Happy Thanksgiving!

God of all blessings,
source of all life,
giver of all grace:

We thank you for the gift of life:
for the breath
that sustains life,
for the food of this earth
that nurtures life,
for the love of family and friends
without which there would be no life.

We thank you for the mystery of creation:
for the beauty
that the eye can see,
for the joy
that the ear may hear,
for the unknown
that we cannot behold filling the universe with wonder,
for the expanse of space
that draws us beyond the definitions of our selves.

We thank you for setting us in communities:
for families
who nurture our becoming,
for friends
who love us by choice,
for companions at work,
who share our burdens and daily tasks,
for strangers
who welcome us into their midst,
for people from other lands
who call us to grow in understanding,
for children
who lighten our moments with delight,
for the unborn,
who offer us hope for the future.

We thank you for this day:
for life
and one more day to love,
for opportunity
and one more day to work for justice and peace,
for neighbors
and one more person to love
and by whom be loved,
for your grace
and one more experience of your presence,
for your promise:
to be with us,
to be our God,
and to give salvation.

For these, and all blessings,
we give you thanks, eternal, loving God,
through Jesus Christ we pray. Amen.

Alt-Market: America’s Economy Cannot Survive Another Lockdown

Brandon Smith at Alt-Market writes America’s Economy Cannot Survive Another Lockdown, And The Cult Of The Reset Knows It

The U.S. economy has been on the verge of collapse for at least a decade, ever since the crash of 2008 and the subsequent explosion in fiat stimulus from the Federal Reserve. While the mainstream media has always claimed that central bankers “saved” us from another Great Depression, what they actually did was set us up for a far worse scenario — a stagflationary implosion of our society.

Here is the primary problem: By injecting trillions of bailout dollars into the system, the Federal Reserve prevented the economy from going through its natural purging cycle. This cycle would have been painful for many, but survivable, and it would have removed large amounts of excess debt, parasitic corporations that produce little or nothing of use, as well as numerous toxic assets with no legitimate value. For a real free market to function, weak or corrupt elements must be allowed to fail and die. Instead, central banks around the world and most prominently the Fed kept all of those destructive elements on life support.

This has created what amounts to a “zombie economy:” a system that needs constant outside support (stimulus) in order to continue moving forward. In the process of keeping zombie corporations and other parts of the body alive, healthy parts of the economy, like the small business sector, get devoured.

The zombie economy is, however, highly fragile. All it takes is one or two major shocks to bring it down, and the moment this happens the whole facade will disintegrate, leaving the public in panic and disarray. This is what is happening right now in 2020, and it will get much worse in 2021.

Bailouts encourage and reward unhealthy financial behavior, and this is why national debt, corporate debt and consumer debt have recently hit historic highs. When every pillar of the economy is encumbered with the weight of debt, any instability has the possibility of bringing all those pillars down at once. The Federal Reserve turned the U.S. into an economic time bomb, and the Fed is itself more like a suicide bomber than some kind of fiscal savior.

The “Great Reset”

I first heard the term “global reset” or “great reset” back in 2014/2015. I wrote an article about how the reset was actually a long term process in my article The Global Economic Reset Has Begun. Christine Lagarde was the head of the IMF back then, and she mentioned it briefly in multiple interviews.

I made a mental note of it because it seemed planted into the discussion very awkwardly, as if it was scripted. I rarely heard it mentioned for years after that. In 2020, as we descend into social and economic chaos, I’m seeing the phrase used everywhere in the media and by globalists.

Over the past decade, globalist institutions have come up with numerous phrases that seem to refer to a worldwide planned and dramatic shift in human society sometime in the near future. The “great reset” is just another phrase for “the new world order.” It is important to understand that the reset these people are talking about has actually been engineered and staged for many years. This is not something that just popped up in 2020 — they have been talking about it since at least 2014. And before that, they talked about the new world order, and “multilateralism,” and the “multi-polar world order,” and Agenda 2030, etc.

The reset is the catalyst phase of an agenda that has been in the works for a long time now. The goal, as they have openly admitted many times, is to centralize the entire globe into one monetary structure, one highly interdependent and socialized economy, and eventually one faceless and unaccountable governing body.

One of the biggest obstacles to the finalization of the reset and the formation of the new world order has been liberty-minded populations across the planet — most of all, the liberty-minded people within America. The U.S. has to be destabilized or eliminated; the old world order has to be brought down before the new world order can be introduced. The people have to be beaten down and desperate, so that when the globalists offer their “reset” as the solution, the people will gladly accept it without question — simply because they want the economic pain and uncertainty to stop.

A common statement made by globalists from Klaus Shwab at the World Economic Forum to the current Prime Minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau, is that the coronavirus pandemic is the “perfect opportunity” to trigger the “great reset.” As globalist Rahm Emanuel is famous for admitting, in crisis there is opportunity to do things you were not able to do before.

In other words, when people panic in the face of crisis, they become easy to manipulate. And, if a crisis doesn’t happen naturally, then why not create a crisis from thin air and use that to cause panic?

Enter the economic lockdowns…

The lockdowns have not only been proven to do nothing to stop the spread of the coronavirus, but they are also a clear attack on what’s left of our economic system. The small business sector in particular is being gutted as more than 60% of those that shut down during the first lockdown were unable to reopen. Small businesses provide more than half of all employment in the U.S.. When they collapse, the U.S. economy will have nothing left except the big-box corporations that the Fed put on life support over a decade ago.

Real unemployment, which is already at 26%, will skyrocket even further if a second national lockdown is initiated. The speedy collapse of the U.S. economy will be assured, and the “great reset” can commence. At least, that is what the globalists want to happen…

With the U.S. presidential election currently being contested, it is hard to say how the next few months will play out in detail. As I have been pointing out since July, a contested election is the best possible scenario for the globalists because it creates a Catch-22 situation:

  1. If Trump stays in office, the political left will accuse him of usurping the presidency and there will be mass riots in the streets. Conservatives will be tempted with the idea of bringing in martial law to suppress rioters, and such measures will undermine the flow of the U.S. economy, causing its fragile structure to implode.
  2. If Biden enters the White House, then he will attempt a Level 4 lockdown similar to the lockdowns we have seen in Australia, France, Germany and the UK; perhaps even worse. Our economy will crumble, conservatives will revolt, and Biden will attempt martial law measures.

Either way, the globalists get their crisis, and therein their opportunity.

Surviving the lockdowns and deterring the globalists

But here is where things get less certain for the elites. If liberty-minded Americans organize immediately for security and mutual aid, we can defuse the Catch-22. If we provide for our own security within our own communities, there will be no rationale for Trump to institute martial law. Community security is an awesome deterrent against leftist rioting and looting, and basic economic trade can continue.

By extension, if we organize our own community security as well as localize our economies with barter and trade, we also act as a deterrent to Biden and any ideas he might have of enforcing national lockdowns. The point is, we can’t allow the globalists to dictate the terms of the crisis. We must act to change the rules of the game.

