How about we all become "Boomers" in our old age, because with age and experience childish bullshit fades and reality takes over. Libertarianism in the end is nothing more than a psy-op meant to waste the most productive part of a man's life. But if he uses those ideas constructively, when he reaches the "Top layer of the cake" he can be a massive force for real change, but he has to leave the cult to do so.

EP Homecoming Dance cancelled tonight bc of last nights shooting outside the game. Confirmed those involved are Somali gangs - no EP or Tonka students. This is on the heels of the Somali gang shooting in Edina outside the church. More on @FOX9 and Fox local app

Breaking News: Credit Union CEO Warns New ‘Loonie-Dollar’ Policy Could Undermine Canadian Dollar and Sovereignty Calgary, AB (March 19, 2025) – Brett Oland, CEO of Bow Valley Credit Union, is raising the alarm over new financial policies introduced by the Mark Carney government in Canada. In a letter to provincial leaders titled “Battle for the Soul of Alberta”, Oland warns that adopting a so-called “Loonie-dollar System” – a framework for issuing debt in U.S. dollars – could destabilize Canada’s financial sector and erode the country’s economic sovereignty. He urges immediate attention to the policy’s potential to drive up inflation, weaken the Canadian dollar, and impinge on provincial autonomy, all while comparing the strategy to the controversial Eurodollar system that operates outside U.S. regulations. New ‘Loonie-Dollar System’ Sparks Concern Oland’s letter outlines the “Loonie-dollar System,” a term he uses to describe the government’s latest financial experiment. Under this system, Canada’s federal government is issuing debt denominated in U.S. dollars rather than in Canadian dollars as a core policy move. Just days after Mark Carney assumed leadership, the government announced plans to launch a U.S.-dollar global bond – a step that was executed on March 11 with a US$3.5 billion, five-year bond issuance. The Department of Finance said the proceeds will “supplement and diversify Canada’s liquid foreign reserves,” helping maintain a buffer and orderly conditions for the Canadian dollar in forex markets. According to Oland, however, this move is a routine reserve management tactic and part of a broader strategy to create a parallel to the Eurodollar system on Canadian soil. The Eurodollar market refers to the vast pool of U.S. dollars held in banks outside the United States (often in Europe) and beyond U.S. regulatory control. Trillions of such “Eurodollars” circulate offshore, facilitating global trade and lending, but “these deposits are not subject to U.S. banking regulations or control,” Oland notes. By tapping into U.S.-dollar funding through Canada – what he dubs the Loonie-dollar System – the Carney government is effectively mimicking the Eurodollar model within the Canadian context. Mark Carney’s role is central to Oland’s critique. The former central banker and now head of government is described as accelerating a plan that allows foreign players, notably in Europe, to influence North American currency flows via Canada. Oland alleges European financial interests are leveraging Canada to regain control over U.S. dollar pricing under Carney’s watch. He points out that the U.S. Federal Reserve’s recent actions (such as replacing LIBOR with SOFR benchmark rates) aimed to reassert American control over its currency costs, which the Eurodollar market had partly influenced. In Oland’s view, the new Canadian policy undermines those gains by creating an offshore U.S.-dollar hub in Canada, potentially “tak[ing] over controlling the price of USD” in a way that could undermine the U.S. financially. The Currency and Inflation Risks Oland and other critics say the economic risks of the Loonie-dollar scheme are significant, particularly for Canada’s currency stability. He argues that channelling large volumes of U.S. dollars through Canada’s much smaller monetary base will put extreme pressure on the value of the Canadian dollar (nicknamed the “loonie”). In his letter, Oland cautions that Canada’s financial market is far more limited than the Eurozone’s, so attempting to absorb “trillions of Euro-dollars” through the Canadian system could devalue the loonie rapidly. “All those trillions of Euro-dollars now need to go through the eye of [the] needle of the Canadian Dollar,” he writes, suggesting the loonie’s value could be “destroyed…much faster” under this scheme than a similar effort in Europe would harm the euro. A primary concern is inflation at home. Because the Canadian economy and money supply are small relative to the enormous scale of offshore U.S. dollars, trying to manage or influence the USD’s price via the loonie would likely require an outsize expansion of Canada’s money supply. Oland warns this approach will be “massively inflationary,” as Ottawa might be compelled to “print” excessive amounts of Canadian currency to maintain the scheme. Such expansionary policy, he notes, would erode Canadians’ purchasing power and drive up prices domestically. Another aspect is the interest rate policy: Oland points out that Canadian interest rates have recently ticked downward, and he interprets this as a deliberate step to facilitate the Loonie-dollar plan. By pushing rates toward the zero lower bound, foreign entities could cheaply borrow Canadian dollars and use those funds to buy Canada’s new U.S.