Saturday, July 20, 2024
Home Blog Page 49

Here’s what to ask when saving for the unexpected

Sponsored content from JPMorgan Chase & Co.

 

Finances are different for everyone, and so are the life events we all go through. An emergency fund is your financial line of defense against life’s lemons. Although there are many financial rules of thumb, there is no “normal” way to handle your emergency fund.

The bottom line: saving money is the first line of defense to financial wellness, especially when the unexpected happens. While nobody can predict the future, everyone can prepare for it.

What is the reason for my emergency fund?

Your emergency fund is a safety net that can help you avoid getting into a difficult financial situation due to a loss of income or unexpected, one-time expenses. Having one in place can reduce stress, anxiety, and other emotions that could make handling the non-financial aspects of an emergency much more difficult.

It may seem a little obvious that an emergency fund is for emergencies. However, one of the challenging aspects of an emergency fund is knowing what expenses qualify as an emergency. This fund’s sole purpose is to prepare you for costs that you cannot or would not typically plan out. For example, oil changes and new tires are predictable vehicle expenses you should plan for in your regular savings. However, you wouldn’t typically plan for costs that you could incur on the off chance that you need to make emergency home repairs or pay for emergency medical expenses. You would cover these from your emergency fund.

How much do I need?

How much would a new furnace cost? If you could not work, how much would you need to cover essential expenses until you could? Asking yourself these kinds of questions will help you set a goal amount for your emergency fund.

The general rule of thumb is three to six months of essential expenses. However, you can always start with a goal you find achievable. Say, $1,000. Once you reach that goal, aim for three months of rent, then three months of essential expenses, and so on.

Tracking your spending can help you estimate monthly expenses. Completing this exercise can also help you figure out how much you can afford to save toward your emergency fund each month. 

How do I save that much?

 – Start small: If you haven’t started, consider putting $25 from every paycheck into a savings account. Even a few dollars can make a big impact in the long run. Check your budget or spending plan to see how much you can save after you’ve paid essential expenses and before budgeting for discretionary spending.

– Keep it separate: Open a separate savings account to help you resist the temptation to dip into it. Remember, this account is for emergencies, so keep it away from your daily spending accounts and separate it from vacation and holiday savings. This method will help you stay organized, visualize your progress, and provide peace of mind.

– Automate your savings: One way to automate is via direct deposit. You may be able to instruct your employer to deposit a portion of your paycheck directly into your emergency savings account every pay period. Alternatively, you can set up an automatic transfer from your primary checking account to your emergency savings account on payday. Both methods save you from adding a manual transfer to your to-do list that may be overlooked if things get busy!

Will I ever need to change the amount?

As your life changes, the amount you need in your emergency fund will change as well. It’s a good idea to revisit your emergency fund plan every six months or any time you experience a life event that impacts your income. Marriage, starting or adding to your family, buying a home, and divorce are just a few examples of when you may need to increase your emergency fund. A good savings plan can roll with the punches right alongside you!

How do I prioritize emergency savings against debt and other goals?

Deciding whether you should pay down debt, save for other goals, or grow your emergency fund is all about the big picture. Everyone has different financials, so that picture will vary person-to-person. What will  impact you the most financially? Paying down debt and saving money long term or having a plan B that allows you to keep making minimum payments if you lose income? There is no right or wrong answer.

Your emergency fund is there to help you expense the unexpected. So, make a plan and be ready for whatever comes your way!

 

 

Chase takes nationwide action to expand credit access for small businesses through Special Purpose Credit Program in historically underserved areas  

As part of JPMorgan Chase’s $30 billion commitment, Chase has developed a Special Purpose Credit Program to expand credit access to businesses in majority Black, Hispanic and Latino communities

 

Produced by JPMorgan Chase

 

NEW YORK – Nov. 18, 2022 – Chase has announced the national launch of a Special Purpose Credit Program (SPCP) to improve access to credit for small business owners in historically underserved areas. The program is the first of its kind to be offered for small business owners nationally and one of many initiatives Chase has introduced to expand small business relationships, drive inclusive economic growth and increase access to credit for minority small business owners in a sustainable way.

“Access to capital has historically been disproportionally challenging for small business owners who live and work in communities of color,” said Ben Walter, CEO, Chase Business Banking. “We want to do our part to create more parity by saying yes to more business owners in these areas so they can grow and thrive, and their communities can benefit in turn.”

The program is geography-based, allowing the bank to target capital to the areas that need it most. The goal of the program is to extend credit to small business owners who might not otherwise be approved or receive it on less favorable terms. Customers do not need to do anything special to qualify. If the business is located in an eligible area, then the application will be evaluated under the program.

Chase began piloting the program in Dallas, Detroit, Houston, and Miami earlier this year and expanded it to 21 cities in July. It is now available for businesses in majority Black, Hispanic and Latino neighborhoods across the U.S.

Small Businesses are the Engine of the American Economy

“Small businesses are critical drivers of economic growth and job creation, and credit is key to helping them survive and thrive,” Walter said. “They are also important anchors for their neighborhoods, and when they are better able to invest and grow they create more vibrant and resilient communities.”

As part of the firm’s $30 billion commitment, its Business Banking arm has been increasingly focused on supporting the growth of Black, Hispanic and Latino entrepreneurs.