The reset is not a natural inevitability, it is a con, a trap. No matter how bad the crisis in our nation becomes, it is the people — namely the liberty-minded people — who will determine the future, not the globalists. Their plan relies on our panic. Instead of panic, let’s show them a unified front and a plan of our own.

Organic Prepper: Timing Is EVERYTHING When the SHTF

Florida residents bugging out ahead of Hurricane Irma.

Selco Begovic, writing at the Organic Prepper, talks about the importance of timing when the SHTF. Just recently we briefly posted about the immense traffic jam caused when people in Paris tried fleeing ahead of the most recent lockdowns. Just this morning after a work meeting with my boss we briefly segued into the state of the country and that we both considered moving to other countries but weren’t sure which could be considered “better” right now. But we also recognized that you don’t want to wait until it is too late to leave. If/when a government crackdown finally comes, it will probably be too late to leave, so you have to try to read the signs of descent.

Timing or the importance of perfect timing in SHTF can be a matter of life and death.

For a starting point, you need to understand something that I mentioned in previous posts. When SHTF occurs, the situation is fluid – it can change quickly, and you need to recognize those changes so you can react in time, and in the proper way.

The real danger is other people

I like to say that when the SHTF most probably your enemy is not going to be some foreign invaders, UN troops, or people that are very different than you.

It’s very possible your enemy will be the people that today live around you.

What will make them your enemy?

Well, a lot of things. The SHTF itself, the lack of resources, hate, polarization, absence of a system, absence of repercussion for their actions…

But always the main reason will be the lack of resources, and it is something I wrote about a lot in my book. That makes every person your possible enemy.

How does the importance of timing come into play here?

Well, it is on you to time your plans and actions based on the situation around you.

Here are a couple of examples:

  • Are local criminal gangs going to go completely wild and storm your home?
  • Can you feel absolutely free to shoot anyone who is a possible threat to you?
  • When you are bugging out are you gonna run over whoever stands in your way on the road, or are you driving like a law-abiding citizen?

Answers to those questions are quite different based on the time (or timing) when you are answering them. Simply if there is no system still working, everything falls apart. The timing of your action is important. You must understand what the rules are so you can choose how (or how hard) your response will be.

And do not forget, since it will be fluid the difference can be as little as a half-hour of time. Or even minutes.

A law-abiding citizen

Yes, I know, most probably you are a law-abiding citizen.

But, you cannot be a law abiding citizens in a situation where there is no law at all.

So what are you gonna be?

I am not suggesting anything here, but, again, your actions should be different in normal times and world without law and order. I am talking here not about violence, but about your feelings of who owns what when all falls apart.

If you recognize in time that there is simply no system, and there are things that actually suddenly do not “belong” to anyone, you can make good decisions about acquiring things you need. And trust me if you do not make it then, you will make it later. Only later you are not gonna have so many choices or opportunities.

No, I am not talking about stealing from other folks or looting your local mall during a bad weather event or riot.

I am talking about your acts in the first days of an event that is gonna be complete and prolonged world without a regular system of law and order.
Timing there also means that you need to recognize when some things are more important than others…for example, food is more important than some big-screen TV.

Actions on the ground

Timing also means a lot while certain things are happening when SHTF, especially in the very early stages of SHTF.

The early stage is important, because most of the people in that stage are not sure of:

  • what is exactly happening
  • how serious it is
  • how long it is going to last
  • what exactly they should do

You, as a survivalist/prepper, should be ahead of those people and you should know, or at least have an educated guess about the 4 questions above so you can time your actions appropriately.

Looting/scavenging

There is nothing too much philosophical here, and here is one example:

Something happens, and people are looting the mall.

What are you going to do?

Well, the most obvious answer is that you’ll stay at home because it is safest.

But let’s say you need medicines, food, or whatever.

Well if it is a real and serious SHTF, I would say you are gonna go there and “loot.” Only it is technically not looting anymore, because there is no law and order. It is not coming back for a long time or ever. So if you are smart, you’ll go there and stock up with important medicines, or food, or lighter fluid or similar stuff.

The timing is perfect because the answers to all of the above questions are “satisfying” for that. And you as a prepper for sure are not gonna loot stereos and TVs.

Most of the other people gonna be stupid and loot that useless stuff, because they completely missed the understanding of what is going on.

The timing here can be tricky too because you need to check if there are other people who understood how serious the situation is (based on the above questions). If they did, then you might lose your life there looking for food or medicines, simply because a lot of other people could be doing the same.

And do not forget, criminal organised groups WILL eventually figure out what is important, so they will eventually come to control that.

So, the timing is important, but again, the timing of your understanding of the term “law-abiding citizen” here is something that you need to figure out first when something serious happens.

You also need to know when to leave.

I have said before if I had realized what was coming when the SHTF for me, I would have left. But I waited too late. I missed my time.

You must be ready to leave everything (physical) in a split second if that means survival and life.

Learn to operate in terms of “less is more” or in other words, try whenever you can to substitute dependence on things with owning knowledge of a particular skill. For example, owning a big stash of water is great, owning skills and means to purify near water sources is even better.

Be ready to alter your plans – do not value your current plan so much that you are ready to die for it. Have an open and flexible mind so you can recognize that moment when your current plan becomes worthless. Do not act like “my plan (bugging out, or bugging in) is so good that I am ready to die for it.

Timing is everything when the SHTF.

A lot of things and actions in the world of survival are simply words. Those words will have different meanings when SHTF, based on the moment in time and based on when you are taking your actions. You as a prepper need to time your actions according to the events around you, and you need to be ready to kinda bend based on the events unfolding.

The most adaptable will survive.

Tenth Amendment Center: There Is No Anti-Commandeering Doctrine when Local Governments Take on a State

Mike Maharrey at the Tenth Amendment Center discusses legal issues related to trying to apply state sovereignty over federal acts (nullification) down to county and city actions against state power in There is No Anti-Commandeering Doctrine when Local Governments Take on a State

The Tenth Amendment Center’s practical nullification strategy relies on James Madison’s blueprint for taking on federal power. Madison advised that “a refusal to cooperate with officers of the union” would create impediments and obstructions to federal acts.

The Supreme Court’s long-standing anti-commandeering doctrine supports this nullification strategy. In a nutshell, this legal doctrine prohibits the federal government from “commandeering” state and local personnel or resources for federal purposes.

In effect, the federal government cannot force state or local governments to cooperate in the enforcement of federal laws or the implementation of federal programs. With the Supreme Court affirming this doctrine in five major cases dating back to 1842, the feds are legally powerless in the face of state noncooperation.

A lot of people want to apply this anti-commandeering strategy to state governments as well. The idea would be for a county or local government to simply refuse to enforce a state law. Activists have specifically pushed this strategy to block enforcement of state gun control laws. But local non-cooperation with state laws poses significant problems from a legal standpoint because the relationship between a city or county and a state is much different than the relationship between a state and the federal government.

By their action, the states created the federal government. Even though they make up part of the union, each state remains a sovereign political society. The states delegated some powers to the federal government and within its constitutional authority, the federal government enjoys supremacy. But outside of the federal government’s delegated authority, the states maintain their fundamental independence. In Federalist #32, Alexander Hamilton explained that under the new Constitution, the states would retain their sovereignty and independence, and would only be subject to the general government in those areas where power was specifically delegated to it.