-dollar bonds. This would effectively funnel liquidity into the Loonie-dollar system. However, “moving interest rates too low is massively inflationary to Canadians but not to foreign countries,” Oland writes, emphasizing that ordinary Canadians would bear the cost of the resulting inflation while foreign borrowers reap benefits. Economic observers note that offshore dollar systems can carry stability risks. The Eurodollar market’s light regulation helped it grow, but it also “introduced risks (e.g., during the 2008 financial crisis)” when unchecked dollar creation contributed to global financial turmoil. By analogy, a Canada-centric USD system could likewise become a source of volatility. If the loonie sharply devalues or inflation spikes, Canada’s economic stability and creditworthiness could be threatened, potentially forcing harsh measures to regain control. For everyday Canadians, that scenario would mean a higher cost of living, erosion of savings, and possible stress on jobs and investments if the economy destabilizes. Oland’s warning underscores that a policy he views as aimed at global currency maneuvering has real-world implications for Canadian citizens, who could feel the fallout in grocery prices, loan payments, and the value of the dollars in their bank accounts. Banking Sector and Credit Union Implications The financial sector’s reaction is another focal point of Oland’s letter. He suggests that Canada’s major banks quietly align with the Carney government’s plan. These large institutions – often called the “Big Five” banks – dominate Canadian banking and are tightly overseen by federal regulators. Oland describes them as a “monopolistic oligopoly” closely aligned with Ottawa’s agenda, noting their significant foreign ownership and federal oversight. In his view, the big banks have little incentive to push back on a federal strategy even if it carries risks, and thus “will not stand up to Carney on this.” This compliance means there may be no internal banking opposition to check the Loonie-dollar policy, leaving any critique to outsiders and smaller players. For credit unions and smaller lenders, the stakes are different. Oland’s outspoken warning is unusual in Canada’s banking landscape – it’s rare for a financial executive to challenge government monetary or fiscal policy publicly. As the head of a regional credit union, he appears to voice concerns that may be shared by other community-based institutions worried about being sidelined or exposed by these sweeping changes. Credit unions typically serve local members and don’t have the global reach or cushioning of big banks, making them more vulnerable to sudden inflation or currency value shifts. A spike in inflation could squeeze household finances and loan repayment rates, directly affecting credit union balance sheets. Moreover, creating a sizeable USD-denominated liability (Canada’s new foreign debt) raises questions about regulatory oversight: it introduces complexities that Canada’s banking regulators, like the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI), must closely monitor. Oland’s letter implies a gap in trust here – he doubts the current oversight framework or the big banks will do much to restrain the Loonie-dollar experiment, given their coordination with the government. This leaves institutions like his and their members anxious about potential fallout. In sum, the concern from the credit union perspective is that local financial stability could be at risk if the national policy misfires and someone needs to speak up before Canadians’ deposits and livelihoods are put in jeopardy. Provincial Sovereignty and Alberta’s Stake A significant theme in Oland’s letter is the threat he perceives to provincial sovereignty, with Alberta at the epicentre. Alberta’s economy – particularly its oil and gas sector – generates a significant trade surplus in U.S. dollars for Canada. Oland warns that this surplus is the linchpin of the Loonie-dollar System’s viability and thus could become a target in an international backlash. He speculates that the United States “will NOT let control over the price of the USD slip away” again after having regained some control in recent years. If Washington perceives Canada’s actions as challenging U.S. dollar primacy, Oland argues, it could retaliate with aggressive economic measures. In one scenario, he suggests a U.S. administration (such as one led by President Donald Trump, whom he references) might respond by imposing steep tariffs or trade barriers to eliminate the American trade deficit with Canada. Since Canadian oil exports are the single most significant contributor to Canada’s trade surplus with the U.S., those exports would likely be the prime target. “Oil is the single biggest line item causing the trade imbalance,” Oland notes, and each tariff “eats into the trade surplus, reducing the effectiveness of the Loonie-dollar System.” By choking off Canada’s U.S. dollar earnings, the U.S. could make it “impossible for Canada to service” its new U.S.