正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

🚨HUGE. Gig workers on strike, demand ₹40,000 monthly pay, pension & fixed entitlements ~ Unions say commission-based gigs deny minimum wages, social security & safe work conditions. · 10–20 minute delivery targets push riders into risk. Security and dignity are non-negotiable, but does a fixed salary fit a flexible...

Indian_Analyzer's profile picture

The Analyzer (News Updates🗞️)

140,299 subscribers

97,416 次观看 • 8 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

新闻政治健康养生
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

#WATCH | In an interview with ANI, AAP MP Raghav Chadha says, "In today's time, Swiggy Zomato delivery boys, Blinkit Zepto riders, Ola Uber drivers, are a workforce on the back of which these big companies have become unicorns... In this entire ecosystem that has been created, if there's one group of people who are oppressed and under immense pressure, it's the gig workers. Today, the biggest problem they face is the tyranny of this 10-minute delivery system... To deliver goods to you in 10 minutes, that person engages in dangerous driving, becomes a patient of anxiety, and experiences fluctuating heart rate... If they are even one minute late, they fear being logged out of the app, fear losing their incentives, and also face abuse from customers... Their minimum wage and maximum working hours should be designated. They work 14 to 16 hours continuously in a situation worse than that of a daily wage labourer. No provident fund, no permanent employment, no job security, no paid leaves..." Watch the full interview on ANI:
1:57

#WATCH | In an interview with ANI, AAP MP Raghav Chadha says, "In today's time, Swiggy Zomato delivery boys, Blinkit Zepto riders, Ola Uber drivers, are a workforce on the back of which these big companies have become unicorns... In this entire ecosystem that has been created, if there's one group of people who are oppressed and under immense pressure, it's the gig workers. Today, the biggest problem they face is the tyranny of this 10-minute delivery system... To deliver goods to you in 10 minutes, that person engages in dangerous driving, becomes a patient of anxiety, and experiences fluctuating heart rate... If they are even one minute late, they fear being logged out of the app, fear losing their incentives, and also face abuse from customers... Their minimum wage and maximum working hours should be designated. They work 14 to 16 hours continuously in a situation worse than that of a daily wage labourer. No provident fund, no permanent employment, no job security, no paid leaves..." Watch the full interview on ANI:

ANI

51,294 次观看 • 8 个月前

I'm not a fan of Uber, but it has provided many people with work, and cheap service. That’s over. Because of the Unions. When it comes to Unions, Labor has a massive conflict, it's destroying Australia and nobody talks about it. Unions once helped people. They allowed the littlest of us a voice. Those that did small and thankless work in a more dangerous environment. They rose when the big end of town could treat the working people as slaves. Just machines. Pay was abysmal, and working conditions - cruel. People were just filthy pawns. The industrial era was brutal. The Unions gave workers the ability to be heard and understood. A much needed voice. Many of the great things about this country came from the high-risk and low-reward strike action early last century. Unions in Australia have many proud achievements back then. Built on a collection of little actions that won things like living wages, weekends (although that was Henry Ford) and holidays. But like so many old institutions, they have completely lost their way today. Modern Unions are different. Unions actively encouraged the big end of town as they smashed workers during the COVID era. Forced masking and vaccination, exposure of private medical data and other breaches of human rights - endorsed by the Unions. Whilst those of us who were privileged enough to make our own decisions, so many working people were pummelled, simply for not having the means to speak up. Because Unions abandoned them. There are many stories of workers completely abandoned by their unions when it mattered over the decades. They're rarely led by the workers, who care about their mates - a care borne from a deep understanding of their colleagues. Now they are run by careerists, lawyers and sociologists all too familiar with the lecture halls and university picket lines. People who've never swung a hammer, picked a banana, served a beer, flown a plane or taught a class. Those on the pathway to parliament, or the board of a superfund to worry about the little people. Their purpose is completely perverted. Unions are the Labor governments and Labor governments are the Unions. Just a giant and very powerful parasite that has exactly no stakes in the outcomes they cause. As jobs disappear. The Unions sent the car industry packing. Forcing business into unsustainable pay and conditions. It was easier for them to close shop, unless the government propped-up the grift, with our taxes. Taxes are the lifeblood of Unions as more and more subsidy fuels industries that the Unions break. All of it inflationary. Pay never keeps up. They’re driving us off a cliff. They talk tough in the boardroom, and build more bureaucracy in the name of safety or productivity. Hollowing out productivity and the living standards of their own membership. Their membership is in decline. Because anyone who ever called on their union from a place of need knows - they don't answer the phones during Question Time. They give us MPs that never had a real job, like Walker and Shorten, advocating for things that make workers lives worse. High immigration, political correctness, and every social cause going. They insist on destroying our energy grid, and more jobs go... Then there's the money go round of political donations and brown paper bags. Just look at the criminal CFMEU. They've go too far - the Unions and Labor put paid drivers on driver-less trains in NSW. Gorging themselves on taxpayer dollars. Meanwhile real wage and productivity falls, as living standards in Australia sink like an anchor looking for the ocean floor. Labor in government don’t regulate Unions, they aid and abet them. Together they have completely lost their purpose, as they ruin themselves and their legacy. If it continues, we will slide back to industrial era conditions as everything fails under its own bloated weight, and nobody wants to see that. I just want Australia back.
1:52

I'm not a fan of Uber, but it has provided many people with work, and cheap service. That’s over. Because of the Unions. When it comes to Unions, Labor has a massive conflict, it's destroying Australia and nobody talks about it. Unions once helped people. They allowed the littlest of us a voice. Those that did small and thankless work in a more dangerous environment. They rose when the big end of town could treat the working people as slaves. Just machines. Pay was abysmal, and working conditions - cruel. People were just filthy pawns. The industrial era was brutal. The Unions gave workers the ability to be heard and understood. A much needed voice. Many of the great things about this country came from the high-risk and low-reward strike action early last century. Unions in Australia have many proud achievements back then. Built on a collection of little actions that won things like living wages, weekends (although that was Henry Ford) and holidays. But like so many old institutions, they have completely lost their way today. Modern Unions are different. Unions actively encouraged the big end of town as they smashed workers during the COVID era. Forced masking and vaccination, exposure of private medical data and other breaches of human rights - endorsed by the Unions. Whilst those of us who were privileged enough to make our own decisions, so many working people were pummelled, simply for not having the means to speak up. Because Unions abandoned them. There are many stories of workers completely abandoned by their unions when it mattered over the decades. They're rarely led by the workers, who care about their mates - a care borne from a deep understanding of their colleagues. Now they are run by careerists, lawyers and sociologists all too familiar with the lecture halls and university picket lines. People who've never swung a hammer, picked a banana, served a beer, flown a plane or taught a class. Those on the pathway to parliament, or the board of a superfund to worry about the little people. Their purpose is completely perverted. Unions are the Labor governments and Labor governments are the Unions. Just a giant and very powerful parasite that has exactly no stakes in the outcomes they cause. As jobs disappear. The Unions sent the car industry packing. Forcing business into unsustainable pay and conditions. It was easier for them to close shop, unless the government propped-up the grift, with our taxes. Taxes are the lifeblood of Unions as more and more subsidy fuels industries that the Unions break. All of it inflationary. Pay never keeps up. They’re driving us off a cliff. They talk tough in the boardroom, and build more bureaucracy in the name of safety or productivity. Hollowing out productivity and the living standards of their own membership. Their membership is in decline. Because anyone who ever called on their union from a place of need knows - they don't answer the phones during Question Time. They give us MPs that never had a real job, like Walker and Shorten, advocating for things that make workers lives worse. High immigration, political correctness, and every social cause going. They insist on destroying our energy grid, and more jobs go... Then there's the money go round of political donations and brown paper bags. Just look at the criminal CFMEU. They've go too far - the Unions and Labor put paid drivers on driver-less trains in NSW. Gorging themselves on taxpayer dollars. Meanwhile real wage and productivity falls, as living standards in Australia sink like an anchor looking for the ocean floor. Labor in government don’t regulate Unions, they aid and abet them. Together they have completely lost their purpose, as they ruin themselves and their legacy. If it continues, we will slide back to industrial era conditions as everything fails under its own bloated weight, and nobody wants to see that. I just want Australia back.