“An entire consolidation of the States into one complete national sovereignty would imply an entire subordination of the parts; and whatever powers might remain in them, would be altogether dependent on the general will. But the plan of the convention aims only at a partial union or consolidation, the State governments would clearly retain all rights of sovereignty which they before had, and which were not, by that act, exclusively delegated to the United States.”

State governments and their local governments have a fundamentally different relationship. Cities and counties are “political subdivisions” of the state. They possess virtually no autonomy unless their state legislatures give it to them. And what the legislature can give, the legislature can take away. In fact, cities and counties exist at the will of the state government. The state legislature can change their borders, split them up, or even dissolve them completely. As a result, counties and cities have a legal obligation to follow the directives of the state government.

From a legal standpoint, no anti-commandeering doctrine exists for cities or counties. They cannot legally refuse to cooperate with state dictates. The state government can commandeer local personnel and resources for state purposes because cities and counties only exist as extensions of the state.

There are some exceptions to this rule. Some states, including Illinois, extend local governments “home rule” privileges, granting them some autonomy. But even in these states, the legislature can override home rule.

In practice, local governments can still refuse to enforce state laws or implement state programs. But unlike states that refuse to cooperate with the federal government, local governments can be punished by the state for their noncooperation. The state legislature can legally cut funding to local governments that refuse to enforce a state law. They even have the power to remove local officials from office or perhaps subject them to criminal penalties.

This makes local non-cooperation with a state government a very difficult strategy to carry out. It could prove successful if enough local entities ban together. But without the anti-commandeering legal doctrine to shield them, it’s much easier for a state to force local and county compliance. The states have legal cover when they refuse to cooperate with the federal government. Local governments enjoy no such legal shield against the state.

From a strategic standpoint, activists should be wary of trying to employ a strategy created for states to use against the feds as a tool for local governments to take on a state. It could be effective if enough local entities work together and create enough political pressure to dissuade the state from cracking down. But you need to be aware that local governments and their employees enjoy virtually no legal protection and the state has significant latitude in how it deals with an uncooperative local entity.

Doom and Bloom: Asthma in Survival

The Altons at Doom and Medical have an article about Asthma in Survival.

Asthma is a chronic condition that limits your ability to breathe. It affects the tubes that transport air to your lungs, collectively known as the “airways”. Asthma affects 20 million Americans and is the most common cause of chronic illness in children. Off the grid, increased stress and exposure to new substances will only makes things worse. The family medic must know how to recognize and treat symptoms with limited supplies.

When people with asthma are exposed to a substance to which they are allergic (an “allergen”), airways become swollen, constricted, and filled with mucus. As a result, air can’t pass through to reach the part of the lungs that absorbs oxygen (the “alveoli”).

During an episode of asthma, you will develop shortness of breath, tightness in your chest, and start to wheeze and cough. This is referred to as an “asthma attack”. In rare situations, the airways can become so constricted that a person could suffocate from lack of air.

Here are common allergens that trigger an asthmatic attack:

  • Pet or wild animal dander
  • Dust or the excrement of dust mites
  • Mold and mildew
  • Smoke
  • Pollen
  • Severe stress
  • Pollutants in the air
  • Some medicines
  • Exercise

Yes, you can trigger an asthmatic attack with exercise. This doesn’t mean you shouldn’t stay in shape. Exercise strengthens lungs, which helps improve asthma control.

There are many other myths associated with asthma; the below are just some:

Asthma is contagious. (False)

You will grow out of it. (False; it might become dormant for a time but you are always at risk for it re-emerging.)

It’s all in your mind. (False; although may trigger it, it’s very real.)

If you move to a new area, your asthma will go away. (False; it may go away for a while, but eventually you will become sensitized to something else and it will likely return.)

Asthma should only be treated when an episode occurs. (False; asthma is best treated with constant medication to reduce frequency and severity of attacks. Encourage your asthmatic group members to stockpile meds.)

You will become addicted to your asthma meds. (False; inhalers and oral asthma drugs aren’t addictive. It’s safe to use them on a regular basis.)

Here’s are two “true” myths: Asthma is, indeed, hereditary. If both parents have asthma, you have a 70% chance of developing it compared to only 6% if neither parent has it. Also, asthma does have the potential to be fatal, especially if you are over 65 years old.

(Note: In the 1980s, I treated a pregnant patient who had the worse type of asthma attack, called “status asthmaticus.” Once she improved somewhat, she insisted on going home against my advice  to care for her other children. She returned that night in an irreversible state of oxygen loss. Both mother and baby perished.)

PHYSICAL SIGNS AND SYMPTOMS OF ASTHMA

Asthmatic symptoms may be different from attack to attack and from individual to individual. Some of the symptoms are also seen in heart conditions and other respiratory illnesses, so it’s important to make the right diagnosis. Symptoms may include:

  • Cough
  • Shortness of Breath
  • Wheezing (usually of sudden onset)
  • Chest tightness (sometimes confused with coronary artery spasms/heart attack)
  • Rapid pulse rate and respiration rate
  • Anxiety

Besides these main symptoms, there are others that are signals of a life-threatening episode. If you notice that your patient has become “cyanotic”, they are in trouble. Someone with cyanosis will have a blue/gray color to their lips, fingertips, and face.

Cyanosis

You might also notice that it takes longer for an asthmatic to exhale than to inhale. As an asthma attack worsens, wheezing may take on a higher pitch. As the attack worsens, the patient suffers a lack of oxygen that makes them confused and drowsy; they may possibly lose consciousness.

Asthma vs Heart Attack

As an asthma attack may resemble a heart attack, the medic should know how to tell the difference. For Asthma is usually improved by using fast-acting inhalers, a strategy that doesn’t offer relief from a heart attack or other cardiac events. Cardiac patients often have swelling of the lower legs, also called “edema.” This is rarely seen with asthma. Asthmatic also don’t have arm and jaw pain that is often seen with heart attacks. Those with a history of cardiac chest pain improve with the angina drug nitroglycerin.

Although both may be associated with shortness of breath, few will confuse the symptoms of COVID-19 with asthma, but suffice it to say that COVID-19 is associated with fever and loss of taste or smell.

DIAGNOSING ASTHMA

On physical exam, use your stethoscope to listen to the lungs on both sides. Make sure that you listen closely to the bottom, middle, and top lung areas as described in the section on physical exams.

In a mild asthmatic attack, you will hear relatively loud, musical noises when the patient breathes. As the asthma worsens, less air is passing through the airways and the pitch of the wheezes will be higher and perhaps not as loud. If no air is passing through, you will hear nothing, not even when you ask the patient to inhale forcibly. This person may become cyanotic.

typical peak flow meter

Sometimes a person might become so anxious (a “panic attack”) that they become short of breath and may think they are having an asthma attack. To resolve this question, you can measure how open the airways are with a simple diagnostic instrument known as a peak flow meter. A peak flow meter measures the ability of your lungs to expel air, a major problem for an asthmatic. It can help you identify if a patient’s cough is part of an asthma attack or whether they are, instead, having a panic attack or other issue.