“Minority entrepreneurs are rapidly becoming the customer of the future,” said Mikal Quarles, head of Chase Business Banking Racial Equity Strategies. “We want to help more minority-owned businesses create and sustain wealth long-term. We are accomplishing this by building the infrastructure, strengthening relationships, and bringing owners into the mainstream financial system. Growing and thriving small business customers are an important driver of our long-term business goals.”

Other Initiatives Under way to Support Minority Business Owners

Special Purpose Credit Programs are just one way Chase is driving sustainable, inclusive economic growth with a focus on greater access to credit.  Chase recently:

– Improved the application process for smaller-dollar loans (generally up to $500,000) to make the process easier, faster and less intimidating.

– Launched a digital loan application so customers can apply for a business line of credit online – no need to call or visit a branch. It’s being rolled out in phases and is expected to be widely available in 2023.

– Expanded its free one-on-one coaching program to more than 40 trained senior business consultants in 21 U.S. cities to provide mentoring and advice to minority business owners on everything from boosting creditworthiness to managing cash flow to effective marketing.

– Since the program’s inception in 2020, Chase has mentored more than 2,600 minority business owners, helping them improve their operations, plan for growth, and network with others in the local business community.

– Launched a new resource center at Chase.com/businessconsultant that provides free educational content, resources, and advice to help early-stage and established entrepreneurs achieve their goals.

“Creating a more equitable economy is a business and social imperative,” said Marc Morial, President and CEO of the National Urban League. “I applaud Chase for helping minority business owners pursue their dreams.”

Research Supports the Need for Special Efforts to Expand Access to Credit

When looking at liquid wealth among U.S. small business owners, the JPMorgan Chase Institute found that:

– Black and Hispanic small business owners have a lower level of starting wealth, which may mean these founders are less able to invest in their businesses.

– Existing wealth inequities could influence the ability of Black or Hispanic founders to invest in their businesses and generate meaningful wealth.

– Programs targeting low-income or majority-minority neighborhoods could be particularly helpful for Black and Hispanic business owners, who typically start firms with less cash, which may limit their opportunities for wealth creation.

 

Protests against electoral reform held in 50 cities on Sunday in Mexico  

It’s unlikely Morena will muster the super-majority needed to pass the reform

 

by Mexico News Daily

 

Mexicans took to the streets in some 50 cities Sunday to protest against the federal government’s proposed electoral reform, legislation that would replace the National Electoral Institute (INE) and state-based electoral authorities with one centralized body.

Approximately 500,000 people including leaders of opposition parties participated in demonstrations in 15 federal entities, according to an El Economista newspaper report that cited statistics provided by protest organizers and media outlets.

However, the number of people who protested the proposed reform in Mexico City — where the nation’s largest march was held — is hotly contested.

Martí Batres, a high-ranking official in the Mexico City government, tweeted from the capital’s security camera monitoring center that between 10,000 and 12,000 people took to the streets, while former president Felipe Calderón cited a vastly different “conservative” estimate of 500,000.

Citing figures given by civil society organizations that organized the march, El Economista reported that between 150,000 and 200,000 people marched from the Angel of Independence on Reforma Avenue to the Monument to the Revolution, located just outside Mexico City’s historic center.

Among the other cities where protests were held were Monterrey, Guadalajara, Morelia, Querétaro, Culiacán and Cancún.

Via signs they carried and slogans they chanted, protesters declared that the INE — known as the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) prior to 2014 — mustn’t be “touched.”

They also asserted that the proposed reform — currently under consideration by the Chamber of Deputies — won’t pass Congress.

That outcome appears likely as no opposition party supports the proposal and the ruling Morena party and its allies don’t have the two-thirds majority required to pass constitutional bills.

The reform bill proposes replacing the INE with a centralized authority to be called the National Elections and Consultations Institute. The new authority’s electoral councilors, as well as electoral tribunal judges, would be directly elected by citizens if the bill passes Congress.

Exactly half of the respondents to a recent Reforma newspaper poll said that President López Obrador and his Morena party want to dismantle the INE in order to “appropriate the new institute to control elections.”

The IFE oversaw Mexico’s transition to full democracy after the once-omnipotent Institutional Revolutionary Party dominated politics in the 20th century, a period in which the party’s success at elections was virtually guaranteed due to its own control of the electoral system.

The reform bill proposes a range of other measures, including cutting the funding of political parties and electoral authorities, and reducing the number of lawmakers in both houses of Congress.

At a rally at the conclusion of Sunday’s march in Mexico City, former IFE president José Woldenberg declared that protesters were demonstrating their “profound commitment” to democracy and defending “an electoral system that protects all of us and allows the co-existence of diversity, and the replacement of governments via pacific and participative means.”

“Mexico doesn’t deserve a constitutional electoral reform driven by a single will,” he charged, referring to López Obrador.

“… Mexico … mustn’t transfer the electoral register to another institution because the INE has excelled in the formulation of a reliable list,” Woldenberg said.

The former electoral official also said that upcoming elections “must have the same guarantees” as the most recent ones: a trustworthy register, a level playing field for candidates, impartiality of the officials organizing them, meticulous counting of votes and the announcement of preliminary results on the night voters went to the polls.

He questioned whether a centralized electoral institute would have the capacity to organize elections to elect officials for the different levels of governments, saying that state-based electoral authorities registered over 275,000 candidates in 2021 alone.