Matthew Camenzuli

13,024 次观看 • 6 个月前

WATCH | Hi Please Share. These are the conditions that workers endure at Indarama Gold Mine in Kwekwe. We write with heavy hearts as Zimbabwean workers employed at Indarama Ming Chang Mine, Kwekwe. We are not against investment or mining. We want to work, build our country, and provide for our families in dignity and safety. Right now, that dignity is being taken away. These are the conditions we face daily, and we are speaking out because internal reports have led to victimization instead of solutions: 1. Safety Violations - PPE Denied & Sold to Workers Workers are being made to operate underground and in hazardous areas without proper Personal Protective Equipment. When PPE is available, it is sold to employees instead of being issued freely as required by the Mines and Minerals Act and Factories & Works Regulations. We are expected to buy our own helmets, boots, gloves, and dust masks from the wages we barely survive on. 2. No Clean Drinking Water or Sanitation The entire mine has no clean, potable water for workers to drink. Many of us are forced to drink shaft water. There are no functional toilets on site. This is a serious health and dignity risk. 3. Poor Wages, No Grading Structure Employees are underpaid with no clear grading or salary structure. There is no transparency on how wages are calculated, no promotions, and no career path for most general hands. 4. Inhumane Accommodation Workers are housed in small rooms built from sacks, tents, and plastics, directly on bare ground.There is no proper housing that meets basic health and safety standards. We sleep in overcrowded, unsafe structures exposed to weather and illness. 5. Victimization & Unlawful Dismissals As workers, we elected representatives to formally write to mine administration to raise these issues for resolution. Instead of dialogue, anyone who raises a concern is dismissed with immediate effect. Employees are being fired without due process, without hearings, and without reason. Fear has replaced safety. Our Plea: We are Zimbabweans. We want to work. But we cannot work safely, legally, or humanely under these conditions. We therefore humbly plead for urgent assistance and investigation from: 1. Ministry of Mines & Mining Development- For safety and compliance inspections 2. Ministry of Labour & Social Services- For labour law, wages, grading, and unfair dismissals 3. Ministry of Health & Child Care- For water, sanitation, and occupational health risks 4. His Excellency, the President- For intervention to protect Zimbabwean workers We are not trying to damage the mine. We are asking for the law to be upheld: safe PPE, clean water, decent toilets, fair pay, proper housing, and the right to speak without fear of being fired. Sincerely, The Workers of Indarama Ming Chang, Kwekwe
0:34

WATCH | Hi Please Share. These are the conditions that workers endure at Indarama Gold Mine in Kwekwe. We write with heavy hearts as Zimbabwean workers employed at Indarama Ming Chang Mine, Kwekwe. We are not against investment or mining. We want to work, build our country, and provide for our families in dignity and safety. Right now, that dignity is being taken away. These are the conditions we face daily, and we are speaking out because internal reports have led to victimization instead of solutions: 1. Safety Violations - PPE Denied & Sold to Workers Workers are being made to operate underground and in hazardous areas without proper Personal Protective Equipment. When PPE is available, it is sold to employees instead of being issued freely as required by the Mines and Minerals Act and Factories & Works Regulations. We are expected to buy our own helmets, boots, gloves, and dust masks from the wages we barely survive on. 2. No Clean Drinking Water or Sanitation The entire mine has no clean, potable water for workers to drink. Many of us are forced to drink shaft water. There are no functional toilets on site. This is a serious health and dignity risk. 3. Poor Wages, No Grading Structure Employees are underpaid with no clear grading or salary structure. There is no transparency on how wages are calculated, no promotions, and no career path for most general hands. 4. Inhumane Accommodation Workers are housed in small rooms built from sacks, tents, and plastics, directly on bare ground.There is no proper housing that meets basic health and safety standards. We sleep in overcrowded, unsafe structures exposed to weather and illness. 5. Victimization & Unlawful Dismissals As workers, we elected representatives to formally write to mine administration to raise these issues for resolution. Instead of dialogue, anyone who raises a concern is dismissed with immediate effect. Employees are being fired without due process, without hearings, and without reason. Fear has replaced safety. Our Plea: We are Zimbabweans. We want to work. But we cannot work safely, legally, or humanely under these conditions. We therefore humbly plead for urgent assistance and investigation from: 1. Ministry of Mines & Mining Development- For safety and compliance inspections 2. Ministry of Labour & Social Services- For labour law, wages, grading, and unfair dismissals 3. Ministry of Health & Child Care- For water, sanitation, and occupational health risks 4. His Excellency, the President- For intervention to protect Zimbabwean workers We are not trying to damage the mine. We are asking for the law to be upheld: safe PPE, clean water, decent toilets, fair pay, proper housing, and the right to speak without fear of being fired. Sincerely, The Workers of Indarama Ming Chang, Kwekwe

𝐂𝐫𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐖𝐚𝐭𝐜𝐡 𝐙𝐖

19,968 次观看 • 1 个月前

There are no jobs natives won’t do, only wages they won’t accept. The migrant behind the camera says “they say we’re taking their jobs… Aussie lads don’t want to work” The farmer replies “..young Aussies just wanna sleep in, go to the beach and drink beer… they don’t want to do this” From the migrant’s perspective, even a low Australian wage is 100x what a low wage is where he’s from, plus working here leads to permanent residency which leads to Medicare and other social supports. So it’s hardly a trudge for the migrant to take the role, seeing as though comparatively to staying home this endeavour will make him very wealthy. And the farmer must surely know that when pay is high enough to compensate for hours, conditions, and opportunity cost, an Australian will take the job. What are often described as “labour shortages” or “they don’t want to do this” are usually a reflection of employers’ preference for keeping wages low rather than a true lack of available workers, especially for lower skill requirement jobs. By increasing the supply of labour, mass immigration places downward pressure on wages and reduces workers’ bargaining power, allowing firms to fill roles without raising pay. This farmer could’ve got Aussies to do it, but he’d have to pay them an Aussie wage. He didn’t want to admit that, so he just said Australians are lazy, and the migrant worker gleefully agrees.
0:34

There are no jobs natives won’t do, only wages they won’t accept. The migrant behind the camera says “they say we’re taking their jobs… Aussie lads don’t want to work” The farmer replies “..young Aussies just wanna sleep in, go to the beach and drink beer… they don’t want to do this” From the migrant’s perspective, even a low Australian wage is 100x what a low wage is where he’s from, plus working here leads to permanent residency which leads to Medicare and other social supports. So it’s hardly a trudge for the migrant to take the role, seeing as though comparatively to staying home this endeavour will make him very wealthy. And the farmer must surely know that when pay is high enough to compensate for hours, conditions, and opportunity cost, an Australian will take the job. What are often described as “labour shortages” or “they don’t want to do this” are usually a reflection of employers’ preference for keeping wages low rather than a true lack of available workers, especially for lower skill requirement jobs. By increasing the supply of labour, mass immigration places downward pressure on wages and reduces workers’ bargaining power, allowing firms to fill roles without raising pay. This farmer could’ve got Aussies to do it, but he’d have to pay them an Aussie wage. He didn’t want to admit that, so he just said Australians are lazy, and the migrant worker gleefully agrees.

auspill

184,463 次观看 • 7 个月前

The Joe Biden Administration Has Proposed $4.5 TRILLION In New Taxes But Plans On Letting Social Security Run Out “In the $4.5 trillion of taxes the president has proposed —not a dime, is going to shore up Social Security.” Everyone On Social Security Will Suffer A 24% Decrease In Their Checks In 9 Years. These People DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU 🚨 “The president keeps saying he does not wish to have cuts in social. Is he aware that under current law, when the program goes broke in nine years, that there will be a 24 percent benefit cut for those who are current recipients? Is he aware of that? Well, it's clear that Social Security... But is he... I apologize for interruption, but I have limited time. Is the president aware that when social goes broke in nine years, under current law, there's a 24 percent cut in benefits for people who are currently receiving. If we don't do anything about it, I think that's about right. Okay, let me ask. But the president will want, wants to strengthen social security and make sure that doesn't happen. In the $4.5 trillion of taxes the president has proposed, are any of those taxes going to shore up social security? I actually know that answer. The answer is of the $4.5 trillion in taxes he has proposed not a dime, is going to shore up Social Security. Does the president know personally anybody who is dependent upon Social Security, and if their benefits are cut by 24%, they will slide into poverty? It's hard for you to know, so I'll give you a pass on that. I assure you that the president knows many people on Social Security. Then why doesn't the president care? He cares very deeply. Then where is his plan? He stands ready to work with Congress to address... That's a lie, because when a bipartisan group of senators has repeatedly requested to meet with him about social, so that somebody who is a current beneficiary will not see her benefits cut by 24%, we have not heard anything on our request. And we've made multiple requests to meet with the president. Now you can't comment on that, I realize that, but that is a fact and if you've been told to say he stands ready to meet, I will tell you there's absolutely no evidence because we have not gotten our meeting.”
2:03

