Celebrate Labor Day More Than Ever

Labor Day was established as a national holiday in 1894 after Congress in the Grover Cleveland administration passed a law to recognize, honor and celebrate the American labor movement.

Its origins dated back to 1882 in New York City when several labor organizations organized a voluntary parade and activities to raise the visibility and influence of the labor movement and the laboring classes.

In the late 1800's it was not unusual that many workers might work 12 hour days and six or seven day weeks to make a living.

The American union movement was attempting to gain strength and celebrating a "Labor Day" fit in well with their plans for wider recognition and respect.

The idea caught on and many other city labor centers followed suit in the next several years

Individual states began to pass legislation recognizing the day (Oregon was the first in 1887), and by the time Congress acted, 30 states had adopted some form of Labor Day

The political motivation was to repair relations with the labor union movement when there were considerable tensions as unions agitated for more influence.

Labor Day may have begun as something connected to the labor movement but it seems to me it needs to celebrated even more today.

Barely 5% of private sector workers today are members of a labor union. 

That compares to over 30% in the late 1950's and early 1960's.

Source: https://equitablegrowth.org/aligning-u-s-labor-law-with-worker-preferences-for-labor-representation/

On the other hand, over one-third of public sector workers (teachers, state, local and federal government employees) are in a union.

Source: https://jacobin.com/2022/01/labor-density-historical-comparison-strikes-weakness

Overall, the 15 million labor union members in the United States are split roughly 50% public sector and 50% private sector That amounts to 10% of the total workforce.

The large number of public sector union members is a big change from as recently as the 1960's when it was generally illegal for a public sector employee to even be in a union.

It is important to remember that there is no real legal or economic reason for the very existence of a public sector union in the first place. 

In fact, liberal luminaries in the 1930's such as Franklin D. Roosevelt and Fiorello LaGuardia were opposed to public sector collective bargaining for the simple reason that it threatened the broad needs of the citizenry. This was the principal reason it was illegal for most government employees to unionize until well into the 1970's.

That is why you only see the public sector line above begin where it does.

Credit: https://showmeinstitute.org/blog/government-unions/what-was-fdr%e2%80%99s-stance-government-unions

The historical basis for unions in the private sector is based on insuring a balance of power to insure that workers receive a reasonable share of profits and work in safe and sanitary conditions. Governments don't have profits to share. They levy taxes to provide services to the public.

In addition, has anyone ever heard of a government worker toiling in a sweat shop? 

Governments also generally work in a monopoly situation meaning that if they provide poor service, no service, or they strike, there is no corresponding power by the consumer to go elsewhere as there is with a private sector business that is unionized.

Most importantly,  private sector unions are balanced against managers who have a natural incentive to push back on union demands. 

In the public sector no such tensions exists. More often than not the elected officials on the other side of the bargaining table are incentivized to give in to the unions for their own political survival. Democrats in particular know that they would not have been elected (nor will they be reelected) without that public sector union money flowing into their campaign coffers.

Why do I suggest that Labor Day needs to be celebrated more than ever today despite the decline of private sector unions?

It is because those that work and labor today (union or non-union, manufacturing, service, healthcare or anything else) are the ones who are paying taxes and pulling the wagon for everyone else.

These are the people who are making the United States work through their labor, sacrifice and tax payments.

And that number seems to get smaller every year.

The civilian labor participation rate (the adult population working) is only 61.4%.

20 years ago it was over 66%.

Source: https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-labor-force-participation-rate.htm

Why are fewer people in the labor force?

Baby boomers have been retiring.

Source: https://usafacts.org/articles/what-is-this-years-social-security-cost-of-living-increase/

More people have a disability.

More people are just choosing to simply not work.

It means more people in the wagon. Fewer people pulling the wagon.

You can see the stark reality of this in these color coded maps of the United States that show the share of personal income in each county that comes from government transfers.

In 1970, not even 1% of counties relied on government transfers for 25% or more of its personal income.

In 2000, 10.4% did.

By 2022, 53% of all counties in the United States were relying on government money for over a quarter of their total personal income.

Credit: https://x.com/GreenPlusAnE/status/2094796289019871502

Those government transfers have to be covered by taxes on those who are in the labor force.

Or new debt that will ultimately have to be paid by someone laboring in the future.

Do you see why we need to celebrate Labor Day more than ever?

Hug someone who is working today.

Oh Canada!

Over the last couple of years I have written several times about the substantial challenges facing Canada.

Here are two examples.