To determine what is normal for a member of your group, you should first document a peak flow measurement when they are feeling well. Have your patient purse their lips over the mouthpiece of the peak flow meter and forcefully exhale into it. Now you know their baseline measurement. If they develop shortness of breath, have them blow into it again and compare readings.

In moderate asthma, peak flow will be reduced 20-40%. Greater than 50% is a sign of a severe episode. In a non-asthma related cough or upper respiratory infection, peak flow measurements will be close to normal. The same goes for a panic attack; even though you may feel short of breath, your peak flow measurement is still about normal.

TREATMENT OF ASTHMA

Asthma bronchodilator in inhaler

The cornerstones of asthma treatment are the avoidance of “trigger” allergens, as mentioned previously, and the maintenance of open airways. Medications come in one of two forms: drugs that give quick relief from an attack and drugs that control the frequency of asthmatic episodes over time. In panic attacks, however, these medicines are ineffective; treatment for anxiety is discussed elsewhere in this book.

Quick relief asthma drugs include “bronchodilators” that open airways, such as Albuterol (Ventolin, Proventil), levalbuterol (Xopenex HFA), among others. These drugs should open airways in a very short period of time and give significant relief. These drugs are sometimes useful for people going into a situation where they know they will exposed to a trigger, such as before strenuous exercise. Don’t be surprised if you notice a rapid heart rate on these medications; it’s a common side effect.

If you find yourself using quick-relief asthmatic medications more than twice a week, you are a candidate for daily control therapy. These drugs work, when taken daily, to decrease the number of episodes and are usually some form of inhaled steroid. There are long-acting bronchodilators as well, such as ipratropium bromide (Atrovent HFA). Another family of drugs known as Leukotriene modifiers prevents airway swelling before an asthma attack even begins. These are usually in pill form and may make sense for storage purposes. The most popular is Montelukast (Singulair).

Often, medications will be used in combination, and you might find multiple medications in the same inhaler. The U.S. pharmaceutical Advair, for example, contains both a steroid and an airway dilator. Remember that inhalers lose potency over time. Expired inhalers, unlike many drugs in pill or capsule form, have less effect than fresh ones. Physicians are usually sympathetic to requests for extra prescriptions from their asthmatic patients.

NATURAL TREATMENT OF ASTHMA

Ginger

In mild to moderate cases of asthma, you might consider the use of natural remedies. Some involve breathing exercises:

Pursed-lip breathing: This slows your breathing and helps your lungs work better. Breathe in slowly through your nose for two seconds. Then position you lips as if you were whistling, and breathe out slowly through your mouth for four seconds.

Abdominal breathing: Similar to pursed-lip breathing but focuses on using the diaphragm more effectively. With your hands on your belly, breathe as if you were filling it with air like a balloon. Press down lightly on the belly as you slowly exhale.

There are also a number of substances that have been reported to be helpful:

Ginger: A study published in the American Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology indicates that ginger is instrumental in inhibiting chemicals that constrict airways. Animal tests find that extracts of ginger help ease asthmatic symptoms in rodents. Use as a tea or extract twice a day.

Ginger and Garlic Tea: Add three or four minced garlic cloves in some ginger tea while it’s hot. Cool it down and drink twice a day. Some report a benefits from just the garlic.

Other herbal teas are thought to help: Ephedra, Coltsfoot, Codonopsis, Butterbur, Nettle, Chamomile, and Rosemary all have been used in the past to relieve asthmatic attacks.

Caffeine: Black unsweetened coffee and other caffeine-containing drinks may help open airways.  Don’t drink more than 12 ounces at a time, as coffee can dehydrate you. Interestingly, coffee is somewhat similar in chemical structure to the asthma drug Theophylline.

Eucalyptus: Essential oil of eucalyptus, used in a steam or direct inhalation, may be helpful to open airways. Rub a few drops of oil between your hands and breathe in deeply. Alternatively, a few drops in some steaming water will be good respiratory therapy.

Honey: Honey was used in the 19th century to treat asthmatic attacks. Breathe deeply from a jar of honey and look for improvement in a few minutes. To decrease the frequency of attacks, stir one teaspoon of honey in a twelve-ounce glass of water and drink it three times daily.

Turmeric: Take one teaspoon of turmeric powder in 6-8 ounces of warm water three times a day.

Mustard Oil Rub: Mix mustard oil with camphor and rub it on your chest and back. There are claims that it gives instant relief in some cases.

Gingko Biloba leaf extract: Thought to decrease hypersensitivity in the lungs; not for people who are taking aspirin or ibuprofen daily, or anticoagulants like warfarin (Coumadin).

Lobelia: Native Americans actually smoked(!) this herb as a treatment for asthma. Instead of smoking, try mixing tincture of lobelia with tincture of cayenne in a 3:1 ratio. Put 1 milliliter (about 20 drops) of this mixture in water at the start of an attack and repeat every thirty minutes or so

Further research is necessary to determine the effectiveness that some of the above remedies have on severe asthma, so take standard medications if your peak flow reading is 60% or less than normal.

Don’t underestimate the effect of diet on the course of asthma. Asthmatics should:

  • Replace animal proteins with plant proteins.
  • Increase intake of Omega-3 fatty acids and vitamin D.
  • Eliminate milk and other dairy products.
  • Eat organically whenever possible.
  • Eliminate trans-fats; use extra-virgin olive oil as your main cooking oil.
  • Always stay well-hydrated; more fluids will make your lung secretions less viscous.

Finally, various relaxation methods, such as taught in Yoga classes, are thought to help promote well-being and control the panic response seen in asthmatic attacks. Acupuncture is thought by some to have some promise as well.

I’m sure you have your own home remedy that might work to help asthmatics. If so, let us know!

Joe Alton MD

The Trumpet: What Does the U.S. Constitution Say About the Election Crisis?

The Trumpet talks about what the Founding Fathers said in regards to solving contested elections in What Does the U.S. Constitution Say About the Election Crisis?

The rule of law is under attack in America. Evidence shows politicians are trying to transform the nation by emphasizing ends over means. Former United States federal prosecutor Sidney Powell claims to have evidence exposing large-scale voter fraud. During an interview with Fox Business, Powell said she had “staggering statistical evidence” that a leading voting machine firm, Dominion Voter Systems, stole votes from U.S. President Donald Trump.

“Well, I can hardly wait to put forth all the evidence we have collected on Dominion, starting with the fact it was created to produce altered voting results in Venezuela for Hugo Chávez and then shipped internationally to manipulate votes for purchase in other countries, including this one,” she told Lou Dobbs on November 13. “It was funded by money from Venezuela and Cuba, and China has a role in it also. So, if you want to talk about foreign election interference, we certainly have it now. We have staggering statistical evidence.”

What Powell is talking about is the biggest political scandal in U.S. history—if proved true.

If corrupt politicians can get away with using Communist-funded software to rig an election, then we no longer live in a constitutional republic. We live in an authoritarian technocracy.