The Joe Biden Administration Has Proposed $4.5 TRILLION In New Taxes But Plans On Letting Social Security Run Out “In the $4.5 trillion of taxes the president has proposed —not a dime, is going to shore up Social Security.” Everyone On Social Security Will Suffer A 24% Decrease In Their Checks In 9 Years. These People DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU 🚨 “The president keeps saying he does not wish to have cuts in social. Is he aware that under current law, when the program goes broke in nine years, that there will be a 24 percent benefit cut for those who are current recipients? Is he aware of that? Well, it's clear that Social Security... But is he... I apologize for interruption, but I have limited time. Is the president aware that when social goes broke in nine years, under current law, there's a 24 percent cut in benefits for people who are currently receiving. If we don't do anything about it, I think that's about right. Okay, let me ask. But the president will want, wants to strengthen social security and make sure that doesn't happen. In the $4.5 trillion of taxes the president has proposed, are any of those taxes going to shore up social security? I actually know that answer. The answer is of the $4.5 trillion in taxes he has proposed not a dime, is going to shore up Social Security. Does the president know personally anybody who is dependent upon Social Security, and if their benefits are cut by 24%, they will slide into poverty? It's hard for you to know, so I'll give you a pass on that. I assure you that the president knows many people on Social Security. Then why doesn't the president care? He cares very deeply. Then where is his plan? He stands ready to work with Congress to address... That's a lie, because when a bipartisan group of senators has repeatedly requested to meet with him about social, so that somebody who is a current beneficiary will not see her benefits cut by 24%, we have not heard anything on our request. And we've made multiple requests to meet with the president. Now you can't comment on that, I realize that, but that is a fact and if you've been told to say he stands ready to meet, I will tell you there's absolutely no evidence because we have not gotten our meeting.”

Wall Street Apes

571,905 次观看 • 2 年前

Elon Musk says working will be "optional" soon. Robots and AI will eliminate non-physical jobs, creating a "Universal High-Income" where everyone gets what they want. But a Yale paper shows the economics behind his prediction are far more brutal than he suggests. I'm talking about the paper titled "We Won't Be Missed." It concludes: "Half the workforce could stop working tomorrow and GDP wouldn't budge." i.e. humans become economically meaningless. The paper splits all work into two categories: 1) Bottleneck work This work is essential for growth. Energy production, logistics, scientific discovery, and infrastructure. The economy cannot grow unless this work scales. 2) Accessory work It's non-essential. Arts, hospitality, therapy, and fine dining. It's nice to have, but not required for growth. AGI systematically takes over everything that's mission-critical. Some accessory work stays human, not because AGI can't do it, but because we have surplus workers and it's not worth the compute. In other words, your future salary will be based on the computational cost of replicating your work. As compute gets exponentially cheaper, your wage ceiling plummets. The economy grows, productivity increases, but your value is tied to declining tech costs. Yale's paper concluded: Labor's share of GDP converges to zero. All income flows to owners of computational resources. The transition speed determines how painful this gets. If technology develops faster than computing scales, we get jagged disruption, with some workers receiving huge premiums before crashing. If compute scales faster, we get gradual, predictable decline in wages. In my opinion, there is a paradox that Musk missed here. Work being "optional" is an illusion. Humans need work, maybe not for survival, but for purpose. The existential question is: Would people still choose to work when it's economically meaningless... and when your contribution doesn't matter for progress or prosperity?
2:12

Elon Musk says working will be "optional" soon. Robots and AI will eliminate non-physical jobs, creating a "Universal High-Income" where everyone gets what they want. But a Yale paper shows the economics behind his prediction are far more brutal than he suggests. I'm talking about the paper titled "We Won't Be Missed." It concludes: "Half the workforce could stop working tomorrow and GDP wouldn't budge." i.e. humans become economically meaningless. The paper splits all work into two categories: 1) Bottleneck work This work is essential for growth. Energy production, logistics, scientific discovery, and infrastructure. The economy cannot grow unless this work scales. 2) Accessory work It's non-essential. Arts, hospitality, therapy, and fine dining. It's nice to have, but not required for growth. AGI systematically takes over everything that's mission-critical. Some accessory work stays human, not because AGI can't do it, but because we have surplus workers and it's not worth the compute. In other words, your future salary will be based on the computational cost of replicating your work. As compute gets exponentially cheaper, your wage ceiling plummets. The economy grows, productivity increases, but your value is tied to declining tech costs. Yale's paper concluded: Labor's share of GDP converges to zero. All income flows to owners of computational resources. The transition speed determines how painful this gets. If technology develops faster than computing scales, we get jagged disruption, with some workers receiving huge premiums before crashing. If compute scales faster, we get gradual, predictable decline in wages. In my opinion, there is a paradox that Musk missed here. Work being "optional" is an illusion. Humans need work, maybe not for survival, but for purpose. The existential question is: Would people still choose to work when it's economically meaningless... and when your contribution doesn't matter for progress or prosperity?

Ruben Hassid

44,173 次观看 • 9 个月前

Mearsheimer is honest about power. He dares to say the quiet part of Western politics out loud: international relations are not a fairy tale of “good guys” and “bad guys”, but a naked struggle for survival, security, and dominance. That is why, to him, there is no moral distinction between America and China. But he still misunderstands China. His offensive realism has one fixed Western code: • A great power must seek regional hegemony. • A great power must push others into dependence. • A great power must turn its neighborhood into a Monroe Doctrine. So when he sees China rise, he assumes China must want to become America in Asia. That is where he gets China wrong. America’s strategy is exclusion. It cannot tolerate another strong power in its own hemisphere. That is why Cuba, Venezuela, and any independent force in Latin America become permanent targets. China’s strategy is not a Chinese Monroe Doctrine. China’s priority is stability around itself, because China’s own development requires peace, trade, logistics, markets, energy routes, and regional order. But stability does not mean turning neighbors into colonies. It does not mean hundreds of military bases. It does not mean color revolutions, proxy wars, sanctions, coups, and permanent ideological containment. China spent forty years building roads, ports, factories, power grids, railways, supply chains, and markets. America exported war. China exported infrastructure. America’s model is control. China’s model is connectivity. That is why Western realists often misread China. They assume interest maximization must mean domination. They assume security must mean exclusion. They assume strength must become hegemony. But China’s civilizational instinct is different. China does not need every country to become Chinese. It does not need every neighbor to become a satellite. It does not need to export ideology, stage revolutions, or install puppet regimes. China’s highest security is not ruling everyone around it. It is building a region where trade, development, and interdependence make war too expensive and chaos too stupid. Mearsheimer is right that great powers compete. But he is wrong to assume every great power dreams in American grammar. China does not want to become America in Asia. China wants Asia to stop being America’s battlefield.
5:26

Mearsheimer is honest about power. He dares to say the quiet part of Western politics out loud: international relations are not a fairy tale of “good guys” and “bad guys”, but a naked struggle for survival, security, and dominance. That is why, to him, there is no moral distinction between America and China. But he still misunderstands China. His offensive realism has one fixed Western code: • A great power must seek regional hegemony. • A great power must push others into dependence. • A great power must turn its neighborhood into a Monroe Doctrine. So when he sees China rise, he assumes China must want to become America in Asia. That is where he gets China wrong. America’s strategy is exclusion. It cannot tolerate another strong power in its own hemisphere. That is why Cuba, Venezuela, and any independent force in Latin America become permanent targets. China’s strategy is not a Chinese Monroe Doctrine. China’s priority is stability around itself, because China’s own development requires peace, trade, logistics, markets, energy routes, and regional order. But stability does not mean turning neighbors into colonies. It does not mean hundreds of military bases. It does not mean color revolutions, proxy wars, sanctions, coups, and permanent ideological containment. China spent forty years building roads, ports, factories, power grids, railways, supply chains, and markets. America exported war. China exported infrastructure. America’s model is control. China’s model is connectivity. That is why Western realists often misread China. They assume interest maximization must mean domination. They assume security must mean exclusion. They assume strength must become hegemony. But China’s civilizational instinct is different. China does not need every country to become Chinese. It does not need every neighbor to become a satellite. It does not need to export ideology, stage revolutions, or install puppet regimes. China’s highest security is not ruling everyone around it. It is building a region where trade, development, and interdependence make war too expensive and chaos too stupid. Mearsheimer is right that great powers compete. But he is wrong to assume every great power dreams in American grammar. China does not want to become America in Asia. China wants Asia to stop being America’s battlefield.

