Category Archives: Finance

Hundreds of PPP Loans Went to Fake Farms in Absurd Places

Above: Photo Credit / Adobe Stock

Hundreds of PPP Loans Went to Fake Farms in Absurd Places

by Derek Willis and Lydia DePillis for ProPublica

ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.

 “This story was originally published by ProPublica.”

The shoreline communities of Ocean County, New Jersey, are a summertime getaway for throngs of urbanites, lined with vacation homes and ice cream parlors. Not exactly pastoral — which is odd, considering dozens of Paycheck Protection Program loans to supposed farms that flowed into the beach towns last year.

As the first round of the federal government’s relief program for small businesses wound down last summer, “Ritter Wheat Club” and “Deely Nuts,” ostensibly a wheat farm and a tree nut farm, each got $20,833, the maximum amount available for sole proprietorships. “Tomato Cramber,” up the coast in Brielle, got $12,739, while “Seaweed Bleiman” in Manahawkin got $19,957.

None of these entities exist in New Jersey’s business records, and the owners of the homes at which they are purportedly located expressed surprise when contacted by ProPublica. One entity categorized as a cattle ranch, “Beefy King,” was registered in PPP records to the home address of Joe Mancini, the mayor of Long Beach Township.

“There’s no farming here: We’re a sandbar, for Christ’s sake,” said Mancini, reached by telephone. Mancini said that he had no cows at his home, just three dogs.

All of these loans to nonexistent businesses came through Kabbage, an online lending platform that processed nearly 300,000 PPP loans before the first round of funds ran out in August 2020, second only to Bank of America. In total, ProPublica found 378 small loans totaling $7 million to fake business entities, all of which were structured as single-person operations and received close to the largest loan for which such micro-businesses were eligible. The overwhelming majority of them are categorized as farms, even in the unlikeliest of locales, from potato fields in Palm Beach to orange groves in Minnesota.

The Kabbage pattern is only one slice of a sprawling fraud problem that has suffused the Paycheck Protection Program from its creation in March 2020 as an attempt to keep small businesses on life support while they were forced to shut down. With speed as its strongest imperative, the effort run by the federal Small Business Administration initially lacked even the most basic safeguards to prevent opportunists from submitting fabricated documentation, government watchdogs have said.

While that may have allowed millions of businesses to keep their doors open, it has also required a massive cleanup operation on the backend. The SBA’s inspector general estimated in January that the agency approved loans for 55,000 potentially ineligible businesses, and that 43,000 obtained more money than their reported payrolls would justify. The Department of Justice, relying on special agents from across the government to investigate, has brought charges against hundreds of individuals accused of gaming pandemic response programs.

Drawn by generous fees for each loan processed, Kabbage was among a band of online lenders that joined enthusiastically in originating loans through their automated platforms. That helped millions of borrowers who’d been turned down by traditional banks, but it also created more opportunities for cheating. ProPublica examined SBA loans processed by several of the most prolific online lenders and found that Kabbage appears to have originated the most loans to businesses that don’t appear to exist and the only concentration of loans to phantom farms.

In some cases, these problems would’ve been easy to spot with just a little more upfront diligence — which the program’s structure did not encourage.

“Pushing this through financial institutions created some pretty bad incentives,” said Naftali Harris, the CEO of Sentilink, which helps lenders detect potential identity theft. “This is definitely a case where companies that decided they wanted to be more careful in terms of giving out loans were penalized for doing so.”

Presented with ProPublica’s findings, SBA inspector general spokeswoman Farrah Saint-Surin said that her office had hundreds of investigations underway, but that she did “not have any information to share or available for public reporting at this time.” Reuters reported that federal investigators were probing whether Kabbage and other fintech lenders miscalculated PPP loan amounts, and the DOJ declined to confirm or deny the existence of any investigation to ProPublica.

Kabbage, which was acquired by American Express last fall, did not have an explanation for ProPublica’s specific findings, but it said it adhered to required fraud protocols. “At any point in the loan process, if fraudulent activity was suspected or confirmed, it was reported to FinCEN, the SBA’s Office of the Inspector General and other federal investigators, with Kabbage providing its full cooperation,” spokesman Paul Bernardini said in an emailed statement.

As soon as the pandemic swept across America, Kabbage was in trouble.

The online lending platform had launched in 2009 as part of a generation of financial technology companies known as “non-banks,” “alternative lenders” or simply “fintechs” that act as an intermediary between investors and small businesses that might not have relationships with traditional banks. Based in Atlanta, it had become a buzzy standout in the city’s tech scene, offering employees Silicon Valley perks like free catered lunches and beer on tap. It advertised its mission as helping small businesses “acquire funds they need for their big breaks,” as a recruiting video parody of Michael Jackson’s “Thriller” put it in 2016.

The basic innovation behind the burgeoning fintech industry is automating underwriting and incorporating more data sources into risk evaluation, using statistical models to determine whether an applicant will repay a loan. That lower barrier to credit comes with a price: Kabbage would lend to borrowers with thin or checkered credit histories, in exchange for steep fees. The original partner for most of its loans, Celtic Bank, is based in Utah, which has no cap on interest rate, allowing Kabbage to charge more in states with stricter regulations.

