Facebook is getting ready to release a brand-new independent app designed for direct competition with Elon Musk’s Twitter, continuing Mark Zuckerberg’s long practice of blatantly stealing functionality from social media competitors. According to the corporation, it is in response to requests for “a sanely run platform,” which implies that the Twitter clone will probably have strict censorship.

According to The Wall Street Journal, Facebook (which is now known as Meta) is preparing to launch a brand-new independent app that will directly compete with Twitter. The app’s codename, Project 92, was disclosed to Facebook employees at a recent all-hands meeting.

During the meeting, Chris Cox, Facebook’s chief product officer, described the app as Zuckerberg’s response to Twitter. According to Cox, the business has heard from creative and public people who need “a sanely run platform,” and it is meeting this demand. This statement demonstrates Facebook’s intentions to censor its new platform in the same way it censors its primary platform and Instagram, maybe by using the notorious “third-party fact checks” that the company eventually acknowledged in court are merely views.

According to sources, the company is in talks to deploy the app with well-known individuals like Oprah Winfrey and the Dalai Lama, demonstrating its goal to attract a sizable user base. Despite the fact that the launch date is still a mystery, Cox highlighted the company’s desire to make the app available “as soon as we can.”

During the conference, CEO Mark Zuckerberg also shared his thoughts on Apple’s newly introduced $3,500 Vision Pro headset, which has received a lot of jeering. He drew a clear distinction between Apple’s premium product and Facebook’s planned Quest 3 headgear, which is slated to go on sale this autumn for a starting price of $499.

According to Zuckerberg, “The different values and vision that our companies bring to this is really important. We develop new technologies to make sure that everyone can buy and use our items.”

Zuckerberg also highlighted Facebook’s continuing efforts in the field of generative AI, which is concerned with AI systems that can generate text, graphics, or other types of material. One of these projects is the development of AI “agents” with individual identities for WhatsApp and Messenger, as well as the development of a photo-generation function that will allow Instagram users to alter their photographs using text prompts.

“The chance to take that technology, advance it, and include it into each and every one of our products is now available to us because of some very amazing breakthroughs—quality breakthroughs—in generative artificial intelligence,” according to Zuckerberg.

Americans want the economic climate to change.

When inhaling smoky air under the ochre sun that has been hovering over the northeastern United States this week, it is easy to get into an apocalyptic frame of mind. Even though we are aware that this discomfort was not brought to us by a wicked god but rather by Canadian wildfires, our minds tend to jump to analogies of imminent sorrow.

“Sailors revel in the red sky at night.” The proverb reads, “Sailors take caution when the sky is red in the morning.”

For a while now, the American people have been regularly seeing a crimson sky above the economy. In spite of the unemployment rate being under four percent since January of the past year, the most recent Economist/YouGov survey findings show that Americans are quite dissatisfied with the state of the economy.

How would you characterize the current status of the economy? Let’s start with the most basic question. Only 4% think the economy is doing well. We’ll suppose that a sizable portion of those people work directly for the administration of Joe Biden or one of their green energy subsidiary departments. 17% feel the economy is “good,” putting the total favorable rating to only 22%.

A total of 32 percent of respondents on the opposite side of the ledger believe the economy is just “fair.” 42 percent of people feel the economy is “poor.” This raises the percentage of unfavorable evaluations to 74 percent.

The demographics provide an intriguing narrative. By far, individuals between the ages of 48 and 64 are the group of people who are most likely to think the economy is bad or fair. Among this group, 82% have a poor opinion of the economy. Older Americans come in second, with 75% of them holding unfavorable opinions. However, things aren’t actually a lot better for younger adults. The economy is rated as fair or poor by 69% of Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 and 68% of those between the ages of 30 and 47.