“With such numbers I ask you: Is it desirable and possible to concentrate, centralize and administer that political universe in a single institution?” Woldenberg asked, prompting a resounding “no” from his fellow protesters.

In a video message posted to social media after Sunday’s protests, INE president Lorenzo Córdova noted that hundreds of thousands of people came out to defend “our democracy and our electoral system in the face of the risk of an anti-democratic regression.”

“… The democracy and electoral system we have today are a collective work and asset of all citizens,” he said. “… Mexican democracy wasn’t built in a day nor is it the work of just one man, one party or one political force. It’s the product of multiple civil struggles against a hegemonic party regime, struggles against electoral fraud that characterized the anti-democratic past.”

The INE chief added that that “we can’t allow” the electoral authority to lose its constitutional autonomy “if we don’t want to return to the authoritarian past that we fortunately left behind.”

Córdova also said that, “at INE we watch on with enthusiasm and satisfaction … [as] citizens value and defend … [Mexico’s] democracy.”

More than half a million people have also signed a Change.org petition that denounces the proposed disbandment of the INE.

López Obrador, the key proponent of the electoral reform bill, declared Monday that those who participated in Sunday’s protests are opposed to the transformation his government is carrying out in Mexico. They protested “in favor of the privileges they had before the government I represent [took office], in favor of corruption, in favor of racism, classism and discrimination,” he said.

The president asserted that “not a lot” of people participated in the Mexico City march, claiming that the protesters didn’t go to the zócalo as they “wouldn’t have filled even half” of the capital’s central square.

He described the protest as a “political [and] public striptease of conservatism in Mexico,” adding that “this is very good because if this doesn’t surface it remains hidden and does a lot of damage [to efforts] to have a better, fairer, more equal, more fraternal society.”

Former president Vicente Fox, who joined the Mexico City protest, highlighted on his Twitter account that López Obrador pledged in 2020 that he would quit if 100,000 people protested against him. AMLO said at the time another prerequisite to him leaving office early was opinion polls showing that he has lost support. However, polls have consistently shown that he retains the support of a majority of citizens.

With reports from El Economista, Reforma, El Financiero, Sin Embargo and Proceso.

Chaos in Brazil: Bolsonaro supporters block roads in protest of declared election results

by the El Reportero‘s wire services

Shared via LSite

 

The Brazilian Federal Highway Police said that truckers supporting Bolsonaro were blocking highways at 271 points.

After the declared electoral defeat of conservative-populist incumbent President Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil, which some commentators are calling fraudulent, a nationwide movement in support of Bolsonaro has erupted, with road blockades popping up all over the country and police joining the movement.

Bolsonaro has not conceded defeat to the socialist former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who spent 18 months in prison for corruption-related offenses. Silva’s tarnished criminal past and Bolsonaro’s party’s massive gains at all levels besides the presidency have cast doubt on the run-off election results according to some.

Journalist Matthew Tyrman told Steve Bannon on Monday that Bolsonaro’s party had significantly increased its presence in the Brazilian Congress, gaining 22 seats in the House of Deputies. “That’s just his party,” Tyrman said. “In the right-wing government coalition group,” which supports Bolsonaro, there were also significant gains, to the point that Tyrman said it “will dominate in both the lower house and the upper house.”

Support for Bolsonaro is continuing to grow in the days since the election, with roads between major cities being blocked in protest of what many believe to be an illegitimate result.

In São Paulo, national police have seemingly joined the protestors and have helped them gain deeper access to the São Paulo International Airport in order to continue with their demonstrations.

 

UN to discuss resolution against US blockade of Cuba

 

by the El Reportero‘s wire services

 

The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) will begin on Nov. 2 the first of two days of debates on the draft resolution to end the economic, commercial and financial blockade of the United States against Cuba.

As part of the 77th session of the UNGA, during Wednesday and Thursday the representatives of the different countries will pronounce on the subject, in what will be the thirtieth time that the matter reaches the plenary.

All the previous votes were favorable to the elimination of the economic siege imposed by Washington and the unilateral coercive measures applied to the Caribbean nation, for which the support of the international community is again expected.

According to the island’s report presented to the agency, at current prices the damages accumulated during six decades of this policy amount to 150 thousand 410.8 million dollars, with a great weight in sectors such as health and education, beyond economy and quality of life.

The Cuban authorities classify the blockade as an act of war in times of peace, and as the greatest obstacle to the development of the country.

The calculations suggest that approximately six thousand 300 million dollars lost the island due to the American siege, only in the 14 months of the government of the American Joe Biden.

There is no mention, however, of the popular protests that have been clamoring for freedom against a state where there is only the voice of a single political party and the state, where for opposing one faces jail and where there is no freedom of the press.

 

Want to vote on raising California’s minimum wage? judge said not until 2024

by Jeanne Kuang

CalMatters.

 

Californians still won’t get a chance to vote on a minimum wage hike this November, after a judge ruled late today that the campaign was at fault for missing a key deadline to get the measure on the ballot.

Proponents, including investor and anti-poverty advocate Joe Sanberg, went to court to try to force Secretary of State Shirley Weber’s office to place the initiative onto this November’s ballot. If approved by voters, it would raise the state minimum wage to $16 an hour next year and $18 by 2025.