Shockingly, most political and media figures do not want to give Powell a chance to present her evidence. News sources from the center-left Washington Post to the center-right Wall Street Journal have condemned Powell’s claims as a conspiracy theory. Former President Barack Obama said in an interview with 60 Minutes that President Trump needs to “put the country first” and concede the election right away. A group of 1,000 attorneys published a letter on November 10 making similar demands. They accused President Trump of violating his oath to the U.S. Constitution by claiming there was evidence of voter fraud.

Of course, none of these figures say what specific clause of the Constitution President Trump had violated. That is because the Constitution does not prohibit presidents from investigating voter fraud. In fact, as the nation’s chief law enforcement executive, you could say the Constitution mandates that he investigate these fraud allegations.

Those accusing President Trump of violating the rule of law are ignoring a major aspect of constitutional law. The Constitution does not give the media the power to pick the president, nor does it give attorneys the power to pick the president. It does not even give the American people the power to pick the president. The supreme law of the land gives the electoral college the power to pick the president. This means every politician, lawyer and soldier who has taken an oath to the Constitution is bound to accept the president chosen on December 14 by the 538 electors of the electoral college.

The recounts and court cases that happen before then are an attempt to inform these electors how their state voted. Electors are not constitutionally required to vote for the candidate who won their state, and six electors did not do so during the 2016 presidential elections. Only 33 states have laws punishing electors for not voting the way their state did.

The framers of the U.S. Constitution also wrote specific provisions on how to solve a contested election. They empowered Congress to be the backup if the electoral college could not decide on a winner. The 12th Amendment specifies that if no candidate receives 270 votes in the electoral college due to disputed ballots, or some other reason, the House of Representatives shall immediately choose between the three leading candidates. In this congressional vote, the representation from each state has one vote.

In regard to the current election crisis, law professor Donald Brand wrote, “If neither candidate gets to 270 electors due to disputed ballots, the House would have to decide the election. Though the House has a Democratic majority, such an outcome would almost certainly benefit Trump. Here’s why: In a concession to small states concerned their voices would be marginalized if the House was called upon to choose the president, the founders gave only one vote to each state. House delegations from each state meet to decide how to cast their single vote. That voting procedure gives equal representation to California—population 40 million—and Wyoming, population 600,000. This arrangement favors Republicans. The gop has dominated the House delegations of 26 states since 2018—exactly the number required to reach a majority under the rules of House presidential selection.”

Many Democrats hate the electoral college and want to replace it with a system where the winner of the popular vote becomes president. But they cannot condemn President Trump for violating the rule of law for refusing to concede an election before the electoral college has even convened. The framers of the U.S. Constitution established provisions on how to decide contested elections, and the only people violating the rule of law are those trying to circumvent those provisions by letting the media pick the president.

In 1999, British historian Paul Johnson wrote an article in the Sunday Telegraph titled “No Law Without Order, No Freedom Without Law.” He wrote: “The rule of law, as distinct from the rule of a person, or class or people, and as opposed to the rule of force, is an abstract, sophisticated concept. It is mighty difficult to achieve. But until it is achieved, and established in the public mind with such vehemence that masses of individuals are prepared to die to uphold it, no other form of progress can be regarded as secure. The Greeks had tried to establish the rule of law but failed. The Romans had succeeded under their republic but Caesar and his successors had destroyed it. The essence of the rule of law is its impersonality, omnipotence, and ubiquity. It is the same law for everyone, everywhere—kings, emperors, high priests, the state itself, are subject to it. If exceptions are made, the rule of law begins to collapse—that was the grand lesson of antiquity.”

Americans today do not understand “the grand lesson of antiquity” as our founders understood it. That is why the nation is on a dangerous path toward lawlessness.

For decades, activists have striven to fundamentally transform America by emphasizing ends over means. If a policy lacks support to be passed by the lawmaking branch of government, radicals call for the president to enact it via executive order, or for the Supreme Court to enact it via judicial activism, or for protesters to take to the streets. They accuse President Trump of violating the rule of law when he investigates lawbreaking, but they attack the supreme law of the land if the electoral college votes in a way they do not like.

The Prophet Isaiah described such lawless thinking 2,700 years ago: “None calleth for justice, nor any pleadeth for truth: they trust in vanity, and speak lies; they conceive mischief, and bring forth iniquity. They hatch cockatrice’ eggs, and weave the spider’s web: he that eateth of their eggs dieth, and that which is crushed breaketh out into a viper. Their webs shall not become garments, neither shall they cover themselves with their works: their works are works of iniquity, and the act of violence is in their hands” (Isaiah 59:4-6).

This passage is a prophecy about end-time America (as our free book The United States and Britain in Prophecy, by Herbert W. Armstrong, proves). Today, corrupt politicians “speak lies,” “conceive mischief,” and “bring forth iniquity.” But God will not allow them to “cover themselves in their works.” He will expose the corruption so people have a chance to repent before a lawless spirit completely destroys America by replacing the rule of law with the horrifying rule of brute force!..

Organic Prepper on Liberals Burning Books

In Mainstream Media Thinks Parler Is a “Threat to Democracy” Because Libertarians and Conservatives Get to Post, Daisy Luther of The Organic Prepper talks about liberal outrage over social media alternative Parler – the free speech social network. Mainstream social media tech giants have been removing conservative and libertarian voices from places like Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, and many others in order to stifle dissenting voices in the name of false truth. These liberals want to remove alternative ideas from circulation. This is no different than burning books – books being the way most ideas circulated before the advent of internet technology. Liberals cried out, rightly, against book burning for many decades, and now liberals the book burners. As Time magazine once said, “if you are on the side of book-burners, you’ve already lost the argument.”

After years of being censored on Facebook and Twitter, conservatives, libertarians, and other fans of free speech are making a mass exodus to new platforms. One that has really taken off since the election is Parler, which has been the most downloaded app in the country over the past two weeks.

Unsurprisingly, the mainstream media and left-wing extremists are outraged. How dare the people who have been censored, deplatformed, and shut down on their social media sites move to a site that promises not to treat them like pariahs? (By the way, you can find me on Parler here: @daisyluther ) They go as far as to say it’s a “threat to democracy” because libertarians and conservatives get to post.

I mean, seriously, we can’t be letting conservatives and libertarians post their opinions all willy-nilly, right? What will happen without the “fact-checkers?”

Why on earth WOULDN’T people go to a different network?

Personally, I haven’t had access to my own Facebook pages for more than a year and won’t unless I send them photos of my passport, a utility bill, and other identifying information – because they didn’t think my driver’s license was sufficient. As well, I voluntarily archived my thriving preparedness groups because of the threat of losing both my groups, my own personal account, and the accounts of all my moderators if we let through a post of which Facebook disapproved. I wrote more about it here.

And remember when Twitter shut down Zero Hedge’s account for posting something about the coronavirus they deemed as misinformation that was later proven to be true? And how they put warnings on nearly anything the President posts? And how conservative and libertarian websites are being demonetized?

I invite you to try posting anything on standard social media that questions vaccines, the outcome of the election, the COVID lockdowns, or is pro-gun. I’ll see you in Facebook jail.