Our Northern Neighbor Heading South?  in February, 2026

What's Next For Canada in May, 2025

The latest example of a misstep by the Liberals who have led the country for the last 11 years is attempting to start a trade war with the United States.

Take a look at Canada's trade numbers and tell me who is going to win any trade war between the two countries.

Source: https://x.com/trish_regan/status/2092429759158301013/photo/1

77% of Canada exports go to the United States.

Those exports represent 22% of Canada's total GDP.

In fact, more goods are exported from Canada to the United States each year than any goods that are transferred among the provinces of Canada.

Canada is also heavily reliant on those in the United States to hold its debt.

Canada has about 

For context, Canada's national federal debt is about $1 trillion.

Beyond all of that, Canada almost totally relies on the United State for its defense.

Canada had neglected spending money on defense for most of the last five decades although it is scheduled to finally spend the NATO required minimum 2% of GDP this year.

Of course, that only came about due to pressure from Trump on Canada and other NATO countries that were getting a free ride from the United States for many, many years.

Prime Minister Carney's actions in treating Trump's trade actions as an attack rather than a negotiation  seems politically calculated rather than being based on sound and rational policy.

Look at the trade numbers above if you don't believe that.

Carney seems to be only interested in playing to the liberal voters who dominate Canadian politics right now and who have a severe case of Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Just 15% of Canadians have a positive approval of Trump.

What is really sad is that the majority in Canada want to blame Donald Trump for their problems when the reality is that they have done this to themselves by following the wrong leaders and the wrong policies.

It helpful to shift blame for Canada's problems and away from him.

Trump understands what Carney is doing as shown in this Truth Social post from yesterday.

Trump also knows that Carney is only going to accelerate Canada's decline.

I get it that the Canadians believe that Trump is threatening their sovereignty.

However, Trump doesn't have it in for Canada or its people.

He is just playing chess rather than checkers.

Trump understands that Canada has gotten the better part of the trade and defense aspects of the U.S-Canada relationship for a number of years.

For example, the U.S.-Canada trade balance got massively unbalanced during the Biden years.

Source: Grok

Trump  came into office in his second term desiring to bring some balance back to the relationship.

He also knows that Canada has been trying to assist China in circumventing Chinese tariffs by putting Chinese content and parts in goods manufactured in Canada.

Trump's request in the negotiations was merely that when a product comes in from Canada and is marked as "Made in Canada" that it really is true.

The U.S. wanted assurances that it was truly made with non-Chinese parts and labor so that the Chinese could not use Canada to circumvent U.S. tariffs on China.

This apparently is what Carney called an "attack". It would seem this would be something Carney should want for his country anyway.

Trump is also looking at Canada and the United States as a business man would rather than a politician.

Looked at from the perspective of a businessman like Trump. if the U.S. and Canada were corporations, they would be ideal candidates for a consolidation or merger.

It needs to be kept in mind that although Canada encompasses a larger geographic area than the United States, its population is only 40 million compared to 335 million in the U.S.

Further, 90% of the Canadian population lives within 100 miles of the U.S. border.

Canada is resource rich but does not have the population, manufacturing and technology infrastructure to take full advantage. Nor do they have the financial resources to maximize its assets.

The Canadian dollar is near 20 year lows in value relative to the U.S. dollar.

A Canadian only provides 72 cents $US at recent exchange rates.

15 years ago the Canadian dollar was trading as high as $1.08

Canadian/US Currency Exchange Rate
Source: https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/CADUSD=X/

The average Canadian has lost over 30% of their purchasing power over that period.

Consider the decline in the real GDP per capita and the standard of living in Canada compared to the United States since 2016.

Credit: https://x.com/WallStreetMav/status/2028326186783236412

The Justin Trudeau administration in Canada was disastrous to the financial well-being of average Canadians.

The Carney administration might end being worse.

In this era where economies of scale are more important than ever, and the cost of government services (especially defense) is growing more expensive every year, there is an argument that combining the United States and Canada would make sound economic sense.

A formal merger or annexation is probably not achievable but an economic union with open trade, a common currency and the ability for Americans and Canadians to travel and work freely by and between the two countries might not be out of the question.

This is clearly where Trump's thinking is leading him.

However, this would necessarily require a common policy on immigration that limits and controls this problem. There would also have to be some type of parity in government benefits.

Canada's current more liberal immigration policies make this impossible.

Almost 25% of Canada's population is foreign born compared to 15% in the United States.

If you include those who are first-generation Canadians (their parents were foreign born) that number is about 45%.