But Sacramento County Superior Court Judge James P. Arguelles ruled that Weber acted properly in enforcing a June 30 deadline for counties to verify signatures for this November’s ballot.

The minimum wage campaign argued that Weber’s office confused county election officials because she told them they had until July 13 to finish the count, based on the requirement that counties get 30 working days for signature verification after campaigns turn in their petitions.

Proponents collected 1 million signatures, but didn’t turn in signatures until May, Weber’s office said, making them late to start the clock. By the June 30 deadline to qualify for this November’s ballot, several counties had not finished verifying signatures and the campaign fell short. Seven other propositions did make the ballot this November.

The minimum wage measure has since been cleared for the November 2024 ballot, after county elections offices finished verifying enough signatures this month.

Business groups have opposed the measure. On Thursday, an attorney representing the California Restaurant Association and the California Business Roundtable wrote Arguelles objecting to the effort to put the measure on this November’s ballot because it would force them to “hastily commence a campaign against the initiative.”

“Our television airwaves are already seeing campaign ads for and against initiative measures that have properly qualified for the ballot,” the attorney, Thomas Hiltachk, wrote. “While petitioner, using his personal fortune, might be able to ramp up a campaign, opponents of this initiative will have an impossible challenge in front of them.”

Arguelles is the same judge who extended the signature-gathering deadline by four months during the pandemic in 2020 for proponents of recalling Gov. Gavin Newsom, giving them enough time to trigger last year’s unsuccessful election.

But in this case, Arguelles refused to give proponents two more weeks. In a tentative ruling before a court hearing, he wrote that the minimum wage proponents’ argument that the pandemic slowed down their signature-gathering efforts was “unpersuasive.” The judge also agreed with Weber’s office that putting a new initiative on the ballot now would “interfere substantially” with conducting the upcoming election.

“The burden was on Sanberg (and all others proposing statutory initiatives) to conform to the June 30 deadline if he wished to place the initiative on the November 2022 ballot,” Arguelles wrote. “Sanberg’s failure to do so did not somehow reallocate the burden to Weber.”

In a statement after the ruling, Sanberg and other proponents slammed the judge’s decision as a “gross double standard,” saying that while Arguelles “saw fit to offer right-wing extremists” more time “to recall our governor, he declined to give voters an opportunity to pass a measure that would lift working people out of poverty.”

Proponents called on Weber to put the measure on the ballot voluntarily, joined progressives in urging Gov. Gavin Newsom to act and vowed to go to the Legislature when it reconvenes Aug. 1, though it’s too late for lawmakers to put a measure on the November ballot.

“Workers cannot wait another two years for a raise,” Sanberg, U.S. Rep. Nanette Barragán and UNITE HERE Local 11 Co-president Ada Briceño said in the joint statement.

Sanberg announced the proposition campaign last December and poured $10 million into signature-gathering. He said the campaign did the best it could to gather signatures quickly during the pandemic. Last week, he and other proponents sued to force it onto this year’s ballot, arguing a vote in two years would come too late to make the measure’s wage hikes to $16 next year and $17 in 2024 go into effect.

Under an inflation-triggered provision in state law, California’s minimum wage, already the nation’s highest, is scheduled to rise in January to $15.50 from $15 for most businesses and $14 for smaller employers.

Given that about a third of California’s private-sector employees are covered by dozens of local minimum wage ordinances that are higher than the state’s, the measure would result in raises for about five million workers, a UC Berkeley economist has found.

“We here are trying to prevent catastrophic injury to over five million Californians in the form of two years of lost wages,” Sanberg told CalMatters. “Over a million Californians signed the petition. Our objective is implementing the will of the people.”

Weber’s office has declined to comment on the litigation. In court filings, Weber said it was the campaign’s fault for turning in signatures too late to give the counties enough time to verify signatures. “It was their own decision to begin the signature gathering process late in the game,” attorneys for her office wrote.

At issue were what proponents called two “competing” deadlines enforced by Weber’s office for counties to verify signatures.

To qualify a ballot measure for any election, counties get 30 business days to verify signatures after they’re turned in. Based on when the minimum wage ballot proponents submitted their petitions, that deadline was July 13, Weber’s office told the counties.

But to make it specifically onto this November’s ballot, the cutoff to verify signatures was June 30 — a deadline also listed on the Secretary of State’s public guide for ballot measure proponents. By that day, not enough counties had finished the verification process to put the campaign over the 685,534 signatures needed to qualify. That threshold was reached a week later after more counties turned in signature numbers.

In his suit, Sanberg accused Weber’s office of confusing county officials by telling them the July 13 deadline and not the June 30 one. The campaign this week released a statement from San Mateo County’s chief elections officer, Mark Church, that “there was a misunderstanding about the deadline for validating signatures.”

The campaign was short more than 77,000 verified signatures on the June 30 deadline, but the Secretary of State was missing reports from several larger counties, including San Mateo. If a few more counties had verified signatures in time, the measure would have qualified for this November.

Sempra and Silicon Valley Power sign deal for Baja California wind energy

The US utility signed a 20-year agreement to buy from a proposed wind farm in Mexico

 

by Mexico News Daily

 

The United States energy company Sempra intends to build a new wind farm in the Baja California municipality of Tecate, and already has a customer willing to buy the power it proposes to generate there.