Everyone who is leaving is a crazy racist.

To hear the MSM talk about it, everyone over there has a “bunker mentality”, they’re joyously engaging in racism and hate speech, and they just want an echo chamber. It’s “not good for the country,” according to commentators on CNN.

“There’s this new social media app called Parler getting a lot of attention, because conservatives are leaving, saying they’re leaving Twitter and Facebook, going of to Parler, because they believe Parler is a safer space for them. What we’re seeing is even more of a bunker mentality in right-wing media. And ultimately that’s not good for the country.”

“No it’s not good, it’s a threat to democracy,” Pamela Brown replied, “that these people are in echo chambers and they’re getting fed a diet of lies essentially.” (source)

Incidentally, sweeping generalizations aside, there are a lot of folks over there (like me) who are not politically conservative.

CNN is not alone in their hysteria about the social media outlet. Here’s what the mainstream media is saying about Parler and the folks using it. Yes, the irony over their outrage is palpable. And yes, it does seem like they’re trying to further divide the country. Be sure to like the video and subscribe to the channel – it’s a great show with timely subject matter. (Warning: Some harsh language)

For those of you new to Parler:

If you ask questions on those videos, I’m sure you’ll get an answer.

Things to remember about social media

For those who want free speech that is not left-leaning, Parler definitely seems like a better option than the Big Tech monoliths. However, there are a few things to remember.

  • If you get to use something for free, you are the product. Either your eyeballs on advertisements or your information will make Parler money one of these days. And it’s understandable – the expense of running a platform like that is immense.
  • While the rules may be favorable toward your position right now, it doesn’t mean they always will be. Facebook didn’t start out censoring the snot out of everyone who didn’t agree with Mark Zuckerberg. The rules will evolve.
  • Don’t share too much personal information. I know you guys are aware of this, but I just want to remind you not to share the kind of personal information that would allow people to find out where you live, when you’ll be on vacation, etc. Nothing online is that safe.
  • Don’t become too dependent on one outlet. Whether you’re a blogger like me or someone who just wants to connect with like-minded people, don’t forget that you are using their platform. They make the rules and they can decide whether you can stay or go, whether you can post certain things, or whether they want to change direction. It’s comparable to building a house on borrowed land. It might be nice land, but it’s not yours.

With these caveats in mind, I’ll see you over there if you are a social media person. Find me @daisyluther on Parler and please consider checking out our forum, here, for more in-depth preparedness discussions.

Do you think a more conservative social media outlet is a bad thing?

Are you bothered by a social media platform that doesn’t conservatives and libertarians? Or do you think it’s fair and reasonable to be able to share your opinions equally?

AmPart: Giuliani – Powell News Conference November 19, 2020

American Partisan, among others, made note of the Nov. 19th press conference with “Rudy Giuliani, Sydney Powell, and a host of other lawyers who are representing President Trump and the American people who voted for him.”

…To be quite frank, I was mesmerized as I drove around and at one point when my errand list was done, I parked in a shopping center parking lot to listen to the end of the press conference.

Giuliani started out saying that he called the news conference because he was tired of the press saying that the Presidential election was not stolen. “Show us facts” the MSM keeps shouting…

In case Youtube removes the above video, it may alternately be viewed at Breitbart – Trump Campaign Holds Press Conference to Outline ‘Viable Path to Victory’

FEE: Would AOC Blacklist 73 Million Americans?

The Foundation for Economic Education discusses how people are losing their jobs over a lack of “proper” political orthodoxy – Would AOC Blacklist 73 Million Americans?

Should a qualified employee’s political views determine whether he gets—or keeps—a job? For a growing number of Americans, they already do. As I wrote in an article published recently at American Greatness:

[Last month] a Pennsylvania police chief was forced to retire by his “progressive mayor” after 26 years on the job. His offense? The chief’s wife posted a Facebook message supporting President Donald Trump.

Lancaster Police Chief Jarrad Berkihiser might be the latest victim of cancel culture, but he won’t be the last.

The article was written before the 2020 election. Since then the female African-American police chief of Portsmouth, Virginia, lost her job. The town’s progressive leadership fired Angela Greene after she pressed charges against rioters who decapitated and pulled down a Confederate statue, striking a middle-aged black man in the head. The injury left the man temporarily comatose, caused him to flatline twice as his brain swelled dangerously, and required months of therapy to teach him to walk and talk again. City officials fired Greene on Monday morning, a little more than two months after placing her on paid leave. She said she plans to sue.

Greene will have company in the unemployment line, and not merely because of another round of proposed COVID-19 lockdowns or impending minimum wage hikes. A number of political figures have in effect declared a Bush Doctrine against the Trump administration: They will make no distinction between the 45th president and those who “enable” him. For instance, former Clinton administration Treasury Secretary Robert Reich proposed a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” to discover the names of anyone who helped “enable” the Trump administration.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., tweeted support of the Trump Accountability Project, an effort to blacklist “Trump sycophants” to stifle their employment prospects. (After the blacklist backlash, TAP announced last Thursday that “this project will no longer be active.”)

“Employers considering them should know there are consequences for hiring anyone who helped Trump attack American values,” said former Obama campaign spokesman Hari Sevugan, threatening not only Republicans but those who hire Republicans.

Depending on how broadly one wants to define “helped,” this description could encompass 73 million Americans. It could go well beyond Trump administration alumni to include anyone insufficiently supportive of the Great Awokening, and perhaps the whole point is to instill the maximum level of fear in the greatest number of political apostates.

This is alarming. Americans of all political backgrounds should seek to reverse this lamentable trend for several reasons.

First, threatening to lock someone out of “polite society” over run-of-the-mill political differences normalizes discrimination. While some find it more acceptable to discriminate against people based on their beliefs rather than immutable factors such as ethnicity, sex, or gender identity, legitimizing employment bias against any group opens the possibility of bias against every group. Worse, researchers have found that Americans already indulge political animosity “to a degree that exceeds discrimination based on race.”

Second, employment bias denies people the opportunity to share their God-given gifts and talents with others. It deprives their families of an adequate livelihood, entirely out of spite.

But discrimination does not simply hurt those who are discriminated against. It also violates the bigot’s self-interest. Viewpoint discrimination in the workplace denies a firm the most productive talent on the basis of often-irrational biases. That lowers the office’s efficiency, productivity, and ingenuity.

Two researchers, Shanto Iyengar and Sean Westwood, bore this out by conducting an experiment that allowed participants to award scholarships to either the most qualified applicant or a student who shared the same political views. When it came to a time for choosing, they wrote, “partisanship simply trumped academic excellence.” Discriminating against the best and the brightest leaves bigoted firms competing for second place.

Politically prejudiced hiring also harms businesses in another way. One source summarized the late economist Gary S. Becker’s groundbreaking work on the economics of discrimination this way:

Suppose that an employer does not want to employ members of a particular group even though these workers are as productive as any others. If the firm has to pay all workers the same wage it will simply not employ members of the disadvantaged group. However, if it is possible to pay these workers less than those from other groups the firm then faces a trade-off: it can employ members of the disadvantaged group at lower wages and thus increase its profitability, or it can discriminate and employ only workers from the high wage group even though this will mean lower profits. Discrimination in the latter case therefore imposes a cost on the firm.