In the City of Toronto, 51% of the population is foreign born.

In Vancouver it is 43%.

No economic union or other consolidation would work unless there is full agreement on the immigration issue.

The media and others may want you to believe that Trump is a madman highlighting the possibilities described above.

However, the facts above show there is sound logic and arguments for everything Trump has talked about.

It is confusing to many because Trump is literally thinking two or three steps beyond where most everybody else is who are captured by conventional thinking and the status quo. 

We can only hope that cooler heads will prevail in all of this.

There is too much history of harmony. goodwill and shared values between the two countries.

All I can say is "Oh Canada!" when I look at all of this.

Do Carney and Canadians fully understand the implications of the fight they seem to want to take on?

This guy on X sums it up pretty well.

What are they thinking?

This and That----September 2, 2026 Edition

A few random observations, charts and factoids to provide some context on what is going on in the world.

Prescription Drug Prices

All of the media attentions seems directed at higher gas and food costs.

For some reason no attention is being paid to lower prescription drug prices.

 Prices are down 3.1% over the last 12 months.

They were down 0.8% in July alone---the largest decrease in the last 60 years. That equates to an annualized decline of almost 10%.

The drop in prices has been so dramatic that it was a major factor in revenues slowing down for Walmart last quarter.

Revenues from Walmart's pharmacy business declined year over year spooking investors as Walmart's overall revenue gains were affected by the pharma price declines.

Walmart,s stock quickly dropped 10% in the aftermath of its earnings release,

What did Walmart state was the cause of the decline in pharmacy revenues?

Source: https://www.ndtvprofit.com/markets/walmart-earnings-impact-shares-plunge-6-pre-market-as-drug-price-decline-spooks-investors-11935834

Despite the stronger overall performance, falling drug prices emerged as a concern for investors. Walmart said the decline was partly linked to the federal government's Medicare prescription drug regulations.

The company specifically pointed to lower prices for GLP-1 drugs, saying prescription growth was “more than offset by price-mix headwinds.”

The pressure comes as the US prescription drug market experiences significant price deflation. According to Axios, drug prices are seeing their biggest decline in generations.

Those declines were due to pressure by the Trump Administration that was made possible in part by the new law passed in Trump's Big Beautiful Bill last year.   

That provision requires pharma companies to provide "most favored nation" pricing in the United States similar to prices offered to the lowest or second-lowest prices paid in comparable, wealthy international peer nations.

Is the reason that you don't hear about lower drug prices due to the fact that Donald Trump is in The White House and not a Democrat?

Drug Use Deaths

Pharmacy prices have decreased over the last year but so have deaths from illegal drug usage.

A few years ago all we heard about were deaths from fentanyl.

Deaths are down 54% from the peak in 2024.

Credit: https://x.com/Smirkley/status/2092263071272100135/photo/1

Deaths from meth, cocaine and heroin are also down since 2024.

The downward trend appears to have begun before Donald Trump was elected in 2024 but it is hard to say that stronger border enforcement and using the Navy and Coast Guard to track and destroy drug running craft in the Caribbean has not had a significant effect on these numbers.

Again, how much of this is being reported in the. mainstream media?

 

Cola Wars

For years we have been hearing about the cola war between Coke and Pepsi.

There have also been several books written about the brand competition over the years.

I was surprised recently to see that the Cola War is no longer between Coke and Pepsi.

It is between Coke and Dr. Pepper.

Dr. Pepper has passed Pepsi, Sprite and Diet Coke in recent years to become the second best selling soft drink in the U.S.

Source: Google AI

Pepsi might need another Roger Enrico.

Unfortunately, he passed away 10 years ago.

Pepsi's competition with Coke seems to have passed away as well.

Were The Good Old Days Actually That Great?

We hear a lot about how it used to be better in the good old days.

We also have our younger generations believing that nothing will ever get any better.

There is no reason that it is not possible for the next 80 years to show more improvements than the last 80 years did.

Credit: https://x.com/newtgingrich/status/2090803212659950059/photo/1

 

Most of what we have today was unthinkable 80 years ago.

The graphic above does not take account of such improvements as the television, satellite communications, computers, the internet, cell phones, Google, Amazon, AI and much more.

The best is always yet to come as long as human ingenuity and innovation, the "ultimate resource", is involved.

BeeLine Sets Another Record on Views

BeeLine broke all records for views in the month of August.

More than 500,000 views of BeeLine blog posts were registered during the month.

That is an average of over 17,500 per day.

Source: Google Analytics
August, 2026 Activity

The previous monthly record was 300,000 views.