Sempra Infrastructure (SI), a subsidiary of the San Diego-based firm, and Silicon Valley Power — a municipal electricity utility owned and operated by the city of Santa Clara, California — announced a 20-year power purchase agreement last Thursday.

The renewable energy is to be supplied to Santa Clara from “the proposed Cimarrón wind project, Sempra Infrastructure’s cross-border wind generation facility under development in Baja California,” SI said in a statement.

To be located less than 10 kilometers from the SI-operated Energía Sierra Juárez (ESJ) wind farm, “Cimarrón is expected to be a 300-megawatt (MW) wind generation facility,” the statement said, adding that clean energy would be delivered to a substation in San Diego County via Sempra Infrastructure’s existing cross-border high voltage transmission line.

“Cimarrón is being developed to include approximately 60 wind turbines with a capacity to produce enough energy equivalent to the annual energy consumption of more than 84,000 homes and is expected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by nearly 210,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year,” SI said.

“The construction of the new facility is expected to create more than 2,000 direct and indirect jobs in Mexico with additional local community investment under Sempra Infrastructure’s framework for corporate giving as part of the company’s commitment to the communities where it operates,” the company said.

It added that the development of the planned project “is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including securing all necessary commercial agreements and permits and other factors, including reaching a final investment decision.”

Construction of the wind farm hasn’t yet commenced, but SI believes it could start generating power by the end of 2024.

CEO Justin Bird said the company is “excited to work with the City of Santa Clara, home to some of the world’s largest technology companies, to provide access to renewable energy that can help meet their energy demands while supporting their sustainable energy goals.”

SI’s agreement with Silicon Valley Power “underscores our commitment to advancing the development of our North American clean energy portfolio as we continue to help create a cleaner energy future,” he said.

Manuel Pineda, chief electric utility officer of Silicon Valley Power, said that the utility is “excited to partner with Sempra Infrastructure to add clean energy resources to help meet our sustainability and climate goals.”

SI didn’t say how much it intended to invested in the new project, but the outlay will likely be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. A total of US $450 million was spent on the two phases of the nearby 263-MW ESJ facility, which has 73 turbines.

SI operates another large wind farm in the Nuevo León municipality of General Bravo and a natural gas storage terminal in Ensenada, Baja California. The latter facility intends to start exporting gas to tap into growing global demand for the fuel.

SI also has plans to build a battery storage facility of up to 500 MW in Mexicali, Baja California, and an liquefied natural gas (LNG) export facility in Topolobampo, Sinaloa. The former is slated to serve California’s Imperial Valley, while the latter could ship gas to Asia.

The San Diego Union-Tribune reported that “export terminals on or near the Pacific are considered valuable because ships carrying LNG cargoes to natural gas-hungry markets in Asia can skip paying the tolls at the Panama Canal that facilities on the Gulf Coast must pay and can reach their destinations in about half the time.”

The federal government is planning to build a gas export hub in Coatzacoalcos, Veracruz, but that facility is slated to ship LNG to Europe rather than Asia. President López Obrador is increasing the state’s involvement in the energy sector, and his government has pursued a range of policies that are hostile to foreign firms, many of which generate renewable energy here.

Despite that, 17 United States energy companies have committed to invest in solar and wind projects in Mexico, the president said in June. Citing remarks made by López Obrador at the U.S.-Mexico CEO Dialogue in Washington D.C. in July, Foreign Affairs Minister Marcelo Ebrard said that U.S. companies in general will invest $40 billion in Mexico over the next two years.

With reports from The San Diego Union-Tribune and El Financiero.

USDA stirs surveillance suspicions as it sets up national vegetable garden database

by Belle Carter

 

10/11/2022 / – The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has recently resumed its “People’s Garden Initiative,” which includes the registration of people’s vegetable gardens across the nation. The initiative seeks to empower communities to participate in local food production and provide diversity and resiliency to the food supply chain.

As per the agency’s website, it is building a “more diverse and resilient local food system to address issues like nutrition access and climate change.” The guidelines provided that school gardens, community gardens, urban farms and small-scale agriculture projects in rural, suburban and urban areas can be recognized as a “people’s garden” once they register on the site.

“We welcome gardens nationwide to join us in the people’s garden effort and all it represents,” USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack said. “Local gardens across the country share USDA’s goals of building more diversified and resilient local food systems, empowering communities to come together around expanding access to healthy food, addressing climate change and advancing equity.”

He further encouraged existing and new gardens to join the movement as “growing local food benefits local communities in so many ways.” Moreover, Vilsack added that they offer technical resources to help and this paves a way for people to connect with the local USDA team members.

However, the USDA’s move aroused suspicions among analysts, who said the initiative is an effort to spy on Americans and not to promote healthy eating. The project will allow Big Government – which spends billions every year on companies whose products are responsible for a massive obesity epidemic – to have a database of vegetable gardens. Besides, the USDA mission statement does not involve keeping Americans healthy.

“Skepticism over a national garden database run by this organization is entirely warranted. As the world teeters on the verge of nuclear war and economic collapse, remember that in times of war and economic downturns, food is more valuable than gold,” Matt Agorist, former intelligence operator and independent journalist wrote in the Free Thought Project. (Related: UN food chief warns of “chaos,” “hell,” “devastation” from FAMINE … expect price controls, rationing and criminalization of preppers … HIDE YOUR FOOD.)