With backing from the powerhouse venture capital firm SoftBank, Kabbage had been planning an IPO. Its model foundered, however, when Kabbage’s largest customer base — small businesses like coffee shops, hair salons and yoga studios — was forced to shut down last March. Kabbage stopped writing loans, even for businesses that weren’t harmed by the pandemic. Days later, it furloughed more than half of its nearly 600-person staff and faced an uncertain future.

The Paycheck Protection Program, which was signed into law as part of the CARES Act on March 27, 2020, with an initial $349 billion in funding, was a lifeline not just to small businesses, but fintechs as well. Lenders would get a fee of 5% on loans worth less than $350,000, which would account for the vast majority of transactions. The loans were government guaranteed, and processors bore almost no liability, as long as they made sure that applications were complete.

At first, encouraged by the Treasury Department, traditional banks prioritized their own customers — an efficient way to process applications with little fraud risk, since the borrowers’ information was already on file. But that left millions of the smallest businesses, including independent contractors, out to dry. They turned instead to a collection of online lenders that have sprung up offering short-term loans to businesses: Kabbage, Lendio, Bluevine, FundBox, Square Capital and others would process applications automatically, with little human review required.

For the platforms, this was also easy money. In the first funding round that ran out last August, Kabbage completed 297,587 loans totaling $7 billion. It received 5% of each loan it made directly and an undisclosed cut of the proceeds for those it processed for banks; its total revenue was likely in the hundreds of millions of dollars. A lawsuit filed by a South Carolina accounting firm alleges that Kabbage was among several lenders that refused to pay fees to agents who helped put together applications, even though the CARES Act had said they could charge up to 1% of the smaller loans (a provision that was later reversed). For Kabbage, that revenue kept the company alive while it sought a buyer.

“For all of these guys, it was like shooting fish in a barrel. If you could do the minimum amount of due diligence required, you could fill up the pipeline with these applications,” said a former Kabbage executive, one of four former employees interviewed by ProPublica. They spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid retaliation at their current jobs or from industry giant American Express.

To handle the volume, Kabbage brought back laid-off workers starting at $15 an hour. When that failed to attract enough people, they increased the hourly rate to $35, and then $40, and awarded gift cards for reaching certain benchmarks, according to a former employee with visibility into the loan processing. “At a certain point, they were like, ‘Yes, get more applications out and you’ll get this reward if you do,’” the former employee said. (Bernardini said the company did not offer incentive compensation.)

In a report on its PPP participation through last August, Kabbage boasted that 75% of all approved applications were processed without human review. For every 790 employees at major U.S. banks, the report said, Kabbage had one. That’s in part because traditional banks, which also take deposits, are much more heavily regulated than fintech institutions that just process loans. To participate in the PPP, fintechs had to quickly set up systems that could comply with anti-money laundering laws. The human review that did happen, according to two people involved in it, was perfunctory.

“They weren’t saying, ‘Is this legitimate?’ They were just saying, ‘Are all the fields filled out?’” said another former employee. As acquisition talks proceeded, the employee noted, Kabbage managers who held the most company stock had a built-in incentive to process as many loans as possible. “If there’s anything suspicious, you can pass it along to account review, but account review was full of people who stood to make a lot of money from the acquisition.”

One situation in which Kabbage approved a suspicious loan became public in a Florida lawsuit filed by a woman, Latoya Clark, who received more than $1 million in PPP loans to three businesses. When the funds were deposited into accounts at JPMorgan Chase, the bank discovered that Clark’s businesses hadn’t been incorporated before the PPP program’s cutoff and froze the accounts. Clark sued Chase, and Chase then filed a counterclaim against the borrower and Kabbage, which had originated the loan despite its questionable documentation. In its response, Kabbage said it had not yet completed its investigation of the incident.

Although the Justice Department rarely names lenders that processed fraudulent PPP applications, Kabbage has been named at least twice. One case involved two loans worth $1.8 million to businesses that submitted forged information, and the other involved a business that had inflated its payroll numbers and submitted a similar application to U.S. Bank, which flagged authorities. Kabbage had simply approved the $940,000 loan. American Express’ Bernardini declined to comment further on pending litigation.

Shortly after the application period for PPP’s first round closed on Aug. 8, American Express announced the Kabbage purchase. But the transaction included none of Kabbage’s loan portfolios, either from the PPP or its pre-pandemic conventional loans. The PPP loans had either been sold to SBA-approved banks or bought by the Federal Reserve. Bernardini wouldn’t say which banks now own the loans, however, and said that no potentially fraudulent loans had been pledged to the Fed.

In April, an Ocean County, New Jersey, resident contacted ProPublica after seeing his name attached to a Kabbage loan for a nonexistent “melon farm.” To see whether it was an isolated incident, ProPublica took basic information the government released after a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by ProPublica and others and compared it with state business entity registries. Although registries don’t pick up all sole proprietorships and independent contractors, the absence of a name is an indication that the business might not exist.

As it turned out, Kabbage had made more than 60 loans in New Jersey to unlisted businesses. Fake farms also showed up repeatedly in the SBA’s Economic Injury Disaster Loan Program, according to reports from localnewsoutlets.

A common tie became apparent when the resident of the home to which one nonexistent business was registered said that he was a client of the certified public accountants at Ciccone, Koseff & Company. In March 2020, the firm notified its clients of what it called an “ultimately unsuccessful ransomware attack” that occurred the previous month. According to information filed with Maine’s attorney general, the attackers acquired Social Security numbers and financial information.