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

14,030 次观看 • 1 个月前

Look carefully at these pictures. On 30 June there will be no march to the mansions. There will be no march to the luxury estates. There will be no march to the golf courses. There will be no march to the beachfront suburbs. Migrants — documented or undocumented — living in those wealthy suburbs have nothing to fear. Nobody will be knocking on their gates. Nobody will be dragging them from their homes. Nobody will be demanding to see their papers. The rich will sleep peacefully on 29 June. They will sleep peacefully on 30 June. And they will wake up on 1 July exactly as they did before. But in the townships and informal settlements there will be fear. The targets will not be the rich. The targets will be the poorest of the poor. The migrant living in a shack. The refugee running a spaza shop. The domestic worker. The gardener. The security guard. The construction worker. The unemployed young person trying to survive. And when it is all over: No jobs will have been created. No factory will have reopened. No mine will have reopened. No pothole will have been repaired. No school still using pit toilets will have been fixed. No hospital will have been repaired. No clinic will have received more nurses. No municipality will suddenly work. No family will escape poverty. No inequality will disappear. The rich will remain rich. The poor will remain poor. And once again, the victims will be people living in shacks while those living behind high walls, electric fences and private security watch from a safe distance. The anger is real. The unemployment is real. The poverty is real. The inequality is real. But the targets are wrong. The poor are being mobilised against the poor while the real causes of the crisis remain untouched.
5:25

Look carefully at these pictures. On 30 June there will be no march to the mansions. There will be no march to the luxury estates. There will be no march to the golf courses. There will be no march to the beachfront suburbs. Migrants — documented or undocumented — living in those wealthy suburbs have nothing to fear. Nobody will be knocking on their gates. Nobody will be dragging them from their homes. Nobody will be demanding to see their papers. The rich will sleep peacefully on 29 June. They will sleep peacefully on 30 June. And they will wake up on 1 July exactly as they did before. But in the townships and informal settlements there will be fear. The targets will not be the rich. The targets will be the poorest of the poor. The migrant living in a shack. The refugee running a spaza shop. The domestic worker. The gardener. The security guard. The construction worker. The unemployed young person trying to survive. And when it is all over: No jobs will have been created. No factory will have reopened. No mine will have reopened. No pothole will have been repaired. No school still using pit toilets will have been fixed. No hospital will have been repaired. No clinic will have received more nurses. No municipality will suddenly work. No family will escape poverty. No inequality will disappear. The rich will remain rich. The poor will remain poor. And once again, the victims will be people living in shacks while those living behind high walls, electric fences and private security watch from a safe distance. The anger is real. The unemployment is real. The poverty is real. The inequality is real. But the targets are wrong. The poor are being mobilised against the poor while the real causes of the crisis remain untouched.

Zwelinzima Vavi

111,050 次观看 • 2 个月前

The Government's trade deal with India will mean that it's cheaper to hire an Indian worker than a British one. Most other countries are perfectly happy to strike trade deals without forcing us to undercut our own workforce. We should have expected India to do the same. Instead, under the terms of our Free Trade Agreement with India, Indian companies will be able to transfer their workers to this country more easily. Once they're here, those workers will be able to avoid National Insurance payments for up to three years. The same is true for employers. Instead, both employee and employer will pay into the Indian social security system instead. This National Insurance exemption will make it much cheaper to hire Indian workers, in fields like IT and engineering, than to hire domestic talent. Let's imagine a British IT firm, set to hire a computer programmer for £60,000 a year. To hire them, an employer needs to spend £60,000 a year on their salary, plus £8,250 on Employer National Insurance. That's a total of £68,250. An Indian competitor with an office in London, meanwhile, can save money by transferring Indian workers to the UK, even if they pay the same headline salary. They’d still spend £60,000 on the salary - but instead of paying National Insurance, they pay into the Indian Employee Provident Fund instead. Mandatory contributions to the fund are capped at 15,000 rupees a month, or about £120. That means that, across a year, an employer only pays £1,470 into the social security system - for a total of £61,470. So under this Government's deal, it would be at least 10 percent cheaper to hire an Indian worker over a British one for this job. This is absurd. Over three years, it would be more than £20,000 cheaper for an Indian firm to bring over an Indian worker to London than to hire locally. The reason for this absurd arrangement is that the India deal includes a Double Contribution Convention. DCCs make it easier for international companies to transfer their workforce. They're designed to stop highly-skilled workers from paying into two different social security systems. We already have Double Contribution Conventions with other countries. However, these other countries tend to be either: (1) roughly as developed as the UK - in the case of countries like Canada or Japan, or (2) very small - in the case of countries like Jamaica. India is by far the poorest country on the list, and by far the largest. The net result of this deal will be more Indian workers in fields like IT and engineering, undercutting British workers. Given the relative markets in the UK and in India, we shouldn't expect this to automatically be a like-for-like swap in terms of talent. We've seen this happen in the US already, with Indian consultancies leasing their workers to American companies, who are then able to pay an Indian worker far less than they'd need to pay an American. The result has been a massive expansion in the number of lower-cost Indian workers, at the expense of American workers. We should not be allowing other countries to dictate the terms of our migration system, in exchange for some trade benefits at the margins. If India wants to trade, then we should trade. Migration shouldn't even come into the equation.
1:10

The Government's trade deal with India will mean that it's cheaper to hire an Indian worker than a British one. Most other countries are perfectly happy to strike trade deals without forcing us to undercut our own workforce. We should have expected India to do the same. Instead, under the terms of our Free Trade Agreement with India, Indian companies will be able to transfer their workers to this country more easily. Once they're here, those workers will be able to avoid National Insurance payments for up to three years. The same is true for employers. Instead, both employee and employer will pay into the Indian social security system instead. This National Insurance exemption will make it much cheaper to hire Indian workers, in fields like IT and engineering, than to hire domestic talent. Let's imagine a British IT firm, set to hire a computer programmer for £60,000 a year. To hire them, an employer needs to spend £60,000 a year on their salary, plus £8,250 on Employer National Insurance. That's a total of £68,250. An Indian competitor with an office in London, meanwhile, can save money by transferring Indian workers to the UK, even if they pay the same headline salary. They’d still spend £60,000 on the salary - but instead of paying National Insurance, they pay into the Indian Employee Provident Fund instead. Mandatory contributions to the fund are capped at 15,000 rupees a month, or about £120. That means that, across a year, an employer only pays £1,470 into the social security system - for a total of £61,470. So under this Government's deal, it would be at least 10 percent cheaper to hire an Indian worker over a British one for this job. This is absurd. Over three years, it would be more than £20,000 cheaper for an Indian firm to bring over an Indian worker to London than to hire locally. The reason for this absurd arrangement is that the India deal includes a Double Contribution Convention. DCCs make it easier for international companies to transfer their workforce. They're designed to stop highly-skilled workers from paying into two different social security systems. We already have Double Contribution Conventions with other countries. However, these other countries tend to be either: (1) roughly as developed as the UK - in the case of countries like Canada or Japan, or (2) very small - in the case of countries like Jamaica. India is by far the poorest country on the list, and by far the largest. The net result of this deal will be more Indian workers in fields like IT and engineering, undercutting British workers. Given the relative markets in the UK and in India, we shouldn't expect this to automatically be a like-for-like swap in terms of talent. We've seen this happen in the US already, with Indian consultancies leasing their workers to American companies, who are then able to pay an Indian worker far less than they'd need to pay an American. The result has been a massive expansion in the number of lower-cost Indian workers, at the expense of American workers. We should not be allowing other countries to dictate the terms of our migration system, in exchange for some trade benefits at the margins. If India wants to trade, then we should trade. Migration shouldn't even come into the equation.

Katie Lam

167,617 次观看 • 6 个月前

The man who built ChatGPT just issued a verdict on your career. Andrej Karpathy, co-founder of OpenAI, the architect of Tesla Autopilot just ranked every job in America by one brutal question, how soon does AI replace you?​ He pulled all 342 occupations from official US government labor data. And fed each one to an AI with a scoring rubric, published the results for the world to see.​ The verdict is that the average American worker scores 5.3 out of 10 for AI replacement risk.​ More than half the economy is already inside the blast radius. Here is what the numbers actually say. 42% of all US jobs score 7 or higher and that's 59.9 million people.​ The jobs at the top of the kill list are not low-skill factory work. They are the highest-paid, most-educated careers in the country.​ Software developers, 9/10, Financial analysts: 9/10. Lawyers: 8/10, Office administrators: 9/10.​ The jobs that require a laptop are the jobs in the crosshairs Jobs scoring 7 or above represent $3.7 trillion in annual U.S. wages. Roofers score a 1 and construction workers score a 1.​ The people who everyone called unskilled may be the most recession-proof workers alive. Karpathy's rule is one sentence, if the entire job happens on a screen, exposure is high.​ Anthropic, the company behind Claude published its own data the same week. Anthropic also found something nobody is talking about. Hiring for young workers aged 22–25 in high exposure jobs is already slowing down. The layoffs have not spiked yet but the hiring has stopped. The most chilling part is not the 10/10 score but rather that no job scored a zero.​ There is no safe harbor, only degrees of exposure.
1:02