USDA willing to endanger public health for benefit of corporations

While a handful of USDA officials may have well-meaning intentions behind the said program, the suspicions of analysts cannot be discounted as the federal agency has shown time and again its willingness to endanger public health for the benefit of corporations that are making unhealthy products.

In December 2020, a scientific committee composed of 20 academics and doctors recommended cutting the limit for added sugars in the diet to six percent from 10 percent in the current guidelines.

The group presented compiled data and requested the USDA to cut the limit for added sugars, citing rising rates of obesity and the link between obesity and health problems like Type 2 diabetes, heart disease and cancer. They asked for a very minimal four percent less in the recommended sugar intake in foods but the agency refused.

“The new evidence is not substantial enough to support changes to quantitative recommendations for either added sugars or alcohol,” Brandon Lipps, USDA deputy undersecretary for food, nutrition and consumer services, told the Wall Street Journal at the time.

The American Beverage Association, which represents drink makers like Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, backed the government in keeping the 10 percent added-sugars limit. Katherine Lugar, the organization’s president and chief executive, said in a statement: “America’s beverage companies appreciate the common sense approach taken by USDA.”

The alcohol industry also praised the decision.

“It was clear that excessive sugar intake was connected to comorbidities like heart disease, type 2 diabetes and obesity. “All of which drastically increased complications from a [Wuhan coronavirus] COVID-19 infection. Yet the USDA, who pretends to care about your health, refused to budge in the slightest,” Agorist said.

Visit FoodSupply.news for more news related to gardening and food independence. Foods.news.

Over $1 billion lost in cryptocurrency scams since 2021

Young people, minorities among those reporting the biggest losses

 

By Jenny Manrique

 

The promise of hefty returns is what initially drew Jeffrey Vaulx, a second-grade special ed teacher in Memphis, Tennessee to go in on a cryptocurrency investment opportunity introduced to him by a Facebook friend.

Vaulx would soon discover that he had been taken by a scheme that data from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) shows is part of a billion-dollar industry in the United States.

Vaulx set up an account on a website that he says, “looked legitimate.” He then transferred $500 cash to his friend, who was supposed to purchase the cryptocurrency – a form of unregulated digital money where transactions are verified through digital ledgers. His investment quickly grew to $8000, though to access that newfound wealth Vaulx learned that he would have to pay an additional fee of $500.

That’s when he says the red flags began to appear. “I went back to my friend’s website and saw it was all a hoax,” he recalled. “Fraud was in the back of my head.”

Vaulx was among a panel of speakers during a September 9 media briefing organized by Ethnic Media Services and the FTC.

Experts at the FTC stress that most cryptocurrency scams start with an unsolicited message, either through text, email, or social media. “Social media and crypto is a very combustible combination,” said Cristina Miranda, consumer education specialist at the FTC Bureau of Consumer Protection.

“Just know that a lot of these scams start off with tips or secrets on online message boards,” Miranda added. “There’s not going to be a whole lot of detail about what you’re investing in, because scammers are always trying to get you to be emotionally invested.”

According to the FTC’s Consumer Sentinel Network, an online resource for tracking scams, from January 2021 through June 2022 cryptocurrency scams have cost consumers over $1.3 billion. Nearly half of those victimized say the scam began with an ad, post, or message on social media.

The largest share of the losses, about $785 million, involved bogus investment opportunities, followed by romance scams at $220 million, business imposters at $121 million, and government imposters at $56 million.

Miranda explained that romance scams or online dating scams involve charming the intended target before offering help with cryptocurrency investing. That’s when the request for money typically comes in.

In the case of fraudulent business scams, victims will often receive unexpected texts or security alerts popping up on their screens claiming to be from well-known companies like Amazon or Microsoft.

“If you click on any link, you will be connected to a scammer who tells you about fraud on your (cryptocurrency) account and that your money is at risk,” said Miranda.

Other scams attempt to impersonate government agencies, warning potential victims that their accounts or benefits will be frozen as part of some investigation.

Young people aged 18-35 and minority populations are among the groups that have reported the highest losses. These groups, Miranda explained, typically exist “outside the traditional financial ecosystem, they typically are unbanked and most open to using these emerging payment technologies.”

The unregulated nature of cryptocurrency — which exists outside traditional financial systems — has made it both more attractive to smalltime investors and opened the door to a ballooning scam industry.

And because transactions happen digitally, with no middleman involved, getting money back for victims has proven to be difficult, said Elizabeth Kwok, assistant director of litigation technology and analysis for the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

Kwok added that because cryptocurrency is not backed by any government there is significant volatility in the market. “There is nobody overlooking the system… If there’s a run on a particular exchange, no entity is going to step in and make sure that consumers can get their money back.”

Since 2021, Bitcoin — the largest cryptocurrency by valuation — has fallen from a high of $60,000 per coin to as low as $22,000. The entire crypto market has dropped from a valuation of over $3 trillion to just over $1 trillion today.

Kwok noted the Biden administration is working to impose some regulation over the crypto market. “They are aiming for a more coordinated regulatory environment,” she said, pointing to an executive order from the president in March that directs federal agencies to implement policies and regulations for assets including cryptocurrencies.

The IRS currently taxes crypto assets as physical property like a car, and if they are used as an investment, the Securities and Exchange Commission gets involved, Kwok said.