Thank you to all my followers and readers for your support.

I also appreciate the fact that many of you are forwarding BeeLine content to others.

This type of reach would not be possible without you.

Who Is Going To Win The Midterms?

As the calendar turns towards September I am getting a lot of questions about what to expect in the midterm elections in November.

Midterm elections are traditionally challenging for the incumbent President's party.

It is often a referendum on the man in The White House.

Donald Trump's current approval ratings suggest that the Republicans face an uphill battle retaining slim majorities in the House and Senate.

Trump's average approval rating at RealClearPolitics.com currently stands at just 40%.

Source: https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/donald-trump/approval-rating
as of 8/30/26

This is not helpful to Republicans seeking office right now

In the last 22 midterm elections (dating back to 1938) there have only been two times that the incumbent party gained House seats (1998 and 2002). The average loss of House seats in a midterm election is 26 since World War II.

Both times the President's party gained seats in the House were when the President (Clinton in 1998 and George W. Bush in 2002) had approval ratings of over 60%.

Things do not look good right now for Republican prospects in the midterms but we are still two months away from election day.

What are some of the factors that might come into play?

It is important to remember that for almost the entirety of Trump's time in politics his approval rating has hovered between 40%-45%. Despite this he won two Presidential elections.

Source: https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/donald-trump/approval-rating

There are a lot of people who may not approve of Trump personally, or his methods, but vote for him anyway because they believe he is right on the issues.

Trump's approval recently has suffered principally due to the lingering Iran war and high gas prices.

These issues have hurt Trump particularly with Independent and swing voters.

However, a settlement of the Iran conflict favorable to the United States or an outright collapse of the Iranian regime leading into November could  provide a tremendous boost in momentum and enthusiasm for Trump and Republican candidates.

I wrote a blog post in January that the leaders of the Iranian regime were "Dead Men Walking".

I didn't know at that time how literally true that would turn out to be with the Israeli and American strikes on Iran.

However, my point at the time was that it seemed inevitable that Iran's regime would ultimately collapse due to economic problems and their inability to take care of their people.

This is what I wrote last January before the Iran war began in February.

The mullahs and Iran's regime leaders are dead men walking almost any way you look at it right now.

Exhibit One is the complete collapse of its currency.

Iran's rial is now essentially worthless vs. the Euro.

It is worth nothing vs. the U.S. dollar.

The Mullahs may hang on for another day, week, month or year.

However, they are dead men walking

The only question now is whether they collapse from within or from the weight of all of this?

It is even truer today as Iran's military power has been degraded and its economy is being strangled by the naval blockade and even stronger economic sanctions on the regime,

The Iranian rial has lost another 40% of its value against the dollar since the beginning of the year.

Timing is everything in politics. 

If the Iran problem is resolved between now and November it could be a boost for Trump and the Republicans. 

It is also hard to ignore the sizeable gap in campaign money between the Republican and Democrat national committees right now.

Trump's political action committee, MAGA, Inc. was also sitting on over $400 million in cash at the end of July,

The largest Democrat aligned PAC had less than one-third of that total.

Money talks in politics and it might make a difference in the last two months.

Finally, you have the sharp left turn the Democrat party has made to Socialist candidates.

It may play in New York City or Vermont but will it play in Peoria, Illinois, Piqua, Ohio, Paw Paw, Michigan, Prosper, Texas and Portland, Maine?

Democrat candidates are going to be constantly asked about their acceptance of Democrat Socialists and their platform that wants open borders, free rent, food and everything else plus abolition of the Senate and the electoral college.

How will that play out across America?

People may not approve of Trump or Republicans right now but there may be more voters who fear the Democrat Socialists than dislike Trump.

It is worth considering one other point in all of this.

The Iranian regime clearly calculated that negative media coverage of the Iran War and the upcoming midterm elections would pressure Trump into backing off and agreeing to a deal that would benefit Iran.

Every day we get closer to the midterms proves that assumption wrong.

In fact, right now it is the Iranians who want to go back to the terms of the earlier Memorandum of Understanding that resulted in the initial ceasefire.

Trump has moved beyond the MOU as the midterms loom. He has not backed off and increased the economic pressure on the Iranian regime.

This reinforces a point I have made about Trump in the past and I think is a reason that he survives politically despite approval ratings that would sink others.

Trump is not afraid to be great.

I wrote this at the outset of the Iran War in early March.

Great Presidents usually come about by facing great challenges. In many respects, the times make the man. It was certainly true with Washington, Lincoln and Roosevelt.