Finally, if the neo-McCarthyites really believe that President Trump and his supporters are revolutionaries, the last thing they should want is for this group to find itself unemployable, aggrieved, and awash in free time. If they honestly think that job losses make people “cling to guns or religion, or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them,” it would behoove them to see their political enemies busy themselves punching time clocks, creating goods and services, and entangling themselves in the joys of family life. One can only speculate how better employment prospects might have thwarted previous revolutions. What if Adolf Hitler had been a better artist? What if Fidel Castro had been a better baseball player?

For economic as well as philosophical and moral reasons, we should oppose viewpoint discrimination in secular education and employment. As I wrote at American Greatness:

We must stand up for Jarrad Berkihiser. We must demand our right to offend and be offended. We must insist on being judged on the content of our character, not the color of our skin.

Among those rights is the right to be judged on our performance, not our political orthodoxy.

The Federalist: Your Political Leaders Hate You And Think You’re Stupid

From The Federalist, something you may have already suspected – Your Political Leaders Hate You And Think You’re Stupid

One thing should be abundantly clear by now, after ten months of this pandemic: our political leaders hate us and they think we’re stupid. Nothing else can explain the blatant hypocrisy we’ve seen, mostly from Democrat governors and mayors who are eager to impose harsh lockdowns and strict rules for the public at large but then turn around and do whatever they please with their own families, friends, and cronies.

Examples abound, but this week brought a fresh spectacle of hypocrisy in the form of a nervous, patently disingenuous apology from California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who was caught dining at an opulent birthday dinner for a top California political operative at a fancy French restaurant in Napa earlier this month, in apparent violation of his own COVID-19 protocols.

The timing couldn’t have been worse. On Monday Newsom announced he was “pulling the emergency brake” on reopening his state amid a spike in COVID cases, dealing a crippling blow to shuttered businesses and out-of-work Californians who have been struggling for months under rolling lockdown orders.

Only after Newsom was widely criticized for his rank hypocrisy did he offer an attenuated mea culpa, explaining that upon his arrival he was surprised to find there were “just a few extra people” at the party, but quickly added it was an “outdoor restaurant” in Napa County, which has looser restrictions compared to other areas of the state. Blinking incessantly and smiling tightly, Newsom finally got around to saying, albeit in the passive voice, that “the spirit of what I’m preaching all the time was contradicted.” Indeed it was, governor.

But then we come to find out this week that the dinner wasn’t outdoors at all. Pictures obtained by the Fox News affiliate in Los Angeles show Newsom and a bunch of others dining at the French Laundry restaurant in Yountville, California. They are obviously not outside, not social distancing, and not wearing masks.

The woman who took the photos told the Fox affiliate that Newsom was with a “very large group of people shoulder to shoulder,” and that she was “surprised because it didn’t look like he was uncomfortable being there until the very end, until people were looking at him and staring at him as he was leaving the room.”

But it doesn’t end there! On Wednesday, Politico reported that two top officials with the California Medical Association were among the guests at Newsom’s fancy birthday dinner.

You might think the state’s top medical lobbyists would think twice about flagrantly disregarding COVID guidelines, or even feign an apology like Newsom, but no. A spokesman for the CMA told Politico that “the dinner was held in accordance with state and county guidelines,” which prohibit more than three households from gathering privately—but do allow restaurants to seat people from more than three households together. See?

Apparently this is a pretty common attitude among California politicians and their lobbyist buddies. With much of their state locked down by government fiat, last week a bunch of state lawmakers and corporate lobbyists flew off to Hawaii for a five-day conference and schmooze-fest at an upscale Maui resort. Legislators and their families mingled with representatives of businesses and trade groups that paid thousands of dollars for access to the lawmakers in what has become an annual lobbying tradition—even during a global pandemic!

Dan Howle, chairman and executive director of the Independent Voter Project, which hosts the conference, didn’t apologize. He told the San Francisco Chronicle, “Somebody has to be first to say, ‘OK, we’re going to do a group event safely.’” Yes, Dan, somebody does has to be the first, and why shouldn’t it be a handful of powerful politicians and corporate lobbyists instead of, you know, ordinary people trying to salvage their businesses and visit their loved ones?

Lockdowns For Thee, But Not For Me

On and on it goes. Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot, who issued a citywide stay-at-home order last week, defended her recent appearance at a massive street rally celebrating Biden’s apparent victory, where a mask-less Lightfoot addressed the crowd through a bullhorn.

When asked about the obvious double standard on MCNBC last week, Lightfoot was defensive, insisting that, “There are times when we do need to have relief and come together, and I felt like that was one of those times.” She added, as if it excuses her hypocrisy, “That crowd was gathered whether I was there or not.”

Seemingly everywhere you look you find people in positions of power ignoring pandemic restrictions and doing as they please. Often these are the same people who are most outspoken about the need for lockdowns.

Back in September, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was defiant after being caught on camera (mask-less, of course) at a shuttered San Francisco salon in violation of a citywide lockdown order, calling it a “setup” and refusing to apologize.

Then last week, Pelosi was forced to cancel a dinner for incoming Democratic House members after a viral tweet showing tables being set up for the soiree understandably provoked outrage. “It’s very spaced,” she explained to an NBC News reporter.

The truth is, our elites have been doing this since the pandemic began. Who knows how many ordinary Americans were barred from attending the funerals and burials of their beloved dead these past months? Yet thousands were allowed to gather in July for memorials of Rep. John Lewis, in services that stretched from Alabama to Washington, D.C. Thousands were allowed to gather for George Floyd’s memorial service in June in Minneapolis.

We all saw the way the media treated Trump rallies like COVID super-spreader events yet condoned the hundreds of large-scale protests over the summer and fall in cities all across the country under the idiotic pretense that the protesters were “all wearing masks.” Same with the post-election celebrations that brought out thousands, dancing in the streets cheek-by-jowl and passing around champagne bottles.

Again, there is only one possible conclusion you can reach, based on months and months of appalling hypocrisy from the media and our ruling elite: they think lockdowns are for you, not them. They think pandemic rules are for you, not them. They think suffering hardships and doing as you’re told are for you, not them. Why? Because they hate you and think you’re stupid.

AIER: FedCoin Revisited

A US physical coin, not a digital currency

This article at the American Institute for Economic Research talks about a new push for government-controlled, central bank digital currency to more easily track the income and tax liabilities of end users – FedCoin Revisited.

The Federal Reserve is thinking about issuing a central bank digital currency (CBDC). The International Business Times reports that the Fed “would be open to collaborating with private business on the creation of a digital currency but emphasized that they were not yet making any commitments.” Talk of a so-called FedCoin appeared to have quelled. But it is now back in full force.

To some, the idea of a FedCoin seems obvious. They see no reason for the Fed to forego adopting 21st century monetary technology. And, certainly, there are a number of benefits, such as lower transaction costs of electronic transfers and helping to execute instant payments (such as in the FedNow project). However, a CBDC also carries risks that must be weighed against the benefits.