-denominated debts, undercutting the whole scheme. In a worst-case projection, Oland even suggests the U.S. might go so far as to “collapse the oil industry in Alberta and Canada” by shutting out Canadian oil if that’s what it takes to preserve American control over its currency. Such an outcome would be economically devastating for Alberta – a province heavily reliant on energy revenues – and represent an extreme deterioration in Canada-U.S. relations. Given these risks, Oland urges Alberta’s leaders to take defensive action to protect the province’s interests. One proposal he puts forward is for Alberta to redirect or shield its oil revenues from the Loonie-dollar System. For instance, the Alberta government could price its oil in gold or immediately convert oil sale proceeds into gold instead of U.S. dollars. By doing so, Alberta’s U.S. dollar income would not flow into the federal system that services Canada’s U.S.-denominated debt. This measure, Oland argues, would effectively “neuter the functionality of the Loonie-dollar System,” starving Ottawa of the USD resources needed to continue the scheme. He acknowledges that such a move would be unprecedented and could roil markets – the letter notes it might cause oil prices to spike and advises consulting with U.S. authorities first to avoid misinterpretation. Nevertheless, the suggestion underscores how far Oland believes Alberta may need to go to protect its economy. Oland frames the situation as pivotal for Alberta’s autonomy within Canada. Because Alberta generates much of the trade surplus underlies the Loonie-dollar strategy, he sees the province as “on the front line” of this economic battle. He implores Alberta officials to act decisively in the province’s interest. “If Canadian/Albertan sovereignty is at all a concern, we need to act now,” Oland writes, underlining the urgency he attaches to the matter. The letter pointedly asks whether Alberta will “subvert control to Europe or the U.S., or remain an independent” force in charting its destiny. While such rhetoric goes beyond typical financial analysis, casting the issue in almost existential terms for Alberta, it highlights the depth of frustration and alarm behind Oland’s message. His stance taps into a broader sentiment in Alberta (and other provinces) about overreach from Ottawa: in this case, a fear that federal monetary policy could compromise the province’s economic future without its consent. For Albertans and Canadians, the clash raises fundamental questions about how far a national government can go in pursuit of global financial strategies that might counter regional interests. Federal Perspective and Outlook For now, Oland’s warning has injected a jolt of urgency into Canada’s economic discourse. His stance is striking in that it is not overtly partisan; instead of attacking a party, he frames his alarm to defend financial stability and sovereignty. Nevertheless, it arrives amid an already heated climate of federal-provincial tensions and will likely add to political debate. Economists and policymakers will be parsing these claims in the coming days: Is the Loonie-dollar plan a genuine threat to the Canadian dollar and inflation rate, or are the fears overstated? Are international players poised to use Canada as a pawn in a currency war, or is the government simply ensuring it has a cushion of U.S. funds for emergencies? The answers may become more apparent if the Bank of Canada or the Department of Finance provides further details on how these U.S.-dollar debt issuances will be managed and what limits, if any, will guide them. In the meantime, Canadians are left to absorb the implications of this high-level financial debate. The situation underscores how decisions in monetary and fiscal policy – often technical or obscure to the public – can have far-reaching impacts on ordinary citizens. Questions of inflation, currency strength, and even provincial economic rights have suddenly become breaking news, driven by the concerns of a credit union CEO from Alberta. Oland’s dramatic call to action has put a spotlight on the balance between bolstering national financial defences and safeguarding the economic interests of Canadians. As the country weighs the potential benefits and pitfalls of the Carney government’s approach, one thing is clear: the conversation about Canada’s financial future and who gets to shape it has only just begun. Sources 1.Brett Oland’s open letter “Battle for the Soul of Alberta” (Mar. 14, 2025) – Bow Valley Credit Union 2.Department of Finance Canada – News Release: Government bolsters Canada’s foreign reserves by issuing US-dollar global bond (Mar. 12, 2025) canada.ca/en/department-fina…

Trump blackmailed Europe into releasing its diesel reserves Now he won't do a diesel export ban until the EU reserves are depleted Few understand this

Nothing in Europe is "self-inflicted" bc they have no agency. The entire continent is ruled over by a small group of oligarchs. The leader are puppets who make their people suffer.