Greatness does not follow when taking the easy road. It only graces those who are not afraid of the challenge on the hard road.

Success is never assured. Trump may fail bigly. However, he is not afraid to be great.

That in itself is a rare commodity.

When push comes to shove many voters understand this and would rather have Trump working on their behalf when all things are considered.

However, Trump is not on the ballot this time.

Despite this, if Democrats gain majorities in the House and Senate they will do everything in their power to see that Trump is under constant attack and will likely attempt to impeach him again.

If people think chaos reigns today, consider what things will be like the next two years in that scenario.

Nothing will get done.

This may be the best argument to vote Republican for someone who is on the fence and fed up with politics.

Betting against Trump has proven to be a losing bet over the years.

Despite this, history and data suggest to me that I would not be willing to bet my house on the Republicans maintaining its Congressional majorities as things stand right now two months out from election day.

Does Trump have an ace up his sleeve?

He and the Republican need it looking at the midterms.

What Happened To Responsibility?

It seems that one of the defining characteristics of this era is the utter lack of anyone willing to take responsibility for anything.

There also seems to be a cadre of people who want to excuse the behavior of the bad actors.

50 years ago if a child acted up in school parents often meted out more discipline for the bad behavior than what the child faced at school.

Today a parent is more likely to blame the teacher or the school rather than their child.

Think back to all the violence and turmoil in the aftermath of the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis in 2020.

Floyd's death was a true tragedy. It should not have happened.

However, it also would not have happened if Floyd had not been passing counterfeit money, acting erratically and being high on drugs before the police were called.

Floyd was made out to be a saint but he had previously been convicted of eight crimes.

Few would admit that he might also have borne some responsibility in all that transpired.

Of course, the violence and looting that occurred in the aftermath of the Floyd death was also often explained away.

It was justified as targeting oppression, a reasonable reaction to racial injustice or just poor people getting the necessities they need to live.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated that the crime surge in the aftermath of the Floyd death was mostly parents shoplifting bread for their hungry families.

Source: https://www.yahoo.com/news/aoc-blames-nyc-crime-spike-

Just this month a Socialist New York state assemblywoman argued that shoplifting for biological needs is okay.

Source: https://nypost.com/2026/08/15/us-news/socialist-ny-lawmaker-emily-gallagher-says-shoplifters-have-a-biological-need-to-steal/

She believes that shoplifting should be legalized in New York.

State Assemblywoman Emily Gallagher strongly suggested shoplifting should be legalized while joined at a news conference outside Manhattan Criminal Court on Thursday by other lefty pols and criminal justice advocates with Court Watch NYC. The group claimed it monitored 360 arraignments over four days and found more than half were for misdemeanor offenses.

“Most of what we saw were crimes of poverty-people who are stealing things like toothpaste, people who were stealing things like, you know, soap. And that means if you’re stealing those things, you need them,” said Gallagher, who reps Greenpoint and other sections of woke northern Brooklyn.

We also have people in New York City that are upset that Luigi Mangione, who killed United Healthcare executive Brian Thompson in cold blood on a Manhattan sidewalk in December, 2024, should not have pled guilty last week to federal charges in the murder.

They think that larger "crimes" in the healthcare industry justified the murder.

Source: https://www.cnn.com/2026/08/13/politics/video/luigi-mangione-fans-ahead-of-potential-plea-dont-give-up-lcl

Illegal immigration into the United States is excused and explained by poverty, climate change or anything but the truth---crossing the United States border secretly or without inspection is a federal crime and has been since 1929.

I understand that some people do not agree with an unauthorized border crossing being a criminal offense but the fact us that it is the law of the land.

We have had almost 100 years where that has been the case but there has not been one situation in that time that anyone has been able gain the necessary Congressional support to alter the law.

When people do not want to assign responsibility for the most obvious crimes, we are in a very bad place as a society.

All of this is also reinforced in what we have witnessed in the aftermath of Covid.

It is clear to most objective observers that much of what we were told was not correct.

It is now generally accepted as highly unlikely that Covid had natural origins.

It almost certainly was caused by a leak at the Wuhan lab that was being funded by Fauci and others to conduct gain of function experiments that had been outlawed in the United States.

The lockdowns and school closures were in direct contravention of established pandemic response standards. I wrote a blog post in April, 2021 that detailed how the CDC and Fauci were ignoring long established pandemic response protocols titled Panic, Politics or Power.

There was no science behind the effectiveness of cloth masks and the six feet rule. 