Several other clients of the accounting firm, including Mancini, the Long Beach mayor, also had loans registered to their addresses. Reached by phone, firm founder Ray Ciccone declined to comment.

But that CPA’s data breach didn’t account for all of the suspicious loans ProPublica found across the country. Searches for PPP applicants that didn’t show up in state registration records yielded hundreds in 28 more states, with dense clusters in Florida, Nebraska and Virginia. Other lenders had nonexistent businesses as well, but fake farms only showed up in Kabbage loans. Most followed a distinctive naming convention, with part of the name of a resident or former resident of the home to which the business is registered, plus a random agricultural term.

Some of the fake loans listed addresses of people who’d also legitimately applied for their businesses. Hartington, Nebraska, anesthesiologist Bruce Reifenrath received a PPP loan for his practice in nearby Yankton, South Dakota. That’s why the idea of one being approved for a “potato farm” was so strange. “We did a PPP loan last spring and it’s pretty extensive, the documentation,” Reifenrath said.

Reifenrath was part of a cluster of dubious Kabbage loans in Hartington that also included the home of J. Scott Schrempp, the president of the Bank of Hartington, who confirmed that he did not own a strawberry farm. Schrempp said he had noticed the fake loan, and reported it to the SBA.

The SBA data only reflects approved applications received from lenders, some of which are then caught and not funded. The SBA also periodically updates its dataset to remove loans canceled by lenders. But none of the suspicious loans pulled by ProPublica show undisbursed funds, and they all have remained in the dataset for more than eight months.

One possible mechanism for the invented businesses is a technique known as synthetic identity theft, in which a criminal obtains pieces of personally identifiable information — such as a home address, a Social Security number and a birthdate — and combines it with fake information to build a credit profile. The associated bank account then routes to the fraudster, not the owner of the original information.

None of the residents of the phony farms ProPublica contacted were getting notices that they needed to repay the loans they didn’t apply for, because they didn’t get any money. But that doesn’t mean they’re not at risk, according to James Lee, chief operating officer at the Identity Theft Resource Center.

“Just having an address linked to your name on a fraudulent loan can impact your credit,” Lee said. It can also pose problems for pre-employment background checks, insurance applications or new identification documents like passports and driver’s licenses.

Meanwhile, if not corrected, the fabricated identities will stay in circulation and become better at fooling other financial institutions. “Those records get built into the credit and authentication systems used by government and commercial entities,” Lee said. “Each next time they are used and authenticated, the more ‘real’ they become. That’s what makes synthetic identity fraud so insidious.”

This, however, is largely not Kabbage’s problem anymore.

After its huge blitz of PPP loans last summer, Kabbage had hundreds of thousands of borrowers whose loans would need to be serviced until they were closed out. The loans could either be forgiven, if the borrower demonstrated that they spent most of the money on payroll, or paid back with interest. But American Express didn’t acquire the part of Kabbage’s business that owned those loans. Instead, a separate entity called K Servicing would handle loan forgiveness and take applications for a second PPP draw that Congress funded in December. The servicer is led by former Kabbage employees and its website looks very similar to Kabbage’s, but American Express says it has no affiliation.

If Kabbage was understaffed for the volume of PPP loans it took on before the acquisition, the situation has apparently worsened since then. Reddit, Yelp, Consumer Affairs, Trustpilot, Facebook and Better Business Bureau threads are replete with complaints from customers whose applications were denied or who received no communication from the company. When the SBA changed the rules in February to make the program more generous to independent contractors, K Servicing couldn’t incorporate the new forms into its processing system. So it told all new applicants to apply through another company, SmartBiz, which had operated as a mostly online processor of SBA loans even before the pandemic.

K Servicing is run by Kabbage’s former head of program management, Laquisha Milner, who also runs her own consulting firm. “Due to extenuating circumstances beyond our control, currently, our processing function is delayed,” Milner emailed in response to detailed questions from ProPublica. “We are relentlessly exploring all available options to ensure our existing customers are able to maximize their loan forgiveness.”

Jennifer Dienst is a freelance travel and events writer who received her first-draw loan from Kabbage and wants to apply for forgiveness before her window for doing so closes in the fall, but she has been stymied by K Servicing’s failure to make the forms available. “Please be patient with us as we prepare for the new forms,” a message on the loan portal reads.

Meanwhile, Dienst’s account has started accruing interest, which Milner said will not be charged if the loan is forgiven. But it’s making Dienst nervous.

“It’s always the same response from K Servicing — we’re updating our forgiveness forms and they’ll be made available soon,” Dienst said. “They’ve been saying that for months.”

Recent Articles:


Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Bitcoin and Crypto’s Crash is not the First, the Largest or the Last

Above: Photo by Michael Krahn on Unsplash with elements added by Lynxotic

Coming after a frenzied run-up the hand wringing is no surprise

I many ways it seems as if Bitcoin and Cryptocurrencies appeared suddenly in 2021 out of the head of Zeus. Protean and fully formed, with billions and trillions in market caps, and all your sisters, brothers, cousins and even the Uber driver climbing aboard.