The Greatest Story Never Told - Trump’s economy has produced all-time record household income and an all-time record-low poverty rate. Now the Atlanta Fed predicts 5 percent GDP growth. You’d think somebody would notice. According to the latest from the Census Bureau, the poverty rate just hit its lowest level in U.S. history. Read that again. That’s not all. America just also hit its highest real median household income in history. The Atlanta Fed estimates that the economy is growing at an incredible 5 percent annual rate. That’s after years of Democrats promising us that 1.6 percent was “the new normal.” It’s also after barely more than a year and a half of Trump back in office. It gets even better. Child poverty fell to just 13.4 percent, the lowest official rate ever recorded. Hispanic poverty fell to a record low 13.9 percent. Real weekly earnings for blue-collar manufacturing workers are up 4.1 percent since January 2025; construction workers’ earnings are up an even higher 5 percent. It’s kind of a miracle. And it’s gathering steam. Yet to hear the Enemedia — and some conservatives — talk, the exact opposite is true. To them it’s all “muh gas prices.” Which is funny since the average gas price under Joe Biden was higher than the average during Trump’s second term, even with the war. Something is seriously amiss. If incomes are rising faster than prices, it isn’t affordability. It certainly isn’t household wealth. The income figure measures the household in the middle. Elon Musk getting richer can’t drag it upward the way he could an average. And the $2,250 gain in 2025 alone is what remains after adjusting for higher prices. People who spent years watching inflation eat their raises are finally getting ahead. Dismissing that isn’t showing concern for working families: it’s just myopic. And electing the people who gave you all that inflation — and promised to “skyrocket” energy prices to force everyone into an EV — isn’t even sane. That GDP number is especially striking. Remember that much ballyhooed 1.5 percent second-quarter headline that had the pundits celebrating Trump’s “failure?” I told you then: they were looking at the wrong number. What they were seeing wasn’t a slowdown in growth but a capex boom: the private economy spending its output to buy the equipment that would create an industrial supercycle. It’s happening. The ever-brilliant Larry Kudlow calls the burgeoning boom “the greatest story never told.” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent says we’ve entered the “acceleration phase,” as the tax changes and deregulation start to produce the results they were literally designed to produce. I’ve been explaining that process since early 2025. Yet conservatives continue to buy the left’s lies. It’s time to stop. Working Families Are Getting Ahead Starting with Bill Clinton, America’s ruling class told us manufacturing was gone forever. China would build; we would consume. Russia and the Middle East would supply the energy. Europe would regulate. America would borrow, import, and manage its “inevitable” decline and displacement by more dynamic powers. Trump rejected every part of that nonsense. The workers now getting those bigger paychecks have every reason to be glad he did. Their employers aren’t just buying equipment and building new factories: they're bidding up the price of the people who know how to use them. They’re training even more. Nor is the capex boom ending anytime soon. Trump went out and recruited an incredible $18 trillion of investment into the United States in his first months in office. Equipment shipments have risen at an 18.9 percent annual rate in just the latest three months. And just yesterday, the President announced the largest steel plant in American history, a $15 billion titan set to begin construction in Iowa. The President also negotiated trade deals that pried open foreign markets to U.S. manufacturers; he also exempted foreign companies from tariffs if they begin building plants here. And as a condition of those trade deals — now finalized with countries representing 67 percent of global GDP — he forced countless countries accustomed to buying their energy from Russia and the Persian Gulf to buy it from the Gulf of America instead. The construction workers are building the plants and refineries. The roughnecks are drilling the wells. There will be years of work completing them, and much, much more work running them thereafter. How did that happen? Trump changed the tax code, and thus the incentives for investment. His One Big Beautiful Bill made immediate business expensing permanent for equipment, and added full expensing for qualifying American production facilities. Combined with unprecedented deregulation plus the trade deals, suddenly there’s no better place to build a factory than right here. Meanwhile, no taxes on tips, no taxes on overtime, and no taxes on Social Security (and what sort of obscenity is taxing Social Security anyway?!) help the bottom rung even more than the top. “Those jobs are never coming back” was a lie, calculated to cover for (intentional) Democrat failures. There was a time when an American family could live on one breadwinner’s blue-collar wages. That day