The vaccines clearly did not prevent infection or transmission of the virus.

The claim that natural immunity would not provide any protection was simply false.

Their was an organized and concerted effort by the federal government to censor and cancel the free speech of those who offered information that contradicted the approved narrative.

How many in authority have claimed responsibility for the misinformation and misdeeds?

Dr. Anthony Fauci, when given the opportunity to take some measure of responsibility and apologize for his actions in all of this with a Presidential pardon in hand before a Senate committee, proceeded to take the Fifth Amendment over 100 times.

Despite all that we now know, we still have scores of people who excuse and deny that Fauci and others bear any responsibility for what was done.

This includes millions of people (Democrats more than Republicans) who wanted to implement the most authoritarian responses possible to those who were not willing to adhere to the "party line"on the Covid vaccines.

Never mind that each of these proposed compliance measures were in contravention of some of our most basic constitutional principles.

A majority of Democrats and 20% of Republicans were in favor or locking the unvaccinated at home?

Half of Democrats wanted to fine and imprison critics of the vaccine?

A third wanted to take children away from unvaccinated parents?

Support for Various Covid Vaccine Compliance Measures
January, 2022 Rasmussen Poll

How many of these people have been willing to apologize to their friends and neighbors that they might have been wrong about Covid and taken some responsibility for thinking this way?

Our society is in trouble when the most obvious crimes and misdeeds are ignored, justified, excused or rationalized. 

What happened to responsibility?

Population Bombing

For a long time there have been those who believed that the biggest threat to mankind was overpopulation.

The argument was that global population growth would outstrip global food and natural resources supplies and lead to starvation and ecological collapse.

The leading proponent of this thesis was Paul Ehrlich who was a Stanford professor who wrote a book in 1968 warning of upcoming catastrophe and calamity.

Ehrlich passed away earlier this year at the age of 93.

He was wrong about everything as this article by Jonah Goldberg of the American Enterprise Institute explains.

Source: https://www.aei.org/commentary/paul-ehrlich-was-wrong-about-everything/

“The Population Bomb” opens with a bold prediction, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”

“If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000,” Ehrlich prophesized during a speech in 1971. He also said that the U.S. would be rationing water by 1974, and food by 1980. That smog in L.A. and New York would cause some 200,000 deaths per year. That Americans born after World War II wouldn’t live past 50.

The only thing Ehrlich predicted that came true was the world did grow in population. 

It was 3.6 billion at the time Ehrlich wrote his book. It is 8.3 billion today.

I wrote a blog post in 2019 explaining why Ehrlich's predictions failed to materialize titled "The Ultimate Resource".

Why was Ehrlich so wrong?

He vastly underestimated the most important resource in the world---human ingenuity and innovation.

That is the ultimate resource on the planet.

A prime example is the increase in food production over the years. 

It has outstripped population growth on every continent due to human innovation and productivity.

What is now interesting is that the foundational fact underlying Ehrlich's entire thesis---that global population would continue to expand---is even under threat.

We are at a point where large portions of the planet have birth rates below the replacement level.

Several countries are already beyond peak population.

This has never happened before---not during wars, not during pandemics.

We are not producing children at a level necessary to replace ourselves.

These are countries where population appears to have peaked and is headed lower due to low birth rates.

These trends will accelerate as more of the Baby Boom generation passes away in coming years.

The total fertility (TFR) rate for the entire world is now estimated to be 2.2 sitting just slightly above the general population replacement level of 2.1.

Consider the fertility rates in some Asian countries.

Or these rates in Western societies.

All but Israel are below the replacement rate.

Israel is only able to have the TFR it does due to the Orthodox Jewish population in the country.

The most alarming fact in looking at the data is that births are the lowest in the countries that have been most responsible in providing the human ingenuity and innovation that propelled global advancement over the last several hundred years.

Consider the current distribution of the world's births. 

Credit: https://x.com/dr_duchesne/status/2091538445713690697

India, by itself, has TWICE AS MANY births as the United States, Europe, Russia, Canada and Australia COMBINED. This is despite the fact that India's birth rate is below replacement at 1.9.

Almost one out of every five births in the world last year were in India.

To put this in better overall context, there are more children in India below the age of 18 (420 million) than the entire population of the United States. (343 million).

Pakistan has more births than Europe and Russia COMBINED.

Nigeria has more than TWICE AS MANY births as the United States despite having a total population that is only 2/3 the size of the U.S.