And the FOMO blog posts, where every hour an innocent reader is assaulted by a story, perhaps true, perhaps exaggerated and certainly foolhardy in retrospect, of an innocent putting their life savings into Dogecoin and suddenly having, theoretically, huge gains at their disposal.

Meanwhile, craggy faced, ancient stock market mavens would interject famous last words that now appear to be wise. However, all that notwithstanding, this week’s crash is nothing new or unexpected.

In reality, as can be seen from the graphic below, provided by Visual Capitalist, there have been so may crashes / corrections and doomsday prognostications since 2012 in Bitcoin that it seems like a miracle the there’s any thing such as Crypto at all.

There’s a reason it’s not dead and it’s in the DNA

The resiliency, far from a shock to those that have been around more than a fortnight, is kinda the point. When Satoshi Nakamoto built the system architecture of Bitcoin and since then inspired the over 8000 new crypto entities that have been developed, it was, just like the internet itself that was build to survive WWIII, supposed to be as indestructible as possible.

Like physical gold, which is considered have been adopted as a store of value partly due to its indestructibility and immutability (alchemy notwithstanding) the volatility and sometimes violent-seeming life story of Bitcoin is a necessary adjust to its role in finance, commerce and even individual monetary survival.

Not for the faint of heart, perhaps

While the mainstream and those forces opposed to the adoption or survival of Bitcoin and Crypto are out in force pointing to the “unsuitability” of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies for any “legitimate” use as a trade or savings vehicle, the progress so far, in spite of the obvious fact that volatility has always been baked in to the situation, is an obvious refutation of that viewpoint.

Will the current drop in dollar values relative to Bitcoin end it’s popularity and strip it of the respect it has thusfrar earned among many? In a word, no. In essence what is happening is, as many have foretold, what happens often and repeatedly, the excess attention and dollars that were pumped into crypto by you brother, sister, cousin and Uber driver are now getting blown out, since those were more speculation and psychosis than any kind of vote for viability or permanency.

And, why not? Where was to concern, shock and hesitation by the masses when the prices seemed to only rise for weeks and even months across so many products and coins it was impossible to keep count? Why was to feeding frenzy and the mania-like piling on not ignored as an anomaly?

The herd does as the herd will do. Diamond hands and Paper hands will ebb and flow as long as the rivers flow to the sea and humans herd like buffalo. And, in all likelihood, dollars and euros and yen will be long forgotten when the last bitcoin is transferred to the final wallet in the sky.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation or endorsement of any products, services, or companies. Lynxotic does not provide investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.


Find books on Money and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Elon Musk is taking sides in the ‘True Battle’ between Crypto & Fiat

Above:Photo Credit / Unsplash / Collage / Lynxotic

If you are stuck on the word ‘fiat’ this post can help you (everyone else too)

In a single, 14 word reply to a follower (@TheRealShifo) that asked “Yo Elon what do you think about the peeps who are angry at you because of crypto?” He gave a simple answer that is the often unmentioned, yet most important, question regarding crypto vs. fiat, government issued, currency such as the US dollar.

Looking around during the ongoing frenzy surrounding crypto and digital finance you’ll see countless ‘news” stories and blog posts comparing, or pretending to compare cryptocurrencies, especially the two biggest Bitcoin and Ethereum (as coin sometimes referred to as “Ether”) and they virtually always quote the “price” fluctuations of those coins as a certain number of dollars and cents.

Interestingly I have yet to see any of these “comparisons” use the reverse valuation method, such as, “the US dollar is currently worth .00002703 Bitcoin. Can you imagine everything using that as a standard – CNBC quoting stock prices in Bitcoin, your house is “worth” 32 Bitcoins (if you’re in California, for example).

The reason this comes off sounding strange and ridiculous is that all communication related to the US dollar, which has been a fiat currency since abandoning any “backing” (such as gold) and continuing on by decree (or fiat) of the government with no backing other than than decree, also carries a decree (tacit) not to undermine it in public.

So when Elon says:

“The true battle is between fiat & crypto. On balance, I support the latter.”

Simple and straightforward and yet intentionally shrouded in mystery

Musk is directly comparing crypto, generally, and fiat currencies around the world that “float” against each other. And by inference, doing so in terms of the difference between a fiat currency like the US Dollar and a crypto currency, like Bitcoin.

A fiat currency is money that is not backed by a physical commodity like gold, but instead backed by the government that issued it. Most modern currencies, such as the U.S. dollar, euro, pound and yen, are fiat money.

from Wikipedia

The term fiat derives from the Latin word fiat, meaning “let it be done” used in the sense of an order, decree or resolution.

— common Definition

The fact that Bitcoin was created as a digital alternative to fiat money stands at the forefront of that point. The fact that it was designed precisely to counter the drawbacks and dangers of a system based on fiat paper money (or digital ledgers of those paper dollars such as your bank balance or any method to keep track of how many “imaginary” paper dollars you “have”) is exactly the real issue at hand.

photo credit: twitter

It’s no secret that many attack those goals and intentions superficially and dismiss the entire discussion with a wave of the hand. They willfully use the complexity of the cryptographic solutions, at the heart of cryptocurrency, as a way to gloss over the real and substantive problems being targeted.

They prey on the ignorance of the majority to try and discount out of hand any value at all for the movement and the various products.