One’s view on FedCoin is often related to his or her view on cash. If she thinks cash is good, she is likely to oppose FedCoin. If he thinks cash is bad, he is likely to see FedCoin as an improvement on the status quo. Indeed, some see the introduction of FedCoin as an important step in the direction of a completely cashless economy.

Advocates of moving towards a cashless economy argue that making all payments electronic would help to fight tax evasion and crime. If the move were required, however, it would harm those preferring to use cash for legal transactions as well.

Many people place a high value on anonymity. For some, it’s personal. They don’t want others to know what they are doing. For some, it’s political. They worry about the degradation of institutions, as private information might be used for political ends. The threat of obtaining and revealing private information might silence opposition and undermine the democratic process.

A cashless economy might also lead to policy changes. In order to foster spending during a recession or an economic downturn, the Fed might tax money demand with negative interest rates. If holding cash is an option, then depositors can withdraw their deposits and avoid the negative interest rate. But, if cash is not an option, then consumers are stuck paying interest on their FedCoin holdings. Since they cannot avoid the negative interest rate, consumers would rather spend their money than see their bank balances go down.

In addition to the issues related to one’s view on cash, FedCoin might also undermine financial intermediation. By offering FedCoin, the central bank might crowd out commercial banks.

A checking account at Bank of America is guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation up to the max of $250,000. An account at the Fed is a liability of the government. If both offer the same payment services, why would one opt for the riskier commercial bank account?

Many will see little cause for concern with depositors having access to safer accounts. But that’s because they don’t think much about banking. Banks attract deposits with payment services and interest payments. They then funnel those funds to productive investment ventures. Financial intermediation makes us more productive, thereby raising the standard of living. As the World Bank reports, private credit to GDP high-income countries is “more than 4 times the average ratio in low-income countries.”

If would-be depositors hold FedCoin instead, the corresponding funds will have to be intermediated by the Fed. At best, the Fed would just auction off funds to private financial institutions. But recent events suggest the Fed might be inclined to allocate credit.

My concerns with FedCoin, and other CBDCs, are admittedly speculative. We don’t know whether the Fed would take steps to eliminate cash or impose negative rates on FedCoin balances. We don’t know how it would go about intermediating funds. But such speculations should make one thing clear: there are risks. At the least, we should develop strong institutional checks before permitting the Fed to plow ahead.

Survivalist/Prepper/Outdoorsman Auction – Naples, ID – Nov. 19-21

JKern Auction Group in Naples, ID is holding an auction of survivalist, prepper, and outdoors gear.

The huge Survivalist, preppers and outdoorsman auction is finally here!! We will be open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. today, Thursday, November, 19 for you to come walk through to view all the items and to pre-register for tomorrow and Saturdays auction. There are some Buy It Now items available for purchase today such as: books, clothing, blankets and holiday items. See you today at 138 Latigo Lane, Naples, Idaho. (Moose Valley Nursery on Highway 95 between Sandpoint and Bonners Ferry).

Preview and registration: Thursday, Nov. 19, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Auction days: Friday, Nov. 20 and Saturday, Nov. 21, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

Economic Collapse Blog: UN World Food Program Warns Of “Famines Of Biblical Proportions In 2021”

This article comes from Michael Snyder at the Economic Collapse Blog – UN World Food Program Warns Of “Famines Of Biblical Proportions In 2021” As Some Americans Wait 12 Hours For Food

The UN World Food Program was the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2020, and the head of that agency is warning of the potential for absolutely devastating famines around the globe in 2021.  The COVID-19 lockdowns that were instituted all over the world this year created tremendous hardship in many wealthy countries, but in poorer nations the economic devastation has created alarming waves of hunger.  There was hope that things would get better when lockdowns were being lifted, but now a new round of lockdowns is being imposed, and many experts are warning about what this could mean for those living in deep poverty.

David Beasley was absolutely thrilled when his agency was given the Nobel Peace Prize, because all of the attention has given him more opportunities to ask for money.  Because without a massive influx of money, he says that we are going to see “famines of biblical proportions in 2021”

The head of the World Food Program says the Nobel Peace Prize has given the U.N. agency a spotlight and megaphone to warn world leaders that next year is going to be worse than this year, and without billions of dollars “we are going to have famines of biblical proportions in 2021.”

As I have previously explained to my readers, widespread crop failures along with the economic shutdowns brought on by COVID-19 have put a tremendous amount of stress on global food distribution systems.  Food prices are rapidly rising all over the planet, and this is hurting the people at the bottom of the economic food chain the most.

According to Beasley, many areas of the globe are potentially facing a major food crisis “in the next three to six months”

According to a joint analysis by WFP and the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization in October, 20 countries “are likely to face potential spikes in high acute food insecurity” in the next three to six months, “and require urgent attention.”

Of those, Yemen, South Sudan, northeastern Nigeria and Burkina Faso have some areas that “have reached a critical hunger situation following years of conflict or other shocks,” the U.N. agencies said, and any further deterioration in coming months “could lead to a risk of famine.”

Here in the United States, the good news is that nobody is facing starvation at this point.

But the bad news is that we are in the midst of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression of the 1930s, and some Americans are waiting in line for up to 12 hours for handouts.  If you don’t believe this, here is an excerpt from a news report about a food distribution event that just happened in Texas

Thousands of families lined up to receive groceries at a Texas food bank this weekend, some queuing for as long as 12 hours as the on-going coronavirus pandemic continues to inflict hunger and economic hardships on the state.

The food bank distribution event, held by North Texas Food Bank (NTFB) in Dallas on Saturday, saw 600,000 pounds of food given away – including 7,000 turkeys.

You have to be pretty desperate to be willing to wait in a line for 12 hours.

But when you are very hungry and you are very short on money, all of a sudden you will be willing to do things that you wouldn’t normally do.

For those that wouldn’t have a Thanksgiving dinner otherwise, this food distribution event was “a real big deal”

“I see blessings coming to us cause we all struggling. And I appreciate North Texas helping us out,” resident Samantha Woods said while waiting in her vehicle.

“I haven’t been working since December, can’t find a job, they cut my unemployment, it’s a real big deal,” said Cynthia Culter.

Elsewhere, millions upon millions of impoverished Americans are facing the possibility of being evicted from their homes right after the holiday season is over.

A national moratorium on evictions is scheduled to end on January 1st, and it is being reported that we could see a record number of evictions in January 2021…

An estimated 11 to 13 million renter households are at risk of eviction, according to Stout, an investment bank and global advisory firm. It predicts there could be as many as 6.4 million potential eviction filings by January 1, 2021 if the CDC moratorium is lifted.

Since the order does not cancel or freeze rent, all of the tenant’s back rent will be due come January 1. Without rent relief or an extension of the protection, many struggling renters will — again — face eviction.

I have a feeling that the moratorium may be extended, but that will just put even more financial stress on landlords.

And at some point there will be no more moratoriums, and all of that back rent will be due, and most of those households will not be able to pay it and will be evicted anyway.

…(continues)