The man who built ChatGPT just issued a verdict on your career. Andrej Karpathy, co-founder of OpenAI, the architect of Tesla Autopilot just ranked every job in America by one brutal question, how soon does AI replace you?​ He pulled all 342 occupations from official US government labor data. And fed each one to an AI with a scoring rubric, published the results for the world to see.​ The verdict is that the average American worker scores 5.3 out of 10 for AI replacement risk.​ More than half the economy is already inside the blast radius. Here is what the numbers actually say. 42% of all US jobs score 7 or higher and that's 59.9 million people.​ The jobs at the top of the kill list are not low-skill factory work. They are the highest-paid, most-educated careers in the country.​ Software developers, 9/10, Financial analysts: 9/10. Lawyers: 8/10, Office administrators: 9/10.​ The jobs that require a laptop are the jobs in the crosshairs Jobs scoring 7 or above represent $3.7 trillion in annual U.S. wages. Roofers score a 1 and construction workers score a 1.​ The people who everyone called unskilled may be the most recession-proof workers alive. Karpathy's rule is one sentence, if the entire job happens on a screen, exposure is high.​ Anthropic, the company behind Claude published its own data the same week. Anthropic also found something nobody is talking about. Hiring for young workers aged 22–25 in high exposure jobs is already slowing down. The layoffs have not spiked yet but the hiring has stopped. The most chilling part is not the 10/10 score but rather that no job scored a zero.​ There is no safe harbor, only degrees of exposure.

StockMarket.News

216,992 次观看 • 5 个月前

When the Nigerian economy fell into hard times in the early 1980s, the government issued a “Quit order” expelling undocumented immigrants. In the video below, Nigeria’s president, “Minister” Shehu Shagari fielded questions about the scale and the death of people during the mass exodus. Interestingly, there was not much improvement in Nigeria’s economy after the order was carried out. According to Dr Hashim Gibrill of Clark Atlanta University, “The economic impact was acute, notably in sectors like hospitality and construction, where many skilled workers were lost”. Many foreign manual labourers and skilled tradesmen vanished overnight, stalling building projects, while small businesses, hotels, and agricultural sectors lost a massive pool of cheap, reliable labour. At the same time, the policy failed to save the government economically as the economy continued to freefall. On 31 December, 1983, less than a year after the expulsion order, military Major General Muhammadu Buhari overthrew the government in a military coup, citing a completely ruined economy. Ultimately, historians agree that the 1983 expulsion was a severe humanitarian tragedy that caused massive regional disruption and provided absolutely zero economic relief to Nigeria. Now, to be fair, it makes total intuitive sense on the surface for people to believe that expelling migrants will improve their economic situation. That is precisely why political leaders throughout history have used this tactic because it relies on logic that feels like common sense, even though economic reality repeatedly proves it wrong. This is because from a purely intuitive standpoint, people tend to look at the economy as a zero-sum game, with jobs, housing, and government resources as a fixed pie. It sense that if there are 100 jobs and 20 immigrants occupy some of them, expelling those immigrants means 20 citizens get those jobs. Similarly, when unemployment and inequality are high, finding complex macroeconomic solutions takes years. But blaming a visible, distinct group of outsiders offers an instant, simple explanation for a complex mess, which makes it attractive to a frustrated public. But the thing is that in any economy, jobs are not a fixed pie, and when you suddenly remove millions of consumers from a country, as Nigeria did in 1983, the demand for bread, clothes, transport, and rent plummets. Businesses lose customers, revenues drop, and many end up retrenching more workers. Again, it’s common sense to assume a citizen will just step into an undocumented worker’s shoes. But in reality, citizens often refuse to work the same low-wage, backbreaking labour like seasonal agriculture. South African farmers routinely report struggling to recruit and retain local South African workers for these short-term, backbreaking harvesting seasons as farm work is highly intensive, temporary, and often located in remote areas. South African citizens, who have constitutional rights, families to support locally, and expectations of fair labor standards, rightfully refuse to work for these illegal, sub-poverty wages. So, this is less about citizens being “lazy” and more about the distortion of the labour market because undocumented workers lack legal protections, unscrupulous employers exploit them by paying well below the legal minimum wage and ignoring labour laws. Still, if those undocumented workers disappear overnight, many exploitative small businesses and farms face sudden operational collapse rather than a seamless transition to local labour. Needless to say, for South Africa, a sudden exit of regional labour, much like Nigeria experienced in 1983, would not solve South Africa’s unemployment catastrophe. Instead, it would instead cause immediate labour shortages in agriculture, spike food prices and shrink the overall size of the economic pie available to everyone.
1:32

When the Nigerian economy fell into hard times in the early 1980s, the government issued a “Quit order” expelling undocumented immigrants. In the video below, Nigeria’s president, “Minister” Shehu Shagari fielded questions about the scale and the death of people during the mass exodus. Interestingly, there was not much improvement in Nigeria’s economy after the order was carried out. According to Dr Hashim Gibrill of Clark Atlanta University, “The economic impact was acute, notably in sectors like hospitality and construction, where many skilled workers were lost”. Many foreign manual labourers and skilled tradesmen vanished overnight, stalling building projects, while small businesses, hotels, and agricultural sectors lost a massive pool of cheap, reliable labour. At the same time, the policy failed to save the government economically as the economy continued to freefall. On 31 December, 1983, less than a year after the expulsion order, military Major General Muhammadu Buhari overthrew the government in a military coup, citing a completely ruined economy. Ultimately, historians agree that the 1983 expulsion was a severe humanitarian tragedy that caused massive regional disruption and provided absolutely zero economic relief to Nigeria. Now, to be fair, it makes total intuitive sense on the surface for people to believe that expelling migrants will improve their economic situation. That is precisely why political leaders throughout history have used this tactic because it relies on logic that feels like common sense, even though economic reality repeatedly proves it wrong. This is because from a purely intuitive standpoint, people tend to look at the economy as a zero-sum game, with jobs, housing, and government resources as a fixed pie. It sense that if there are 100 jobs and 20 immigrants occupy some of them, expelling those immigrants means 20 citizens get those jobs. Similarly, when unemployment and inequality are high, finding complex macroeconomic solutions takes years. But blaming a visible, distinct group of outsiders offers an instant, simple explanation for a complex mess, which makes it attractive to a frustrated public. But the thing is that in any economy, jobs are not a fixed pie, and when you suddenly remove millions of consumers from a country, as Nigeria did in 1983, the demand for bread, clothes, transport, and rent plummets. Businesses lose customers, revenues drop, and many end up retrenching more workers. Again, it’s common sense to assume a citizen will just step into an undocumented worker’s shoes. But in reality, citizens often refuse to work the same low-wage, backbreaking labour like seasonal agriculture. South African farmers routinely report struggling to recruit and retain local South African workers for these short-term, backbreaking harvesting seasons as farm work is highly intensive, temporary, and often located in remote areas. South African citizens, who have constitutional rights, families to support locally, and expectations of fair labor standards, rightfully refuse to work for these illegal, sub-poverty wages. So, this is less about citizens being “lazy” and more about the distortion of the labour market because undocumented workers lack legal protections, unscrupulous employers exploit them by paying well below the legal minimum wage and ignoring labour laws. Still, if those undocumented workers disappear overnight, many exploitative small businesses and farms face sudden operational collapse rather than a seamless transition to local labour. Needless to say, for South Africa, a sudden exit of regional labour, much like Nigeria experienced in 1983, would not solve South Africa’s unemployment catastrophe. Instead, it would instead cause immediate labour shortages in agriculture, spike food prices and shrink the overall size of the economic pie available to everyone.