“Education is really the first line of defense when it comes to avoiding problems in the marketplace,” said Rosario Mendez, senior attorney with the FTC Division of Consumer and Business Education.

As part of that effort Mendez urged people to come forward and report scams in their communities. “It’s really important,” she said, “so we can do something about it and alert others about these problems.”

“There are real people out there being hurt by this,” Mendez concluded.

Where to Report Scams

Victims can report scams directly to the FTC through its website in English and Spanish, as well as through the website of the regulatory agency Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the US Securities and Exchange Commission

More resources are available at ftc.gov/cryptocurrency and in Spanish at ftc.gov/criptomonedas.

If you or someone you know is the victim of a cryptocurrency scam, you should also report it to the cryptocurrency exchange involved. The FTC also recommends sending complaints to your state attorney general.

Judge tosses NYC covid vaccine mandate, orders back pay for fired city workers

by Truth Press

 

New York City’s controversial COVID-19 vaccine mandate for municipal workers was enacted illegally and employees who were fired for refusing to comply must be immediately reinstated with back pay, a state judge has ruled.

“It is time for the City of New York to do what is right and what is just,” Staten Island Supreme Court Justice Ralph Porzio wrote in a decision made public Tuesday.

More than 1,750 city workers were fired for refusing to get vaccinated, including 36 members of the NYPD and more than 950 Department of Education employees.

In his 13-page ruling, Porzio said then-city Health Commissioner David Chokshi’s Oct. 20, 2021, order “violates the separation of powers doctrine” enshrined in the state constitution.

Chokshi also violated the workers’ “substantive and procedural due process rights” and didn’t have “the power and authority to permanently exclude [them] from their workplace,” Porzio said.

And Chokshi’s order, another that extended the mandate to private employers and a related executive order issued by Mayor Eric Adams were “arbitrary and capricious” in violation of state law, the judge said. Adams’ March 24 executive order exempted athletes and performing artists from the vaccine mandate.

“The vaccination mandate for City employees was not just about safety and public health; it was about compliance,” Porzio wrote.

“If it was about safety and public health, unvaccinated workers would have been placed on leave the moment the order was issued. If it was about safety and public health, the Health Commissioner would have issued city-wide mandates for all residents.”

Porzio also noted the Big Apple’s “nearly 80 percent vaccination rate” before saying that “we shouldn’t be penalizing the people who showed up to work, at great risk to themselves and their families, while we were locked down.”

The ruling came in response to a suit filed earlier this year by 16 former Sanitation Department workers who were fired in February for refusing to get vaccinated and only applies to them.

But the ex-employees’ lawyer, Chad LaVeglia, said that “every city employee who has been terminated because of the mandate could bring civil actions against the city.”

“Litigation involving the other city employees would cost the city at least hundreds of millions—in taxpayer funds of course,” LaVeglia said.

In his decision, Porzio sald that the former sanitation workers “all claim, and provided laboratory documentation, that they have natural immunity to Covid-19 from prior infection(s).”

Porzio said experience from the pandemic has shown that the protections provided by vaccinations are “not absolute,” with breakthrough infections occurring “even for those who have been vaccinated and boosted.”

But he added that his ruling “is not a commentary on the efficacy of vaccination, but about how we are treating our first responders, the ones who worked day-to-day through the height of the pandemic.”

“They worked without protective gear. They were infected with Covid-19, creating natural immunity,” he wrote.

“They continued working full duty while their exemption requests were pending. They were terminated and are willing to come back to work for the City that cast them aside.”

In his decision, Porzio also cited President Biden’s recent assertion that the pandemic was “over” and Gov. Kathy Hochul’s Sept. 12 announcement that she wouldn’t extend New York’s pandemic-related state of emergency.

Under terms of the ruling, dated Monday, the fired sanitation workers were to be “reinstated to their full employment status” as of 6 a.m. Tuesday.

They’re also “entitled to back pay in salary from the date of termination” and were directed to submit a proposed judgment against the city by Nov. 10.

The city Law Department said it had filed papers seeking to reverse Porzio’s decision, which automatically blocked his order to reinstate the fired workers.

“The city strongly disagrees with this ruling as the mandate is firmly grounded in law and is critical to New Yorkers’ public health,” a Law Department spokesperson said.

“We have already filed an appeal. In the meantime, the mandate remains in place as this ruling pertains solely to the individual petitioners in this case. We continue to review the court’s decision, which conflicts with numerous other rulings already upholding the mandate.”

City Council Minority Leader Joe Borelli (R-Staten Island), said, “Even if it deals with just 16 people now, Pandora’s box has been opened.

“The pendulum has swung toward our direction and at this point, I think the city is appealing it simply because the back pay and the lawsuits that will follow will be more expensive than the appeal,” he said.

“It’ll go to the Court of Appeals and they have not been pro-mandate. You don’t just get to make the rules.”

US imposes sanctions on Sinaloa Cartel-affiliated criminal organization  

The restrictions also apply to three transportation companies that may have smuggled drugs

 

by Mexico News Daily

 

The United States government has imposed economic sanctions on a Sinaloa Cartel-affiliated drug trafficking organization (DTO), three of its alleged members and three companies.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury (UST) said in a statement Wednesday that its Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) had designated the Valenzuela DTO and its presumed leader Juan Francisco Valenzuela Valenzuela in accordance with a 2021 executive order — “Imposing Sanctions on Foreign Persons Involved in the Global Illicit Drug Trade.”