is coming back, fast. An economy “growing” at Obama’s stultifying 1.6 percent takes nearly half a century to double. Young people can’t find jobs because they’re already taken: they’re locked out of their futures for half their lifetimes, and locked into dependency on the socialists. That is, after all, the goal. But an economy growing at 5 percent doubles in size in just 14 years. That translates into so much hiring so fast that labor shortages have to be cured by ever-higher wages. It also translates into so much tax revenue, even at lower rates, that you don’t just reduce the deficit: you start paying off the debt, as we did for four straight years before 9/11. Folks, this ain’t rocket science. This is the difference between Jimmy Carter’s economy and Ronald Reagan’s. It’s not like we haven’t seen this play before. Bessent calls it “parallel prosperity.” Wall Street and Main Street can both do well at once. A profitable company is sustainable: it expands, hires people, trains them, and pays them more. An unprofitable company does none of those things. Yet the “Democratic Socialist” treats the profits that make prosperity possible as an offense, one that must be crushed in the name of “social justice.” That’s the choice on November’s ballot. More Production, Less Inflation Nowhere is that point more obvious than deregulation, anathema to the Democrats. Trump has eliminated 129 regulations for every new one: there’s nothing like it in history. Which party do you think issued most of those in the first place? Not ours. A company wants to build; it has customers waiting; it can raise the money. But then it spends years waiting for government to let it proceed. Supposedly the delay protects us. But from what is it protecting us exactly? More goods? Better jobs? The possibility that somebody might make a profit? In the midst of the Depression, the Empire State Building was completed in just 13 months. Good luck getting a permit in even twice that time in today’s New York. A process that makes it prohibitively expensive to produce in America sends that production somewhere else. It doesn’t abolish the need for the product. Americans still buy it, but workers in some other country collect the paychecks. Democrats piled on regulations — and taxes — year after year, amounting to a multi-trillion-dollar burden on the U.S. economy and those pathetic “growth” rates that steal young people’s futures. Trump is rolling them back. Leftwing economists have long fretted (as they have about global warming, and global cooling, and global overpopulation, and the Ozone hole, and “Peak Oil”, and “two weeks to flatten the curve”) that all this new production will cause inflation. But this Phillips Curve nonsense was discredited 50 years ago: the truth is exactly the opposite. Production isn’t the enemy of price stability: it’s the means by which supply catches demand. The answer to a shortage of something Americans need is to make more of it. And if supply is plentiful, prices fall. Likewise, the “expert” class assured us that we needed to lower our expectations, that a “mature economy” can only grow at a lower rate: all the dynamic gains must come from developing economies like China’s. Yet what the heck is a mature economy? If you’d asked anyone in 1900, they’d have said they had one, just before nearly everything we have was invented. We are entering another such period, with AI and countless other new technologies promising productivity gains beyond anything we’ve ever seen. A worker with better tools can produce much more in the same hour, earning a higher wage without increasing the labor cost of each item he produces. And like Reagan before him, President Trump has laid a foundation that sets America up to dominate the next half century. Go Tell Our Story: The Election Is On You So why aren’t Republicans making this case every day? And no, I don’t mean “the Republicans” in Washington. Trump’s doing more than any President before him. Congress, however flawed, has enacted much of his legislation. The leaders aren’t the problem. We are. Historically, the President’s party — whichever President’s party — loses the midterms. But they don’t have to. Midterms are low-turnout elections, which means “every little thing we do is magic.” No need to appeal to the middle, no need to persuade the socialists. Just talk to your own friends and physically take them to the polls. To keep the majority, all we need is 1,000 extra votes in 20 House races — just four extra votes per precinct. Want to make a difference? You can. But that also means that if you don’t, you’re responsible. Republicans need to stop acting like entitled children, and start taking responsibility for their neighbors and their futures. It’s time to tell our story, over and over again. Record real household income and record-low poverty are a pretty great story to tell. So is the lowest murder rate in 126 years, a 99.9 percent reduction in illegal border crossings, or a thousand other things. Five percent GDP growth is exactly the boom Trump promised. And the equipment arriving at new American factories gives us every reason to expect more. This is nothing else but the greatest story never told. So go and tell it.