Sizwe SikaMusi

53,049 次观看 • 1 个月前

Dasting... Laura Ingraham Challenges President Trump on Air When He Says the U.S. Lacks Talent for Certain Jobs and Needs H-1B Skilled Workers Laura: If you want to raise wages for American workers, you can’t flood the country with H-1B visa workers. Trump: I agree, but you also have to bring in talent. Laura: We have plenty of talent here. Trump: No, you don’t. Laura: You don’t have talented people here? Trump: No, you’re being naive. People have to learn. You can’t take someone from the unemployment line and say, “I’m going to put you into a factory and we’re going to make missiles or batteries.” 🔻 My Thoughts: This exchange isn't a big deal to me—I agree with Laura in theory, but I side with Trump because I understand how H-1B visas work based on his EO. President Trump’s new $100,000 annual fee per H-1B visa application requires employers to pay up front for each filing—on top of existing costs—for visas valid up to three years (or six if extended). When it expires, they must refile and pay the $100,000 fee again. This bold policy, enacted via executive order and effective immediately, slams the door on exploitation while prioritizing American jobs. It forces companies to hire U.S. talent first, slashing the risk of undercutting domestic wages with cheap foreign labor. Highly skilled immigrants can still be brought in—but only to fill genuine gaps and train Americans on the job, accelerating our workforce's growth in critical fields like tech, defense, and manufacturing. Every major company must now ask: Is this worker worth $100,000 every three years to my bottom line? For most routine roles, the answer is a resounding no. This weeds out frivolous applications, reserving visas for true high-value talent in strategic areas, while supercharging investment in upskilling Americans. Plus, it could generate billions in revenue to fund U.S. worker training programs.
1:26

Dasting... Laura Ingraham Challenges President Trump on Air When He Says the U.S. Lacks Talent for Certain Jobs and Needs H-1B Skilled Workers Laura: If you want to raise wages for American workers, you can’t flood the country with H-1B visa workers. Trump: I agree, but you also have to bring in talent. Laura: We have plenty of talent here. Trump: No, you don’t. Laura: You don’t have talented people here? Trump: No, you’re being naive. People have to learn. You can’t take someone from the unemployment line and say, “I’m going to put you into a factory and we’re going to make missiles or batteries.” 🔻 My Thoughts: This exchange isn't a big deal to me—I agree with Laura in theory, but I side with Trump because I understand how H-1B visas work based on his EO. President Trump’s new $100,000 annual fee per H-1B visa application requires employers to pay up front for each filing—on top of existing costs—for visas valid up to three years (or six if extended). When it expires, they must refile and pay the $100,000 fee again. This bold policy, enacted via executive order and effective immediately, slams the door on exploitation while prioritizing American jobs. It forces companies to hire U.S. talent first, slashing the risk of undercutting domestic wages with cheap foreign labor. Highly skilled immigrants can still be brought in—but only to fill genuine gaps and train Americans on the job, accelerating our workforce's growth in critical fields like tech, defense, and manufacturing. Every major company must now ask: Is this worker worth $100,000 every three years to my bottom line? For most routine roles, the answer is a resounding no. This weeds out frivolous applications, reserving visas for true high-value talent in strategic areas, while supercharging investment in upskilling Americans. Plus, it could generate billions in revenue to fund U.S. worker training programs.

MJTruthUltra

70,481 次观看 • 9 个月前

🚨 Mamdani Transition Team Member Treats Delivery Work as the Moral Center of Society This is Ligia Guallpa of Los Deliveristas Unidos and the Worker Justice Project, and she’s on Mamdani’s transition team for Worker Justice. Her worldview treats delivery drivers not as one part of a complex city economy, but as the central moral engine of the city, with everything else reframed around their grievances. “What was won today was fought in the streets to transform this industry in jobs that are dignified and that their humanity is respected.” She talks about deliveristas as if they are the most important cog in New York. And yes, it can be a very dangerous job, amplified by the city’s density, traffic, and the pressures of app-based piecework. But can we have an honest conversation about risk, incentives, and tradeoffs, or will drivers’ lives just be used as a political bludgeon? Because “danger” here is not just traffic. Delivery workers are routinely targeted for robberies and assaults, including theft of e-bikes and phones. And the city’s soft-on-crime posture, light consequences, and revolving-door enforcement only makes that problem worse for the very workers activists claim to champion. In her telling, deliveristas survived COVID and are now facing “masked men” in an “anti-immigrant era,” with the looming threat of ICE raids. So what does governance look like here? Another sweeping City Council mandate, like a citywide rule banning parking within 20 feet of all intersections, sold as “deliverista safety,” with Mamdani ready to sign? If the work is truly that dangerous, the adult answer is a mix of enforcement, practical safety changes, and eventually reducing human exposure through delivery automation.
3:54

🚨 Mamdani Transition Team Member Treats Delivery Work as the Moral Center of Society This is Ligia Guallpa of Los Deliveristas Unidos and the Worker Justice Project, and she’s on Mamdani’s transition team for Worker Justice. Her worldview treats delivery drivers not as one part of a complex city economy, but as the central moral engine of the city, with everything else reframed around their grievances. “What was won today was fought in the streets to transform this industry in jobs that are dignified and that their humanity is respected.” She talks about deliveristas as if they are the most important cog in New York. And yes, it can be a very dangerous job, amplified by the city’s density, traffic, and the pressures of app-based piecework. But can we have an honest conversation about risk, incentives, and tradeoffs, or will drivers’ lives just be used as a political bludgeon? Because “danger” here is not just traffic. Delivery workers are routinely targeted for robberies and assaults, including theft of e-bikes and phones. And the city’s soft-on-crime posture, light consequences, and revolving-door enforcement only makes that problem worse for the very workers activists claim to champion. In her telling, deliveristas survived COVID and are now facing “masked men” in an “anti-immigrant era,” with the looming threat of ICE raids. So what does governance look like here? Another sweeping City Council mandate, like a citywide rule banning parking within 20 feet of all intersections, sold as “deliverista safety,” with Mamdani ready to sign? If the work is truly that dangerous, the adult answer is a mix of enforcement, practical safety changes, and eventually reducing human exposure through delivery automation.

Stu Smith

13,884 次观看 • 8 个月前

ICARUS INTERNATIONAL CONSULTING GROUP THE MANUFACTURED DELAY Our unprecedented analysis reveals what headlines miss: how logistics, capability architecture, and environmental constraints shape outcomes long before decisions are announced. In early 2026, the world watches the Persian Gulf and debates timing, politics, and personalities. Commentators ask when the strike against Iran will happen and why it has not yet begun. Some call it hesitation. Others blame temperament or political caution. That framing misses the point. The delay has nothing to do with POTUS Trump’s mood or indecision. It is about whether the United States is prepared not just to strike Iran, but to sustain pressure long enough to break a regime, not merely signal deterrence. What the public sees looks formidable: advanced aircraft forward deployed, stealth fighters shaping the air picture, heavy strike assets positioned across the region. On paper, it resembles dominance. In reality, it is a posture built for the opening move, not the endgame. Wars against states are not decided by the first strike. They are decided by what still functions after the first retaliation. Land-based airpower, regardless of sophistication, is chained to fixed infrastructure. Runways do not move. Against a capable adversary, they are mapped, targeted, and neutralized early. Once runways are cratered, sortie generation collapses, and with it the ability to sustain tempo. Stealth fighter jets platforms such as the F-35 solve a different problem. They penetrate, observe, and dismantle critical nodes with precision. But they are not designed to deliver sustained volume or to support prolonged deep operations on their own. Precision opens access; it does not maintain pressure. This is why the delay exists. A premature strike would shock, but it would also risk stalling into attrition, cost imbalance, or forced pause once infrastructure is degraded and magazines thin. Regime change does not occur in a single night. It requires endurance. That endurance arrives with the USS George H. W. Bush (CVN-77) The Bush is not deployed for symbolism or redundancy. It is the logistical hinge of the entire campaign. As a mobile airfield, it brings its own runway, its own fuel, and its own regeneration cycle into the battlespace. It cannot be pre-targeted the way land bases can, and it does not pause when infrastructure ashore burns. More importantly, it enables depth. From its deck, fighters and support aircraft can launch repeatedly, refuel one another, and sustain long-range operations that push bombers and strike aircraft deeper into contested space. It keeps penetration corridors open after stealth has done its initial work. It allows heavy strike platforms to return, rearm, and go back again—day after day. This is the difference between a warning shot and a campaign. With a carrier-based sustainment hub in place, the mission expands from signaling to dismantlement. Targets are not struck once; they are revisited. Air defenses are not blinded briefly; they are exhausted. Internal security, logistics, and command structures are degraded faster than they can adapt. Our analysis not only highlights the decisive architecture of logistics and force design but also shows how environmental factors shape strategic timing on the ground. In February 2026, the Moon will transition from a full phase on February 1 to a new Moon around February 17, when lunar luminosity is effectively zero and nights are darkest, creating conditions that can favor operations requiring concealment and minimized visual detection. This environmental window — where the Moon’s light no longer illuminates the battlefield — aligns with the maturation of a logistics and sustainment network that enables sustained operations deep into contested airspace. Rather than acting under a bright, reflective full Moon, planners may exploit the dark of the waning and new Moon period as a temporal enabler for deep penetration sorties, aerial refueling sequences, and carrier-to-shoreside combat logistics, precisely because reduced lunar illumination lowers visual and infrared signatures that adversaries could exploit. The shift from bright lunar conditions to new Moon darkness around mid-February is thus not accidental; it synchronizes with the arrival of sustainment and strike capacity that turns a deterrent posture into one capable of regime-scale pressure. That is the hallmark of regime-change–scale operations. This is why the delay is manufactured. The system is being completed, not debated. The question is not whether force can be used, but whether it can be kept on long enough to matter. Once that answer is yes, the clock stops stretching. Until then, what looks like restraint is something else entirely. It is discipline. Icarus International Consulting Group
3:57