The ultimate irony in all of this is that those like Ehrlich, who predicted doom and gloom due to growing population, may discover the real existential crisis to humanity is not having enough of the ultimate resource that provided the ingenuity and innovation that helped the world advance.

The real problem is not a Population Bomb.

It is the Population Bombing like it is right now.

Mamdani, Grocery Stores and Soviet History

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has decided the best way to provide affordable and accessible groceries to people in the city is by establishing city-owned grocery stores.

Source: https://apnews.com/article/mamdani-nyc-grocery-stores-prices-bronx-4634d4030209fea663e68f5d6d09a325

Mamdani campaigned on the proposal as a plank in a wider affordability platform centered on shifting the power of government toward policies to help the city’s struggling working class. At one point last year, he framed the idea as a modest experiment and said if it doesn’t work, “C’est la vie, then the idea was wrong.”

He is proceeding with plans to open five city-owned stores (one in each borough) that will offer a 30% discount on a core basket of essentials (fresh produce, meat, seafood and dairy). The stores are targeted to open between late 2027 and 2029.

The initial cost is at least $70 million to acquire the real estate and build out the stores.

The grocery store plans have already created problems. Mamdani has already had to admit a New York City ID will be required to shop at the stores so that non residents don't take advantage of the benefits. 

This means that you will need an ID to shop at a grocery store but don't need an ID  to vote in New York City!

In that grocery stores operate at very thin margins of 1%-4%, in order to provide grocery prices 30% below market, large ongoing subsidies will be necessary beyond the fact that the stores will pay no rent and pay no property taxes.

The plan may work to lower grocery prices in the short term but at the expense of disguised costs in higher taxes for New Yorkers.

Not only will large taxpayer subsidies be required to operate the grocery stores, Mamdani will likely need to eventually offer subsidies to private sector grocers who have to compete with the government stores due to the price distortion caused.

Link: https://x.com/danrivoli/status/2090217154213785647

Mamdani might be wise to consider a little history that takes us back to the fall of the Soviet Union nearly 40 years ago.

Many point to the fact that the Soviet Union collapse occurred as the Soviets were baited into trying to compete with the U.S. defense build-up instituted by Ronald Reagan.

The Soviets just did not have the financial resources to match the United States in defense spending while also tending to the needs of its citizenry. 

The Soviets spent money on guns rather than butter. Something had to give and the Soviet people were the ones that suffered.

However, a little known visit to a suburban Houston supermarket in 1989 by Boris Yeltsin appears to have been the real catalyst that ended up bringing down the Soviet Union.

Yeltsin visited the Johnson Space Center in Houston in September, 1989 to tour NASA's Mission Control and to view a model of the planned International Space Station.

After visiting the Space Center, Yeltsin made an impromptu request for his entourage to stop at a local Randall's grocery store so that he could get a glimpse of what everyday life was for Americans as he was  heading to the airport.

That visit changed the course of history.

At the time, Yeltsin was a newly elected member of the Soviet Parliament and the Supreme Soviet and had been a key ally of the General Secretary of the Communist Party Mikhail Gorbachev, who was initiating reforms but the pace of which was too slow for Yeltsin.

Houston Chronicle reporter Stephanie Asin was with Yeltsin on the visit to the grocery store that day.

Yeltsin, then 58, “roamed the aisles of Randall’s nodding his head in amazement,” wrote Asin. He told his fellow Russians in his entourage that if their people, who often must wait in line for most goods, saw the conditions of U.S. supermarkets, “there would be a revolution.”

“Even the Politburo doesn’t have this choice. Not even Mr. Gorbachev,” he said.

The fact that stores like these were on nearly every street corner in America amazed him. They even offered free cheese samples. According to Asin, Yeltsin didn’t leave empty-handed, as he was given a small bag of goodies to enjoy on his trip.

This is a picture of Yeltsin touring the grocery store.

Credit: Houston Chronicle

This Houston Chronicle story from 2014 fills in the rest of the story.

About a year after the Russian leader left office, a Yeltsin biographer later wrote that on the plane ride to Yeltsin’s next destination, Miami, he was despondent. He couldn’t stop thinking about the plentiful food at the grocery store and what his countrymen had to subsist on in Russia.

In Yeltsin’s own autobiography, he wrote about the experience at Randall’s, which shattered his view of communism, according to pundits. Two years later, he left the Communist Party and began making reforms to turn the economic tide in Russia. 

“When I saw those shelves crammed with hundreds, thousands of cans, cartons and goods of every possible sort, for the first time I felt quite frankly sick with despair for the Soviet people,” Yeltsin wrote. “That such a potentially super-rich country as ours has been brought to a state of such poverty! It is terrible to think of it.”