The Greatest Story Never Told - Trump’s economy has produced all-time record household income and an all-time record-low poverty rate. Now the Atlanta Fed predicts 5 percent GDP growth. You’d think somebody would notice. According to the latest from the Census Bureau, the poverty rate just hit its lowest level in U.S. history. Read that again. That’s not all. America just also hit its highest real median household income in history. The Atlanta Fed estimates that the economy is growing at an incredible 5 percent annual rate. That’s after years of Democrats promising us that 1.6 percent was “the new normal.” It’s also after barely more than a year and a half of Trump back in office. It gets even better. Child poverty fell to just 13.4 percent, the lowest official rate ever recorded. Hispanic poverty fell to a record low 13.9 percent. Real weekly earnings for blue-collar manufacturing workers are up 4.1 percent since January 2025; construction workers’ earnings are up an even higher 5 percent. It’s kind of a miracle. And it’s gathering steam. Yet to hear the Enemedia — and some conservatives — talk, the exact opposite is true. To them it’s all “muh gas prices.” Which is funny since the average gas price under Joe Biden was higher than the average during Trump’s second term, even with the war. Something is seriously amiss. If incomes are rising faster than prices, it isn’t affordability. It certainly isn’t household wealth. The income figure measures the household in the middle. Elon Musk getting richer can’t drag it upward the way he could an average. And the $2,250 gain in 2025 alone is what remains after adjusting for higher prices. People who spent years watching inflation eat their raises are finally getting ahead. Dismissing that isn’t showing concern for working families: it’s just myopic. And electing the people who gave you all that inflation — and promised to “skyrocket” energy prices to force everyone into an EV — isn’t even sane. That GDP number is especially striking. Remember that much ballyhooed 1.5 percent second-quarter headline that had the pundits celebrating Trump’s “failure?” I told you then: they were looking at the wrong number. What they were seeing wasn’t a slowdown in growth but a capex boom: the private economy spending its output to buy the equipment that would create an industrial supercycle. It’s happening. The ever-brilliant Larry Kudlow calls the burgeoning boom “the greatest story never told.” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent says we’ve entered the “acceleration phase,” as the tax changes and deregulation start to produce the results they were literally designed to produce. I’ve been explaining that process since early 2025. Yet conservatives continue to buy the left’s lies. It’s time to stop. Working Families Are Getting Ahead Starting with Bill Clinton, America’s ruling class told us manufacturing was gone forever. China would build; we would consume. Russia and the Middle East would supply the energy. Europe would regulate. America would borrow, import, and manage its “inevitable” decline and displacement by more dynamic powers. Trump rejected every part of that nonsense. The workers now getting those bigger paychecks have every reason to be glad he did. Their employers aren’t just buying equipment and building new factories: they're bidding up the price of the people who know how to use them. They’re training even more. Nor is the capex boom ending anytime soon. Trump went out and recruited an incredible $18 trillion of investment into the United States in his first months in office. Equipment shipments have risen at an 18.9 percent annual rate in just the latest three months. And just yesterday, the President announced the largest steel plant in American history, a $15 billion titan set to begin construction in Iowa. The President also negotiated trade deals that pried open foreign markets to U.S. manufacturers; he also exempted foreign companies from tariffs if they begin building plants here. And as a condition of those trade deals — now finalized with countries representing 67 percent of global GDP — he forced countless countries accustomed to buying their energy from Russia and the Persian Gulf to buy it from the Gulf of America instead. The construction workers are building the plants and refineries. The roughnecks are drilling the wells. There will be years of work completing them, and much, much more work running them thereafter. How did that happen? Trump changed the tax code, and thus the incentives for investment. His One Big Beautiful Bill made immediate business expensing permanent for equipment, and added full expensing for qualifying American production facilities. Combined with unprecedented deregulation plus the trade deals, suddenly there’s no better place to build a factory than right here. Meanwhile, no taxes on tips, no taxes on overtime, and no taxes on Social Security (and what sort of obscenity is taxing Social Security anyway?!) help the bottom rung even more than the top. “Those jobs are never coming back” was a lie, calculated to cover for (intentional) Democrat failures. There was a time when an American family could live on one breadwinner’s blue-collar wages. That day