Opening up the door to this exact exchange and characterizing it as a “battle” in one fowl swoop clarifies and simplifies the real issues and the real reason for the existence, and according to many, including Elon Musk, the need for monetary “reform” or change via a shift toward crypto.

Opening up the door to this exact exchange and characterizing it as a “battle” in one fowl-swoop clarifies and simplifies the real issues and the real reason for the existence of, and the need for, monetary “reform” or change via a shift toward crypto.

D.L.

The “price” of Bitcoin or any other crypto currency on any given day has almost nothing whatsoever to do with that debate.

Speculation abounds but not just in Crypto

The “price” is a function of, mostly, speculation and scarcity, due, in the case of Bitcoin to the mining cap, or at least a perceived scarcity. And additionally the various perceived advantages of crypto such as privacy, decentralization, use of block chain systems, etc.

But the price is like the smoke above the battlefield, not the reason for the battle or any indicator who is winning or who is on the side of might or right.

Two major questions that arise from this tweet and the potential shift toward a clearer and simpler dialogue on crypto are the following:

  1. Is crypto generally, and Bitcoin / Ether more specifically established and entrenched enough to withstand the coming backlash from governments that feel threatened and other status quo institutions that will do whatever it takes to discourage or even stamp out crypto usage?
  2. Will the very battle itself, that Elon Musk says is the current “true” battle, bring even more attention to the weaknesses and problems with the current fiat money system and thereby increase, perhaps inadvertently yet massively, the size of the battle and its stakes?

Alternative systems of trade have been tolerated in the US for some time now. How are those air miles doing? What about the chips and points for perks you got at the Indian Casino? Is it too late to outlaw all crypto without causing a revolution in the streets?

The other side of the (clipped) coin

It is truly surprising to see how little is to be found in the media about the deeper reasons for the rise of crypto. How it sometimes seems like direct criticism of fiat currency is almost taboo.

Naturally any internet search will find many “rabbit hole” sources for all kinds of information critical of the current monetary system, the same system the near total collapse of which in 2008 inspired the creation of bitcoin.

It appears that Elon Musk is emphasizing, in a subdued manner, exactly the way that the nonsense-furor over huge price gains or declines is completely missing the actual point. The “true battle”.

Many stories in the media and millions of private comments are currently following a kind of convoluted logic – first the popularity of crypto (which is linked to the unpopularity of the very messed up fiat system) artificially and massively increases prices in many crypto assets.

This “bubble”, a typical outcome of human herding behavior in financial markets, inevitably bursts or sees large setbacks. Then the coin or crypto system itself is blamed for the human stupidity and greed that caused the distortions of price, just like happened in the dot-com bubble and the 2007 housing bubble and subsequent crash.

The difference is that the crypto bubble, in an interesting way, is in reality due to a surge in skepticism toward fiat currencies, a boom in the prevalence of mistrust toward governments and a combination of fear and greed that is growing, not dissipating.

Although many have rightly criticized Elon Musk’s tweets and odd Saturday Night Live appearance, and there is a kind of mini-backlash (growing?) against all things Musk, in this case it is a healthy and wise tweet that we have shown above.

Reframing, or more aptly refocusing the discussion away from prices and speculative profits and back to the real reasons that cryptos were initially created and why it has gained such massive support is a welcome shift. That this reframing comes from the likes of Musk himself, is fitting and who better to put forth a message to simplify and clarify the nature of the real “battle” at hand.

The following video has some interesting data and arguments for, and mainly against, the fiat regime under which we have lived for most of the last century. Although, in a sense, a kind of advertisement for Gold and Silver, the overview is nevertheless accurate and does not exaggerate the dangers and issues that revolve around the fiat system.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation or endorsement of any products, services, or companies. Lynxotic does not provide investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.


Find books on Money and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Elon Musk looking to fix Dogecoin System Transaction Efficiency after Bitcoin Reversal

As has been the case throughout, Elon Musk is Pro Crypto

As can be seen in the tweet above, Elon Musk has announced that he is working with Dogecoin developers to improve system transaction efficiency. He feels, apparently that this ongoing development, an effort to improve energy efficiency, no doubt, is “promising.

This comes after both his silly kinda-sorta negative jokes from his Saturday Night Live appearance a week ago, and his subsequent announcement regarding bitcoin and issues with energy consumption (see below).

Regardless of those issues being about perception or reality, which is an ongoing hot debate within the crypto community, at least the issue of making crypto even more viable as a medium of exchange and store of value is being talked about in good faith serious tones.

This is an indicator of his highly positive attitude and beliefs regarding the future of Bitcoin, Dogecoin and cryptocurrencies in general.

PR nightmare abated and pre-empted by announcement that Tesla will no longer accept Bitcoin

In a sudden about-face Elon Musk announced that Tesla would not accept Bitcoin for its environmentally friendly electric vehicles after all. This, after the company made big news when it purchased $1.5 billion of the cryptocurrency which was revealed in an SEC filing.

In the first quarter report of 2021 the company revealed that it sold a portion of its Bitcoin and netted a $101 million profit. That number represented nearly a fourth of the reported total profits for the quarter.

An even larger contributing factor to the positive news at the time was the massive sales of regulatory credits were $518 million. In other words, profit from Bitcoin and government subsidies was basically 100% of the upside. Car sales, not so much.