ICARUS INTERNATIONAL CONSULTING GROUP THE MANUFACTURED DELAY Our unprecedented analysis reveals what headlines miss: how logistics, capability architecture, and environmental constraints shape outcomes long before decisions are announced. In early 2026, the world watches the Persian Gulf and debates timing, politics, and personalities. Commentators ask when the strike against Iran will happen and why it has not yet begun. Some call it hesitation. Others blame temperament or political caution. That framing misses the point. The delay has nothing to do with POTUS Trump’s mood or indecision. It is about whether the United States is prepared not just to strike Iran, but to sustain pressure long enough to break a regime, not merely signal deterrence. What the public sees looks formidable: advanced aircraft forward deployed, stealth fighters shaping the air picture, heavy strike assets positioned across the region. On paper, it resembles dominance. In reality, it is a posture built for the opening move, not the endgame. Wars against states are not decided by the first strike. They are decided by what still functions after the first retaliation. Land-based airpower, regardless of sophistication, is chained to fixed infrastructure. Runways do not move. Against a capable adversary, they are mapped, targeted, and neutralized early. Once runways are cratered, sortie generation collapses, and with it the ability to sustain tempo. Stealth fighter jets platforms such as the F-35 solve a different problem. They penetrate, observe, and dismantle critical nodes with precision. But they are not designed to deliver sustained volume or to support prolonged deep operations on their own. Precision opens access; it does not maintain pressure. This is why the delay exists. A premature strike would shock, but it would also risk stalling into attrition, cost imbalance, or forced pause once infrastructure is degraded and magazines thin. Regime change does not occur in a single night. It requires endurance. That endurance arrives with the USS George H. W. Bush (CVN-77) The Bush is not deployed for symbolism or redundancy. It is the logistical hinge of the entire campaign. As a mobile airfield, it brings its own runway, its own fuel, and its own regeneration cycle into the battlespace. It cannot be pre-targeted the way land bases can, and it does not pause when infrastructure ashore burns. More importantly, it enables depth. From its deck, fighters and support aircraft can launch repeatedly, refuel one another, and sustain long-range operations that push bombers and strike aircraft deeper into contested space. It keeps penetration corridors open after stealth has done its initial work. It allows heavy strike platforms to return, rearm, and go back again—day after day. This is the difference between a warning shot and a campaign. With a carrier-based sustainment hub in place, the mission expands from signaling to dismantlement. Targets are not struck once; they are revisited. Air defenses are not blinded briefly; they are exhausted. Internal security, logistics, and command structures are degraded faster than they can adapt. Our analysis not only highlights the decisive architecture of logistics and force design but also shows how environmental factors shape strategic timing on the ground. In February 2026, the Moon will transition from a full phase on February 1 to a new Moon around February 17, when lunar luminosity is effectively zero and nights are darkest, creating conditions that can favor operations requiring concealment and minimized visual detection. This environmental window — where the Moon’s light no longer illuminates the battlefield — aligns with the maturation of a logistics and sustainment network that enables sustained operations deep into contested airspace. Rather than acting under a bright, reflective full Moon, planners may exploit the dark of the waning and new Moon period as a temporal enabler for deep penetration sorties, aerial refueling sequences, and carrier-to-shoreside combat logistics, precisely because reduced lunar illumination lowers visual and infrared signatures that adversaries could exploit. The shift from bright lunar conditions to new Moon darkness around mid-February is thus not accidental; it synchronizes with the arrival of sustainment and strike capacity that turns a deterrent posture into one capable of regime-scale pressure. That is the hallmark of regime-change–scale operations. This is why the delay is manufactured. The system is being completed, not debated. The question is not whether force can be used, but whether it can be kept on long enough to matter. Once that answer is yes, the clock stops stretching. Until then, what looks like restraint is something else entirely. It is discipline. Icarus International Consulting Group

Icarus International Consulting Group LLC

144,298 次观看 • 6 个月前

Strike: Wike Approves Over N12bn January Salaries of FCTA Workers, Dismisses Blackmail The Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, has revealed that he has just signed January salaries of the FCT Administration workers amounting to over N12bn immediately after the Court ruling, suspending the strike embarked on by the workers. The Minister stated this while addressing journalists in his office after the court ruling. Wike insisted that the government has largely met workers’ legitimate demands despite the ongoing strike. He added that the strike had been hijacked by political interests, forcing the administration to seek legal intervention to prevent a breakdown of order. “I just signed January salaries amounting to over ₦12 billion,” the minister said. “Yet the FCT is entitled to only one per cent of federal revenue. If the Federal Government earns ₦1 trillion, the FCT gets about ₦10 billion. That allocation alone cannot even cover salaries, not to talk of running the administration.” He explained that the government initially chose dialogue and engagement when the strike began, noting that it did not rush to court. “When the strike started, we believed in dialogue. We felt the issues could be resolved through discussion. But when it became clear that politicians have hijacked the strike, we had no choice but to go to court and allow the law to decide,” Wike stated. The minister acknowledged workers’ rights in a democracy but insisted that strike action should always be a last resort. “This is a democracy. Everyone has the right to protest. But if workers made 14 demands and government addressed like 10, there should be room for understanding and patience,” he said. Drawing from his experience as a former governor and local government chairman, Wike said he understood labour struggles but warned against unrealistic demands. “When demands are legitimate, government should acknowledge them. But it is not always possible to implement everything at once. Government does not deny legitimate entitlements, especially wages,” he added. Wike also dismissed claims that he was chased out of office during the strike, describing such reports as false and politically motivated. “I was in my office, went to the airport to see Mr President, travelled to Turkey, and returned. These stories are deliberate misinformation,” he said. On revenue challenges, the minister disclosed that the administration has significantly improved Internally Generated Revenue (IGR), increasing it from about ₦9 billion when he assumed office to ₦30 billion. “When we take steps to improve IGR, people complain. But that progress is what sustains salaries, reforms, and development,” he said. He highlighted key reforms under the current administration, including the creation of the FCT Civil Service Commission, appointment of permanent secretaries, and establishment of the Office of the Head of Service. “Before now, workers retired at director level, but they can now rise to Permanent Secretary. This was made possible by the Government of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. "You cannot expect government to spend all available revenue on wages alone while neglecting massive infrastructure development,” Wike noted. Following the court order suspending the strike, the minister issued a stern warning to workers. “Disobeying the law has consequences. From tomorrow, any worker who refuses to resume work will face disciplinary action. Anyone who attempts to block government facilities will face the full weight of the law,” he said. Wike rejected claims that dialogue had broken down, insisting that engagement with unions has always been ongoing with his approval. “No amount of blackmail or political games will intimidate this administration. We will obey the court, and everyone else must do the same,” he declared.
1:44

Strike: Wike Approves Over N12bn January Salaries of FCTA Workers, Dismisses Blackmail The Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, has revealed that he has just signed January salaries of the FCT Administration workers amounting to over N12bn immediately after the Court ruling, suspending the strike embarked on by the workers. The Minister stated this while addressing journalists in his office after the court ruling. Wike insisted that the government has largely met workers’ legitimate demands despite the ongoing strike. He added that the strike had been hijacked by political interests, forcing the administration to seek legal intervention to prevent a breakdown of order. “I just signed January salaries amounting to over ₦12 billion,” the minister said. “Yet the FCT is entitled to only one per cent of federal revenue. If the Federal Government earns ₦1 trillion, the FCT gets about ₦10 billion. That allocation alone cannot even cover salaries, not to talk of running the administration.” He explained that the government initially chose dialogue and engagement when the strike began, noting that it did not rush to court. “When the strike started, we believed in dialogue. We felt the issues could be resolved through discussion. But when it became clear that politicians have hijacked the strike, we had no choice but to go to court and allow the law to decide,” Wike stated. The minister acknowledged workers’ rights in a democracy but insisted that strike action should always be a last resort. “This is a democracy. Everyone has the right to protest. But if workers made 14 demands and government addressed like 10, there should be room for understanding and patience,” he said. Drawing from his experience as a former governor and local government chairman, Wike said he understood labour struggles but warned against unrealistic demands. “When demands are legitimate, government should acknowledge them. But it is not always possible to implement everything at once. Government does not deny legitimate entitlements, especially wages,” he added. Wike also dismissed claims that he was chased out of office during the strike, describing such reports as false and politically motivated. “I was in my office, went to the airport to see Mr President, travelled to Turkey, and returned. These stories are deliberate misinformation,” he said. On revenue challenges, the minister disclosed that the administration has significantly improved Internally Generated Revenue (IGR), increasing it from about ₦9 billion when he assumed office to ₦30 billion. “When we take steps to improve IGR, people complain. But that progress is what sustains salaries, reforms, and development,” he said. He highlighted key reforms under the current administration, including the creation of the FCT Civil Service Commission, appointment of permanent secretaries, and establishment of the Office of the Head of Service. “Before now, workers retired at director level, but they can now rise to Permanent Secretary. This was made possible by the Government of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. "You cannot expect government to spend all available revenue on wages alone while neglecting massive infrastructure development,” Wike noted. Following the court order suspending the strike, the minister issued a stern warning to workers. “Disobeying the law has consequences. From tomorrow, any worker who refuses to resume work will face disciplinary action. Anyone who attempts to block government facilities will face the full weight of the law,” he said. Wike rejected claims that dialogue had broken down, insisting that engagement with unions has always been ongoing with his approval. “No amount of blackmail or political games will intimidate this administration. We will obey the court, and everyone else must do the same,” he declared.