is coming back, fast. An economy “growing” at Obama’s stultifying 1.6 percent takes nearly half a century to double. Young people can’t find jobs because they’re already taken: they’re locked out of their futures for half their lifetimes, and locked into dependency on the socialists. That is, after all, the goal. But an economy growing at 5 percent doubles in size in just 14 years. That translates into so much hiring so fast that labor shortages have to be cured by ever-higher wages. It also translates into so much tax revenue, even at lower rates, that you don’t just reduce the deficit: you start paying off the debt, as we did for four straight years before 9/11. Folks, this ain’t rocket science. This is the difference between Jimmy Carter’s economy and Ronald Reagan’s. It’s not like we haven’t seen this play before. Bessent calls it “parallel prosperity.” Wall Street and Main Street can both do well at once. A profitable company is sustainable: it expands, hires people, trains them, and pays them more. An unprofitable company does none of those things. Yet the “Democratic Socialist” treats the profits that make prosperity possible as an offense, one that must be crushed in the name of “social justice.” That’s the choice on November’s ballot. More Production, Less Inflation Nowhere is that point more obvious than deregulation, anathema to the Democrats. Trump has eliminated 129 regulations for every new one: there’s nothing like it in history. Which party do you think issued most of those in the first place? Not ours. A company wants to build; it has customers waiting; it can raise the money. But then it spends years waiting for government to let it proceed. Supposedly the delay protects us. But from what is it protecting us exactly? More goods? Better jobs? The possibility that somebody might make a profit? In the midst of the Depression, the Empire State Building was completed in just 13 months. Good luck getting a permit in even twice that time in today’s New York. A process that makes it prohibitively expensive to produce in America sends that production somewhere else. It doesn’t abolish the need for the product. Americans still buy it, but workers in some other country collect the paychecks. Democrats piled on regulations — and taxes — year after year, amounting to a multi-trillion-dollar burden on the U.S. economy and those pathetic “growth” rates that steal young people’s futures. Trump is rolling them back. Leftwing economists have long fretted (as they have about global warming, and global cooling, and global overpopulation, and the Ozone hole, and “Peak Oil”, and “two weeks to flatten the curve”) that all this new production will cause inflation. But this Phillips Curve nonsense was discredited 50 years ago: the truth is exactly the opposite. Production isn’t the enemy of price stability: it’s the means by which supply catches demand. The answer to a shortage of something Americans need is to make more of it. And if supply is plentiful, prices fall. Likewise, the “expert” class assured us that we needed to lower our expectations, that a “mature economy” can only grow at a lower rate: all the dynamic gains must come from developing economies like China’s. Yet what the heck is a mature economy? If you’d asked anyone in 1900, they’d have said they had one, just before nearly everything we have was invented. We are entering another such period, with AI and countless other new technologies promising productivity gains beyond anything we’ve ever seen. A worker with better tools can produce much more in the same hour, earning a higher wage without increasing the labor cost of each item he produces. And like Reagan before him, President Trump has laid a foundation that sets America up to dominate the next half century. Go Tell Our Story: The Election Is On You So why aren’t Republicans making this case every day? And no, I don’t mean “the Republicans” in Washington. Trump’s doing more than any President before him. Congress, however flawed, has enacted much of his legislation. The leaders aren’t the problem. We are. Historically, the President’s party — whichever President’s party — loses the midterms. But they don’t have to. Midterms are low-turnout elections, which means “every little thing we do is magic.” No need to appeal to the middle, no need to persuade the socialists. Just talk to your own friends and physically take them to the polls. To keep the majority, all we need is 1,000 extra votes in 20 House races — just four extra votes per precinct. Want to make a difference? You can. But that also means that if you don’t, you’re responsible. Republicans need to stop acting like entitled children, and start taking responsibility for their neighbors and their futures. It’s time to tell our story, over and over again. Record real household income and record-low poverty are a pretty great story to tell. So is the lowest murder rate in 126 years, a 99.9 percent reduction in illegal border crossings, or a thousand other things. Five percent GDP growth is exactly the boom Trump promised. And the equipment arriving at new American factories gives us every reason to expect more. This is nothing else but the greatest story never told. So go and tell it.