Enter the massive media frenzy over the energy use “wasted” on Bitcoin mining and you have a PR disaster waiting to happen for Tesla and Musk. Naturally, clever lad that he is, it was prudent to cancel, at least temporarily the policy of allowing customers to pay with Bitcoin.

Odd thing is, there are many worse things sucking up energy than Bitcoin. And the mining will not stop or slow down because Tesla is not getting any for its cars. But the perception that there’s a “great cost to the environment” from crypto-mining is enough to make this sudden announcement mandatory from a PR standpoint.

Though not mentioned in the tweet where this policy change was announced, it is unlikely that Tesla will go forward with accepting Dogecoin, which was mentioned recently by Musk also, due to the perceived similarities in the mining process.

In the statement attached to Musk’s tweet he also states that they will potentially use a crypto currency if it can be used at an energy cost of less than 1% of Bitcoin per transaction.

This is a separate issue from the mining energy usage but it has also been a criticism that the energy expended to transact using Bitcoin is very high, compared to what is a separate question. Perception is at the root, but wanting more efficient crypto is certainly a laudable goal.

This part of the statement will no doubt lead to feverish speculation as to which cryptocurrency might meet his stated requirements.

Elon Musk’s support for cryptocurrency is, like his commitment to sustainable energy, a positive stance and, before his personal success became completely overblown, a courageous one.

Taking on the fossil fuel industry, it’s easy to forget, was no easy feat in the early days. And, similarly, the inevitable upcoming clash between crypto-adherents and governments (printers of fiat currencies) will need established eminent “super-citizens” to give crypto a chance of survival.

For that reason it is good to see that this does no represent a rejection of crypto itself on Musk’s part, but a necessary response to mounting criticism based on the perception of hypocrisy.

You can bet that, if there is a way to mine with sustainable energy sources (actually in many ways already happening) he will reverse his stance yet again.


Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

There’s more to Money than Dead Presidents: Crypto is Alive and Well

Above: photo – Dead Presidents Collage – Lynxotic

Haters like Buffet and Mark Cuban’s cheerleading are off base and spreading confusion

Disclaimer first: This opinion article is not investment advice and does not advocate buying any investment vehicle or currency

There are so many misconceptions propagated far and wide these days that it’s hard to choose a place to start. First it’s important to recognize that crypto currencies are not stocks or companies, yes that’s obvious but one of the biggest “anti” argument these days is that there’s an absurdity to the aggregate total value of a “coin” being more than the market cap of the stock of a particular company.

“Ethereum is now worth more than Bank of America”, this nonsense comparison goes, as if the market cap of a stock and the price of a coin times the number of coins in existence has any meaning whatsoever.

Following this logic, however, beneath all the hype, both pro-crypto and anti-crypto, lies a hidden thread to an actual underlying truth.

Though based on obvious common sense, this thread is potentially confusing and convoluted, to say the least. But without seeing it clearly the misconceptions will just keep getting more ridiculous.

In order to illustrate the conundrum a bit of background is needed. For example:

Stocks, in the US are priced in dollars. But how are dollars priced? Isn’t just as accurate to say that when the “price” of the DJIA moves higher (3,4050 at this writing) it is the value of the dollar, in relation to the DJIA that went down?

While this requires a kind of mental gymnastics, these are only due to the constant bombardment meant to keep you from seeing this 100% valid way of viewing stock valuations based in dollars.

There’s another kind of tacit misinformation and that is stating that “inflation” is only relevant when it’s measured by the government. For example if the “bull market” that began in 2009 and continues into 2021 represented a huge increase in stock prices, that is asset inflation.

The inverse of asset inflation is a reduction in dollar value. Less shares of a given stock can be bought for the same number of dollars. The dollars are worth less.

Read more:

And further, crypto, such as BitCoin is measured as having more or less value in dollars. Who is to say the massive rise in the dollar “value” of BitCoin is not representative of a decline in the “intrinsic” value of dollars.

The truth is often hidden in plain sight and that is what drives traditional markets

And that is precisely the point. BitCoin’s existence, which is locked in the mind of Satoshi Nakamoto (if he indeed exists) was indicated cryptically (no pun intended) to be a kind of answer to the instability of the global financial system as was evidence in the crisis of 2008. Taking place nearly concurrently with the birth of the idea of BitCoin.

Seeing the dollar as having a “stable” value and measuring a companies value, via it’s share price, is, let’s just say, perhaps 100 times more absurd than the Dogecoin dog.

Why? Because, for nearly a century the dollar is not backed or moored to anything but the government’s hope that it will retain value and laws that prohibit you and I from using other vehicles as “legal tender”.

The data (and opinions) on this are seemingly endless and yet absolutely critical to understanding our monetary system and where crypto may or may not fit in.

Horseshoe Nails and The Isle of Yap

Many interesting historical facts point toward the reality that money and coinage has always been just as much about the abstract belief in the system, more than any particular “intrinsic” value.

On the Micronesian Isle of Yap there was a functioning monetary system based on huge stones. A New York Times article, published in 1971 described the curious system:

“Every piece has an owner, and everyone knows who the owner is. Even when the money changes hands, it usually stays put. Yapese stone money is the largest and heaviest “coin” in the world.

In earlier days, brave islanders paddled by canoe 300 miles across open ocean to Palau where they cut slices from huge stalactites and brought them back as money. The value depended on how many men were drowned bringing them back. Nowadays, value is usually determined by measurements. We heard various versions, ranging from $10 radial inch to $42 a foot.”