Lere Olayinka - Aresa 1

11,368 次观看 • 7 个月前

WOW 🚨 The 2024 Election Is Going To Be SO RIGGED American Business Owner has illegal migrant come to him for a job, he says the “Illegal Immigrant has Social Security Card and Drivers License with Work ID in 4 months” of entering America “So yesterday, I ran into somebody that I haven't seen in a while. I haven't seen this guy for months. He's been here for about five months in the United States, six months, something like that. And he says, hey, I'm looking for work. And I said, well, I can't hire you, man. I got to hire legitimate people or whatever. And he was like, No, no, no, I'm legitimate now. And he's broken English kind of bits and pieces together and he pulls his ID and stuff out of his pocket. He says, I've got social security card now and I got workers ID and permit for working everything all legit. Stamp, city stamping, specialized social security envelope. And I said, let's go inside real quick. I need a translator. I have a couple of my guys, they speak Spanish and I'm talking to them and I says, so, where are we at with time frame wise? How long did it take you to get your social security card and your workers permit? He said maybe three and a half, four months. Finished in my hand. This dude got his freaking work permit and social security card, came here illegally, got documented, got on the buses from Texas to Chicago, got in process here in Chicago, found an apartment building within the first week in Efficiency apartment, moved into the apartment building and has been working cash jobs under the table for the last four months until recently got his workers permit. Now he's working for a roofing company but they're laid off right now. They're laid off right now and he's looking for work. And I said, I don't necessarily need anybody right now, buddy. I'm sorry, I'll have to pass. This shocks me, the fact that this guy can't even speak English. Almost not a lick of English. Very broken, can barely understand, gotta have a translator around. Luckily I speak enough Spanish to know what he's saying and I'm like this is absolutely crazy. Four months already has a driver's license, insurance, he bought like a 2012-2011 Ford Focus. — Now within four months this guy's got a social security card, he's got his workers identification card for working, he's got a driver's license, he's got insurance, he just bought a car, all in four months. And it has an efficiency apartment that he pays $500 a month for with government assistance. ‌ That's f**ked up, man. We have people literally trying to do everything they've been waiting for years that still don't have what this guy has in four months. That's how fucked up our government is. That's how much they care about the illegal migrants more than they care about their own people. — It's messed up man. It's really really really messed up that they would do this for people that are not even from this country. They didn't help build this country. They didn't help contribute to this country and they just walk right in like they do and just get handed IDs, Social Security card, just get them on the payroll and stuff. Let's just let's just let's just do it for them. Let's get them let's get them set but not take care of our own people that are on the streets. It's messed up.”
5:02

WOW 🚨 The 2024 Election Is Going To Be SO RIGGED American Business Owner has illegal migrant come to him for a job, he says the “Illegal Immigrant has Social Security Card and Drivers License with Work ID in 4 months” of entering America “So yesterday, I ran into somebody that I haven't seen in a while. I haven't seen this guy for months. He's been here for about five months in the United States, six months, something like that. And he says, hey, I'm looking for work. And I said, well, I can't hire you, man. I got to hire legitimate people or whatever. And he was like, No, no, no, I'm legitimate now. And he's broken English kind of bits and pieces together and he pulls his ID and stuff out of his pocket. He says, I've got social security card now and I got workers ID and permit for working everything all legit. Stamp, city stamping, specialized social security envelope. And I said, let's go inside real quick. I need a translator. I have a couple of my guys, they speak Spanish and I'm talking to them and I says, so, where are we at with time frame wise? How long did it take you to get your social security card and your workers permit? He said maybe three and a half, four months. Finished in my hand. This dude got his freaking work permit and social security card, came here illegally, got documented, got on the buses from Texas to Chicago, got in process here in Chicago, found an apartment building within the first week in Efficiency apartment, moved into the apartment building and has been working cash jobs under the table for the last four months until recently got his workers permit. Now he's working for a roofing company but they're laid off right now. They're laid off right now and he's looking for work. And I said, I don't necessarily need anybody right now, buddy. I'm sorry, I'll have to pass. This shocks me, the fact that this guy can't even speak English. Almost not a lick of English. Very broken, can barely understand, gotta have a translator around. Luckily I speak enough Spanish to know what he's saying and I'm like this is absolutely crazy. Four months already has a driver's license, insurance, he bought like a 2012-2011 Ford Focus. — Now within four months this guy's got a social security card, he's got his workers identification card for working, he's got a driver's license, he's got insurance, he just bought a car, all in four months. And it has an efficiency apartment that he pays $500 a month for with government assistance. ‌ That's f**ked up, man. We have people literally trying to do everything they've been waiting for years that still don't have what this guy has in four months. That's how fucked up our government is. That's how much they care about the illegal migrants more than they care about their own people. — It's messed up man. It's really really really messed up that they would do this for people that are not even from this country. They didn't help build this country. They didn't help contribute to this country and they just walk right in like they do and just get handed IDs, Social Security card, just get them on the payroll and stuff. Let's just let's just let's just do it for them. Let's get them let's get them set but not take care of our own people that are on the streets. It's messed up.”

Wall Street Apes

3,416,650 次观看 • 2 年前

🚨 The era of JCPOA-style compromises is dead as Tehran demands submissions by the US that Washington will not willingly make: a military withdrawal from the Middle East. Former MI6 officer Alastair Crooke warns that Iran is seeking a “complete paradigmatic change in the Gulf region” that effectively ends the American presence Tehran’s terms are non-negotiable: the U.S. must “exit all of your bases in the area” and pay reparations for past damages. This is no longer about nuclear facilities; it is a move to ensure Iran is the “only state that can provide security and safe passage through the Hormuz.” As the Middle East conflict reaches a boiling point, Washington faces a choice between total withdrawal or escalating an unwinnable Iran war. The option the U.S. should take is clear: wind down the pointless war now, before even deeper, more permanent damage to our interests is done. It is already too late to avoid all harm, but it is still possible to avoid the worst. Continue on with the war, however, and we may pay a major and painful price. 📽️ WATCH this urgent breakdown on the future of global energy security: 👉 #IranWar #MiddleEastConflict #Geopolitics #StraitOfHormuz #USStrategy #ForeignPolicy #NationalSecurity #AlastairCrooke #DanielDavisDeepDive #GlobalSecurity #EnergySecurity #BreakingNews
2:28

🚨 The era of JCPOA-style compromises is dead as Tehran demands submissions by the US that Washington will not willingly make: a military withdrawal from the Middle East. Former MI6 officer Alastair Crooke warns that Iran is seeking a “complete paradigmatic change in the Gulf region” that effectively ends the American presence Tehran’s terms are non-negotiable: the U.S. must “exit all of your bases in the area” and pay reparations for past damages. This is no longer about nuclear facilities; it is a move to ensure Iran is the “only state that can provide security and safe passage through the Hormuz.” As the Middle East conflict reaches a boiling point, Washington faces a choice between total withdrawal or escalating an unwinnable Iran war. The option the U.S. should take is clear: wind down the pointless war now, before even deeper, more permanent damage to our interests is done. It is already too late to avoid all harm, but it is still possible to avoid the worst. Continue on with the war, however, and we may pay a major and painful price. 📽️ WATCH this urgent breakdown on the future of global energy security: 👉 #IranWar #MiddleEastConflict #Geopolitics #StraitOfHormuz #USStrategy #ForeignPolicy #NationalSecurity #AlastairCrooke #DanielDavisDeepDive #GlobalSecurity #EnergySecurity #BreakingNews

Daniel Davis Deep Dive

21,274 次观看 • 5 个月前