For many months something very odd has been happening to my account, culminating in my being totally rejected for the original creator program after being made to wait for over three weeks. I've long suspected someone at Twitter has their finger on the scale, and now I'm convinced. A couple of months ago I gained 50k followers overnight, unexpectedly. For the better part of a year, maybe longer, I'd barely gained any followers, even though my analytics told me I was gaining hundreds a day. After this recent explosion, every single day I've lost at least a hundred followers. We all know what effect this has: it tells the algorithm to hide you, and that's exactly what's been happening. Other accounts I've spoken to tell me they've seen similar things happen: a huge influx of followers, then a gradual falloff that effectively makes them invisible. So why is this happening? I've spoken to Premium Support and received no help whatsoever. Elon Musk's purchase of Twitter was supposed to guarantee freedom of speech, but in many ways, we've substituted an overt form of censorship that could be understood and accepted--a ban could come at any second--with a much more insidious form that also, in the case of the new rewards program, seems to allow great latitude for individual engineers to really mess with you if they don't like you. Of course we all know what should have been done to prevent the rampant scamming. @elonmusk

I was a Charlotte, NC, reporter when the openly Democrat leadership of Bank of America recruited Tom Tillis to run against one of the most conservative members of our legislature as a "Republican" and filled his coffers with cash. Tillis can't get along with Trump for one simple reason: he was a Democrat then, and he's a Democrat now.

I told myself after reading the transcript of Brian Cole Jr.'s confession to being the J5 pipe bomber, I was done responding to @SteveBakerUSA ridiculous, self-serving spin about this case, but here we are. (Read my 1500 word analysis of the confession, based on my training and experience here, fxregan.substack.com/p/the-j….) The below screenshot is just a paragraph of Baker's long post, that I'm blocked from responding to because he thinks I'm a "liar." It's about the unique Nike shoes worn by the pipe bomber, which Cole admitted he owned, and that Baker claims Cole did not own. Baker starts this post by referring to Cole's confession as false. Which is weird because in a 22 page letter that was released with the transcript, Cole's own paid expert on police interrogation does not say it was a false confession. Because Baker knows nothing about interview and interrogation, and has never actually done one, he doesn't understand how this interview and interrogation was conducted. From page 1 to page 93, when Cole says, "Yes," he is the pipe bomber, the agents are conducting a wide ranging interview. The purpose is two-fold; establish rapport, and allow the interviewee to tell a story, including lies if he chooses, which might then be used later during the interrogation. It's mostly non confrontational. Which is exactly what happened here. Cole told a carefully constructed lie about going to the Capitol on J5 to attend peaceful protests about the election. That was false, there were no formal protests at the Capitol that night. They were at Freedom Plaza, a few blocks from the White House. If Cole was at a Capitol protest, Steve Baker, who claims to have watched thousands of hours of Capitol CCTV, would have seen him there. On page 77, Cole is shown a picture of the Nikes and asked if he ever owned them. Cole panicked and told both the truth, yes he owned them, then tried to distance himself from them saying he'd thrown them away. His rambling about outgrowing them, the laces, the shoes falling apart was a recognition he was trapped in a critical part of the story. His psyche wasn't broken, as Baker maintains. He was caught. Baker claimed Cole was threatened with his family being "subjected to the same psychological torture he'd just experienced," which is nonsense. On page 89, after Cole admitted he owned the shoes, agents told him his family members would have to be interviewed. That was not a lie, they were all interviewed. Baker puts great emphasis on Cole being an adult by 2018 when the shoes were first made, and so he couldn't have outgrown them, as he claimed. Which doesn't matter, Cole was trying to distance himself from the shoes when he said that, implying he'd outgrown them by J5. In fact, Baker likes to note in other forums that Ms. Kerkhoff, his favored pipe bomb suspect, played professional soccer, and the team colors for the Columbus Eagles was the same as the Nikes. She played in 2017, the year before the Nikes were manufactured. There is a mountain of evidence in this case; the Nikes are a small part of it. If Baker thinks his version of the Nike story exonerates Brian Cole, he is mistaken.