To give you some perspective on what was available in the Soviet Union at that time, here is a picture of a Russian store from that era.

Credit: Gennady Galperin/Reuters

An aide to Yeltsin later reported that in that visit to the grocery store in Houston “the last vestige of Bolshevism collapsed” inside his boss.

Two years later Yeltsin was elected to the newly created office of President of the Russian Federation after the collapse of the Soviet Union with Gorbachev.

Yeltsin immediately began dismantling the socialist economic system and introducing capitalism to the Russians. In the process, he attempted to convert the world's largest command economy into a free-market one.

The results of that transition were rocky in large part to cronyism in the break-up of many of the large state-owned businesses. Many Russian oligarchs were created and Yeltsin eventually resigned his office in 1999 haunted by charges of corruption and incompetence.

His successor?

Vladimir Putin.

Putin has been popular with the Russian people based on his macho style and nationalistic bombast. However, potential trouble lurks for Putin because of the Ukraine war and an economy that is still a shadow of the United States and its European neighbors.

Even Poland, which for years had to suffer under the boot of Soviet communism, now has almost 75% higher GDP per capita than Russia.

The Russian consumer spends about 40% of their income on food which is the highest it has been in 16 years.

In the United States it is about 10% of the average family budget.

On top of all of this, Russians are currently dealing with inflation of 6% per year and a central bank interest rate of 14%.

Mandami stated that if his "experiment" doesn't work he will just say c'est la vie.

Credit: Google AI

Failure in this case will not be due to bad luck or a small failure.

Is Mamdani not aware that the "experiment" has already been done?

How can Mamdani or anyone else look at this data and history and believe that the people of New York City are going to be better off at the end of this Soviet style "experiment"?

A couple hundred million dollars or more and it does not work out?

It is easy to say c'est la vie when you never have to spend your own money.

$40 Trillion and Counting

The outstanding debt of the United States surpassed $40 trillion this week. 

As of August 19, 2026
Source: https://www.us-debt-clock.com/

 Interest on servicing that debt is now $1.4 trillion per year.

A couple charts that show the increase in interest expense.

That is an increase of almost $$900 billion per year over just the last five years.

How did that happen?

Debt outstanding almost doubled in the last five years.

There was $23 trillion of debt in March, 2021 right before the Covid shutdowns. 

Debt has increased $17 trillion in 5-1/2 years.

To make matters worse, the average interest rate on U.S, debt went from 1.6% in 2021 to close to 3.5% today.

Source: https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/datasets/average-interest-rates-treasury-securities/average-interest-rates-on-u-s-treasury-securities

It becomes simple math.

Additional interest on $17 trillion in new debt and a higher average interest on $40 trillion of total debt.

That is how you can quickly add almost $1 trillion in annual interest costs to the federal budget.

To understand how big $1.4 trillion in annual interest costs is let's put that in context.

That is equal to half of the total annual amount of individual income tax receipts of $2.7 trillion.

It is over one-quarter of total federal government revenues.

Interest on the federal debt is now greater than all other spending categories except Medicare and Social Security,

ANNUAL INTEREST on the federal debt in 2026 exceeds the TOTAL DEBT that the United States was carrying during the Reagan Administration in 1982.

It will certainly get worse.

The federal government is now consistently spending $2 trillion more each year than it takes in.

The mountain of debt will grow.

So will the interest on the federal debt.

The interest costs will grow even higher if interest rates increase.

If interest on the federal debt is taking this big a bite of the budget with average rates at 3.5%, imagine what the numbers would look like with an average rate of 6.5% on the debt like the U.S. had in 2001.

Credit: https://wolfstreet.com/2025/05/29/us-government-interest-payments-to-tax-receipts-average-interest-rate-on-the-debt-and-debt-to-gdp-ratio-in-q1-2025/

When you consider that average interest rates on the federal debt were higher than they are right now for almost the entirety of the 2000-2010 period it is not far-fetched that things can get worse.

For example, the 30-year bond rate just hit 5.27%. 

That is the highest it has been since 2007.

If the average interest rate on federal debt stays where it is right now it will require another $300 billion in annual interest payments in 2008.

In order to just keep annual interest costs where they are right now, the average interest rate has to decline to 3.25% or below.

There are a lot of people who would like to see lower interest rates.

However, the U.S. government needs lower interest rates more than anyone.

There are $40 trillion reasons (and counting) why that is.