Another article explains that many “wealthy” home (hut) owners displayed their money by leaving it leaning against the front of the house, where all could see the prosperity.

And, as for the prevention of fraud and corruption in any monetary system? Could any be more corrupt than the one that led to credit default swaps and mortgage-backed securities imploding and all the BS that nearly brought down the world’s banking system?

And that is not new either. In the 1800s traveling bank examiners journeyed throughout the US to check on the gold reserves claimed by various banks. More often than not, they found far less gold than was claimed (in today’s fractional banking system little attempt is made to reduce the leverage in the system).

A common, clever, trick to try to “leverage” what little gold was actually on hand was to pile gold coins and ingots on top of a bed of horseshoe nails, hoping that the examiner would weigh the entire concoction only, and never notice the bogus hidden attempt to bolster the weight.

Bitcoin’s system at least attempts to circumvent this typically human brand of fraud and corruption.

In the article “What is Cryptomining” on Techspot a chart was published to illustrate how Satoshi Nakamoto tried to solve the classic trust delimma with the proof of work mining system.

“For example, if Alice has $100 at the beginning of the day, she could promise Bob, Charlie, and David independently that she’d send them each $100 by the end of the day. While Alice could show them that she owns $100 and they’d all be content and agree to the transaction, Alice only has $100. Thus, if at the end of the day, the public ledger (which once finalized is set in stone, so to speak) includes 3 transactions initiated by Alice for $100, the system would be broken and no one would want to use it.

With a centralized system such as in modern day banks, there would exist a single ledger that can validate how much money a certain individual has, and thus it can guarantee that the customer cannot spend more than they own. When talking about a decentralized, peer-to-peer system, however, who’s there to stop a clever individual from spending their money multiple times quickly before getting caught?

To address this potential issue, crypto miners enter the playing field. Essentially, miners play the role of the decentralized banker, and will perform the required gruntwork to ensure that the system is functioning as expected without double-spending. In return for their work, they will be rewarded with some cryptocurrency.”

Buffet, Cuban, Musk & Munger

In clonclusion, Buffet, Munger and The Wall Street Journal may have knowledge and experience but they have also derived benefit from a system that favors those already holding capital, one that also has a tendency to crush those trying to build it.

So, it’s fairly obvious that they are “talking their book” and data mining to produce a self-congratulatory outcome, when they expound on all the reasons that they hate crypto (Munger even called it “disgusting”).

Recent Articles:

As for Musk and Cuban, what’ve they got to lose? At least they “get it”, at least they are open to the idea of a future that has crypto as a part of the financial system. But where will they stand if there is government resistance in a big way, and if attempts to stop the entire crypto movement or “de-fang” it in ways that make it less viable as a true alternative to the status quo? That, my friend, will be the 1000 BitCoin question.


Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Was Elon Musk’s weak dis’ on SNL the real reason for DogeCoin’s Drop?

Is any chosen form of “money” any more of a “hustle” than another?

Elon’s big night in NYC turned out, not surprisingly, to be less than climactic for the Shiba Inu meme crypto coin DOGE as it was seen sinking during the show and on Sunday. A wise man once said “correlation is not causation” and yet can anyone or anything be responsible for the drop in the high flying cryptocoin other than Elon and his Mom?

In stock market lingo this was what’s known as a “date certain” event. Meaning, the entire world knew that Elon would be on SNL and would, one way or another, mention DOGE, given that he has been endlessly associated with the coin in the media, and it’s a “joke” that has to be told, if only to prove to the SEC that he is really just joking. “Look guys, I am literally on a comedy show talking about this”, he seems to be saying.

“Buy the Rumor, Sell the News”

For good measure, and to avoid scrutiny by the oversight body, he, and the writers at SNL, decided to put a negative spin on both mentions of DOGE during the show. First, in an exchange with his Mom, Maye, Musk sheepishly grins and nods after she says she “hopes it won’t be DogeCoin” referring to her Mother’s day gift.

He eventually capitulates and, after saying that DogeCoin is “about as real as that dollar” he “concedes” that “it’s a hustle”.

Elon Musk, as LLoyd Ostertag on Saturday Night Live, May 8th 2021

Later, in a sketch with 100% focus on the crypto coin, the “Weekend Update” segment features Musk playing “Lloyd Ostertag” who calls himself the “DogeFather” – who is asked repeatedly “what is DogeCoin”. He eventually capitulates and, after saying that DogeCoin is “about as real as that dollar” he “concedes” that “it’s a hustle”.

While the bulk of his appearance in the segment does reconfirm and support his actual views, in a smirking and slightly deprecating way, as Ostertag”, it also underscores a deeper truth that cryptocurrencies are “as real as the dollar” (some would say more real). However, in the end, the punchline is a negative way to sweep away all of that, with a nod to Buffet, Munger and the SEC, toeing the line and insuring himself one less courtroom headache.

Was it the Day of reckoning for Dogecoin? Possible but doubtful

As of Sunday, May 9th, DOGE is hovering around .51 cents. The Muskian peak was .74 cents on May 7th. This means that, although there was a decline on the “news” that Musk would not break the SEC rules by blatantly pumping DogeCoin on live national TV, the coin is still up approximately 33% for the week, 734% for the last month and 19,446% for the last year. And, according to Elon Musk, aka Lloyd Ostertag, aka the DogeFather, it is “about as real” as that dollar in your pocket.