With 88% of conservatives expressing unfavorable views compared to only 64% of liberals, there is a party and ideological divide in opinions on the economy. Self-described moderates fell somewhat in the middle, with 69% of them having unfavorable opinions. In terms of party identification, this is broken down as follows: 86% of Republicans, 79% of independents, and 59% of Democrats. 92% of Trump supporters and 58% of Biden supporters agree that the economy is bad.

The opinions of various racial and ethnic groupings differ. 77% of white people and 71% of Hispanics believe the economy is fair or bad. The unfavorable appraisal proportion decreases among blacks, but only to 61%.

By the way, 77 percent of women vs 72 percent of men have a poor opinion of the economy.

As exports fell and imports increased in April, the U.S. trade imbalance expanded dramatically, placing downward pressure on the country’s economic growth but showing that consumer demand for products is still high.

In April, exports decreased by 3.6 percent to $249 billion, with shipments of medicines and crude oil down the most. Down to $167.1 billion, exports of goods decreased by $9.4 billion. Services exports increased by $200 million to $81.9 billion, driven by growth in business and foreign travel services, which was slightly offset by reductions in banking and government services.

The value of goods imported rose by $5.2 billion to $263.2 billion. Automotive cars, components, and engines grew by $2.0 billion, showing a boom in automobile purchasing in the United States, which has also boosted domestic vehicle sales. Imports of home items and cellphones climbed by $1.7 billion. The decline in service imports was mostly due to declines in travel and transportation services.

The gross domestic product is reduced by larger deficits. Large fluctuations in the trade deficit over the last two years have played a significant role in the instability of this official scorecard of the American economy.

In the next months, imports are anticipated to diminish as consumer spending declines and continues to move from domestic services to products.

A stronger dollar makes imports less costly in the United States and increases the cost of exports overseas, increasing the trade imbalance.

The highest trade difference in April was with China, totaling $24.2 billion.

The Biden administration is ready to have complete control over how Americans warm their families, prepare their meals, and light their houses.

While the implementation of a potential ban on gas stoves is unknown and an incandescent light bulb ban is quickly approaching, a regulation governing gas furnaces is apparently on the way.

According to Fox News Digital, the Biden administration will soon put the finishing touches on its decree ordering households to install energy-efficient furnaces.

In a statement released on June 13, 2022, the Department of Energy described the rule and claimed that if it were to be adopted, consumers would save billions each year on their utility bills as well as 373 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions would be avoided over the course of 30 years, claims that critics have proposed are based on incorrect assumptions.

In accordance with the regulation, “non-weatherized gas heating systems and those placed in mobile homes will be required to reach a yearly fuel usage efficiency of 95%.”

Nearly all of the gas utilized by the furnaces must be turned into heat in order to meet this ultra-utilization efficiency criteria.

Condenser furnaces, which the Biden administration wants to impose on part of the population, contain additional heat exchangers that absorb the heat from the exhaust, unlike less costly ordinary furnaces whose exhaust gases are released outside.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute senior scholar Ben Lieberman claims that the 2029 implementation date of this standard “would essentially prohibit non-condensing furnaces because condensing alternatives would then be the only choices available.”

According to reports, the average yearly fuel usage efficiency for furnaces now on the market is 80%.

Between 40% and 60% of furnaces already on the market would be prohibited under the proposed standard.

When the proposed regulation was first announced, Jennifer Granholm, the secretary of Biden’s DOE, stated: “By revising energy-efficiency standards regarding numerous carbon-emitting appliances, including home furnaces, the Biden Administration is making efforts to save consumers money.”

Critics, some of whom have remarked the forced action would not be cost-effective for everyone, are unconvinced by Granholm’s promise of consumer savings.

One of the rule’s detractors, Lieberman, said in an interview with Reason, “The only thing these rules accomplish is to push the ultraefficient decision on everyone, even when one size does not fit all. Appliances with higher initial prices may or may not save you money on energy because of such efficiency criteria.”

Despite the state’s $32 billion budget shortfall, the California State Senate approved a measure last week to provide jobless illegal immigrants with $300 of weekly unemployment benefits for up to 20 weeks.