OFAC also designated “two Mexican nationals and Valenzuela DTO members, Héctor Alfonso Araujo Peralta and Raúl Rivas Chaires, as well as three Mexico-based transportation companies …  for having engaged in, or attempted to engage in, activities or transactions that have materially contributed to, or pose a significant risk of materially contributing to, the international proliferation of illicit drugs or their means of production,” UST said.

The department said that the Valenzuela DTO was originally established as a transportation cell but evolved into a “sophistical network that became invaluable to Sinaloa Cartel leadership.”

It said the organization was run by three Valenzuela siblings but Juan Francisco is “the last remaining sibling involved” due to the arrest of his brother and sister by U.S. authorities in 2020 and 2021, respectively.

UST said that “under the umbrella of the Sinaloa Cartel, the Valenzuela DTO is involved in the importation and transport of multi-ton quantities of illicit drugs, including methamphetamine, heroin and fentanyl, from Mexico to the United States.”

Juan Francisco Valenzuela, Araujo and Rivas all face trafficking charges in the U.S. but remain at large.

As a result of the sanctions imposed Wednesday, “all property and interests in property of the designated individuals and entities that are in the United States or in the possession or control of U.S. persons must be blocked and reported to OFAC,” UST said.

It also said that “persons that engage in certain transactions with the individuals and entities designated today may themselves be exposed to sanctions or subject to an enforcement action.”

“… Today’s action is part of a whole-of-government effort to counter the global threat posed by the trafficking of illicit drugs into the United States that causes the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans annually, as well as countless more non-fatal overdoses,” UST said.

Brian E. Nelson, undersecretary of UST’s Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, said that the Valenzuela DTO “fuels the ongoing drug epidemic we face in the United States.”

“… Starving this network of resources will help deprive the Sinaloa Cartel of critical support it needs to traffic its dangerous illicit drugs,” he said.

Formerly led by imprisoned drug lord Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán, the Sinaloa Cartel is one of Mexico’s two most powerful criminal organizations, the other being the Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG)

Texas Governor Greg Abbott last month designated both cartels as terrorist organizations.

Mexico News Daily

 

In other news from Mexico:

 

Most Mexicans want military to remain involved in public security: poll

The poll also garnered opinions about the trustworthiness of Mexico’s different public security institutions

 

Almost three-quarters of Mexicans agree with the government’s plan to continue using the armed forces for public security tasks until 2028, a new poll indicates.

constitutional bill extending the military’s involvement in public security by four years has already been approved by Congress and will become law once it has been ratified by a majority of Mexico’s state legislatures.

A survey conducted by the polling company Enkoll for the newspaper El País and broadcaster W Radio found that 73 percent of just over 1,000 respondents agreed with the plan to keep the military on the streets until 2028.

A similar number – 72 percent – said they agreed with the armed forces having control of customs, airports and border crossings, while 62 percent of those polled expressed support for the military’s construction of infrastructure projects such as the Felipe Ángeles International Airport and the Maya Train railroad.

The results are welcome news for President López Obrador, who has relied heavily on the military since taking office in late 2018  and seems intent on increasing the role it plays in public life.

Conducted face-to-face at people’s homes between October 14 and 17, the poll also garnered opinions about the trustworthiness of Mexico’s different public security institutions. As has traditionally been the case, the navy was deemed the most trustworthy security force, with 54 percent of respondents saying they trusted it a lot and an additional 16 percent expressing “some” confidence in the nation’s marines.

The army, National Guard and state police forces were all seen as less trustworthy, although a majority of respondents indicated they had a lot or at least some confidence in the first two institutions. However, only 13 percent of those polled said they trusted state police a lot while an additional 20 percent told Enkoll they maintained some confidence in their officers.

In a more telling revelation, two-thirds of respondents said they had little or no trust in their state police forces.

Asked whether they agreed with López Obrador’s assertion that corruption could be avoided by using the military to build public infrastructure projects, almost six in 10 respondents said they did. Just over one in 10 said they very much agreed with the claim while 47 percent indicated more restrained concurrence with the president.

Although Mexican newspapers have recently been filled with reports detailing the contents of a massive trove of emails and documents stolen from the Ministry of National Defense’s IT system by the Guacamaya hacking group, 71 percent of respondents said they hadn’t heard about the security breach and subsequent leak.

López Obrador downplayed the seriousness of the security breach, asserting that he didn’t expect any negative consequences from it, while Defense Minister Luis Cresencio Sandoval declined to meet with lawmakers to discuss the hacking incident. That response was neither particularly popular or unpopular among those polled, with 41 percent of respondents praising the government’s handling of the issue and 34 percent criticizing it. An additional 25 percent declined to comment on the government’s response or said they didn’t know anything about it.

A clear majority did, however, assert that the army’s digital security personnel “must assume responsibility” for the hacking of the army’s servers, a breach that resulted in the theft and subsequent leaking of six terabytes of data.

The media’s obtention of confidential and sensitive information has led to the publication of a huge number of revelatory reports, including ones on López Obrador’s health problems, the government’s plan to create an army-run commercial airline, a soldier’s sale of weapons to a criminal organization and the Mexican military’s planning and operational shortcomings.