Breitbart News said in a previous article:

“California’s fiscus has gone from a $100 billion surplus over the course of a year, which included funding from the federal government for coronavirus treatment, to a startling $32 billion deficit.”

Governor Gavin Newsom’s (D) updated budget included a warning to lawmakers to exercise “prudence.” However, SB 227 would allow “excluded” employees who are unlawfully present in the nation to collect $300 per week in benefits.

“Due to false claims made during the epidemic, California’s unemployment compensation program is already contentious, since they have lost $30 billion. The state recently missed a payment on a federal loan to pay for benefits.”

According to the Washington Beacon, the measure, SB 227, put up by State Senator Mara Elena Durazo (D-Agoura Hills), has now cleared the State Senate and is headed to the Assembly.

“Under SB 227, officials of the unemployment fund would be prohibited from asking whether applicants are eligible for a social security number or from contacting applicants’ previous or current employers to inquire about their work status. Instead, applicants would certify on their own behalf that they fulfill the criteria for the weekly checks, which include having made at least $1,300 or putting in at least 93 hours over the course of three months. Tax returns, payment app transaction logs, and receipts showing a commute pattern are all acceptable forms of proof.”

Just a few months after California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) warned that an inflow of illegal immigrants may “break” the state, the State Senate enacted the legislation.

“The Golden State already provides undocumented residents with free medical insurance and driver’s licenses. California is home to over two million illegal immigrants.”

It is unknown whether Newsom would sign the legislation. A state task team looking into the matter is presently debating whether as well as how to pay reparations of billions of dollars for slavery that are being asked.

Retailers have informed the government that the Conservative Party’s proposed net zero taxes on groceries would result in an annual rise in food costs for the British population of almost £4 billion.

Instead of attempting to lessen the burden on Britons, who have endured crippling inflation for the past two years as a result of the government-imposed coronavirus lockdowns, the government is determined to take more money out of their pockets with a number of taxes to subsidize the recycling of packaging that will be required at the supermarket.

The government initially estimated that the so-called Extended Producer Responsibility net zero scheme, which Michael Gove developed while serving as environment secretary, would cost consumers about £1.7 billion. However, retailers have now stated that, due to inflation, the cost to consumers will likely be more than twice that amount.

The British Retail Consortium said in a statement to The Telegraph that the green tax, rather than affecting companies, would be passed on to consumers, who will likely see a rise in their annual grocery prices of around £4 billion a year.

Helen Dickinson, CEO of the British Retail Consortium, stated: “Over the course of the next year or so, a number of new rules and levies will increase costs for shops and, eventually, for customers. These new initiatives endanger the possibility of inflation turning the corner just when it seems to be. Each of them has to be examined by the government, which must then decide whether to execute, delay, or abandon each one.”

The information comes in the wake of claims that Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s administration had tried to negotiate price ceilings with key food suppliers in an effort to lessen the effects of rampant inflation, which has driven up the price of basic foods like bread and cereal to a 45-year high.

Even if salaries have grown numerically, according to a study, they have not kept up with inflation, which means that in real terms, the great majority of individuals in the nation have seen their income decrease. Despite this, the neo-liberal Tory administration has argued that the people must bear the biggest tax burden since World War II.

Lord David Frost, a former key Brexit negotiator, stated: “It makes absolutely no sense to attempt to restrict food prices while enacting a new tax on food. People in a cost-of-living crisis the very last thing they need is for food prices to increase because we are adding additional unneeded expenses to businesses under the bogus pretext of net zero.”

An alarming 417,500 scheduled layoffs by American businesses have been reported for the first five months of 2023, in a Bloomberg study. According to an estimate by the outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas, there have been four times as many job layoffs than there were in 2023.

The overall number of predicted job cutbacks through May is the largest since 2009, with the exception of early 2020, when the government’s reaction to the Wuhan virus affected the labor market.

According to Challenger’s research, the IT sector, which declared 136,800 layoffs for the first five months of 2023, accounted for the majority of layoffs. That number was almost higher than the total number of job cutbacks disclosed by the IT sector in 2001, which totaled 168,400.

Similar job layoffs have also occurred in the finance, retail, and media industries. According to Challenger, 17,400 layoffs have already been reported by the media sector in 2023. Through May, financial businesses laid off 37,000 workers, more than four times the amount compared to 2022.

Companies have had to make expense reductions as a result of the Federal Reserve’s 14 months of interest rate rises. Challenger said that many businesses had frozen recruiting as a result of predictions of a perilous economic condition.

Broad-based job cuts will probably continue as Challenger data indicates a 287% increase in layoffs from the previous year.

The outplacement agency estimated that 3,900 jobs had been lost as a result of the spread of artificial intelligence. A considerable number of employment may be lost as a result of AI, a trend that is expected to intensify soon. According to Goldman’s findings, artificial intelligence will result in the loss of tens of millions of employees in the next years.

The foundation of the American economy is shaky. A massive regulatory state coupled with cheap credit guarantees that the American economy will always be unstable and will only fulfill the interests of oligarchical elites, while Middle America is continuing to be eroded.

Only true free-market changes, like eliminating the Fed and reducing the regulatory state, can bring back the US economy to normal.

Author: Scott Dowdy

Chicago residents of color flocked to the city council meeting this week to voice their disapproval of the city’s proposal to spend $51 million supporting migrants in their city.

Much to the dismay of the city’s black population, the Chicago City Council finally decided to accept the $51 million funds for migrants by a vote of 34–13. The cash, which is anticipated to run through June, was announced as a tide of migrants is flooding into the sanctuary city as a result of President Biden’s border crisis.

Over 10,000 migrants are said to have entered Chicago since August.

At a news conference conducted before the city council vote, leaders of the Chicago Republicans and representatives of the Black Community Collaborative along with the Neighborhood Network Alliance pleaded with the council to turn down the $51 million proposal.

Steve Boulton, the chairman of the Chicago GOP, said, “We have no idea where the funding is coming from. No one has disclosed how that money would be used. How it is being spent is kept a secret from us. The City Council is acting irresponsibly by allocating funds that are only a band-aid solution that will only help us for a few weeks or months before the issue returns.”

Black folks opposed to the city’s proposal claimed that money should be diverted first to assist Chicagoans.

Caroline Ruff, a Black Lives Matter Women of Faith member, spoke before the city council:

“I am aware of the $51 million up for vote today, and I urge the alderman to reject it. Why? For starters, we haven’t opened the schools to the homeless, who we see every day on the streets. I also see to it that they are fed and clothed. We must care for our neighborhood, especially for the Black community, and we must establish these mental health schools.”

Ruff said, “Enough is enough. We have not received anything for our neighborhood, and we’re so sick and tired of it.”

Smith pleaded with the municipal council to opt for the approval of a reparations scheme for Black Americans.

Smith criticized newly-installed Mayor Brandon Johnson’s (D) decision to give migrants $51 million, saying, “How dare this mayor, as well as the council of this city, have the guts to do such a thing. I demand that you enact the Reparations Ordinance for the City of Chicago with the same fervor and haste and that you also give us a position for black Americans, just as the new Americans.”

“Neither the luxury nor the chance existed for us to cross the border. We were not allowed to cross the border,” Smith remarked. “You pay migrants $51 million? We were tied to the bottom of ships, raped, stolen from, and assaulted to get here. Do you still remember who you are?”

The decision to invest $51 million in immigrant resources occurred the same week that Mayor Johnson, in defiance of local citizens, overflowed Wilbur Wright College with over 300 immigrants.

Residents of Chicago have demonstrated against the city’s support for migrants in the weeks preceding up to and after Johnson’s inauguration on May 15.

Johnson reiterated his support for immigrants in his inauguration speech.