Recent Articles:

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

In: ‘Antitrust: Taking on Monopoly Power from the Gilded Age to the Digital Age’, Amy Klobuchar Takes on World’s Greatest Challenge

Photo Collage / Lynxotic

Is the title above wrong? Depends who you ask…

In her new book, Klobuchar tries to connect the historical roots of antitrust actions to populism and her own ancestry. That’s not all, however. Although difficult, particularly for readers who are not legal scholars, there’s an important and deeper historic thread here that she is aiming to contribute to.

That job is to find a way to illuminate how the digital age, with all its challenges and complexities, can come to terms with the simple question of how to measure damage that is being done by big tech monopolies, through sheer size, power and lack of external accountability.

Moreover, there is an issue of how antitrust law and practice veered away from the remedies and goals, first established during the Gilded Age, toward a laissez-fair, anti-regulatory stance that gained steam in the Regan years.

That shift is, in many ways, to blame for the current extreme state characterized by dangerous levels of concentrated wealth and power by big tech.

This effort may seem like one that is doomed to being ignored by all but the already long-since converted. But, make no mistake, it is a topic that will grow, reverberate and become more relevant as the current administration in Washington consolidates and comes into its own.

“People have just gotten beaten down. I wanted to show the public and elected officials that you’re not the first kids on the block with this. What do you think it was like back when trusts literally controlled everyone on the Supreme Court, or literally elected members of the Senate before they were elected by the public?”

— Amy Klobuchar, in Wired interview with Steven Levey

When President Biden recently nominated Lina M. Khan to the Federal Trade Commission, in addition to Columbia Law School professor Tim Wu, who announced earlier this month he would join the National Economic Council, he set forth a clear path for an antitrust direction that has the potential to be more than just rhetoric and window dressing.

Khan is an unequivocal proponent of a new era of antitrust, one that is, not coincidentally, along the lines of what Klobuchar advocates. Likely sharing these ultra clear views from her long and celebrated research, Khan, along with Wu, is a key addition to Biden’s growing roster of Big Tech critics, and there is already a blueprint for actions and cases that will build to a crescendo over the next several years.

Buy at

Biden’s call for the repeal of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, meanwhile, a hotly contested and possibly flawed legal shield some feel is exploited by Internet platforms, is another indicator of the tenor of the coming actions.

In a sense, with this bestselling book [on Amazon: #1 in Political Economy, #1 in Government Management, #1 in Business Law (Books)] the gargantuan task of connecting the culpability of massive, nearly infinitely powerful behemoths, each in it’s own territory, to the social and economic catastrophes that they’ve brought down on the world.

However, while politicians like Klobuchar may not have the charisma and energy to set a fire under the population, it is the very deeds themselves that will eventually conspire to ignite an uprising and put pressure on the government and the courts to take real, substantive measures. And with young, new faces and minds such as possessed by Khan and Wu, ultimately there is a bulwark of criticism against monopolist abuses building in government and among the public at large.

“I am never saying, ‘Get rid of their products.’ But let’s have more of the products that give you more choices. You can keep one product, but it’s better to have other products, because we’re not China.”

Amy Klobuchar in Wired interview with Steven Levey

 In response to Klobuchar’s quote above Steven Levey in Wired wrote; “In other words, Facebook could keep it’s main app, but the public might benefit if Instagram and WhatsApp were not Mark Zuckerberg productions.” 

While this kind of “moderate” view may not be the earth shattering remedy that would turn the juggernauts around in a heartbeat, from Zuckerberg’s perspective it would not be ideal, to say the least.

Buy at

And, since we have seen the unfettered and viral growth of big tech, for at least a quarter century in some cases, and since there was a aura of hero worship afforded their leaders for most of that time, a break-up, such as that could ultimately turn out to be the beginning of more sweeping changes. A welcome outcome for those that have been harmed the various monopolistic structures that rule nearly all our lives, or at least it seems, at times.

Levey then asked Klobuchar why legislators so often embarrass themselves in hearings with irrelevant partisanship, clueless technical questions, and time-wasting grandstanding. Her response;

“Welcome to my life,” she says. “I get it—there’s going to be hearings that are irritating to people who know a lot. But that’s a great argument for tech to use because they don’t want this oversight.” 

Amy Klobuchar in Wired interview with Steven Levey

In defense of using the word “antitrust in the title, while also advocating its eradication in future she responded:

 “Well, I thought antitrust was an interesting word”. “It’s not only about this body of law; it’s also about not trusting anyone.”

Amy Klobuchar in Wired interview with Steven Levey

Perhaps it is more the course of history that led to the current and incredibly extreme situation and obscene dominance by big tech that is what should never have be trusted to arise in the first place.

Perhaps these firms will one day be seen, looking back from future generations, as a temporarily necessary, but evil mistake of history, as was the toothless interpretation of laws that led to their rise from “scrappy underdog startups” into malignant monopolies run amok.

Recent Articles:


Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

“GameStonks vs. Wall Street”: Heroes, Victims and Hogwash

Above: Photo Collage / Lynxotic / Adobe Stock

The story that won’t stop and the very fine people on all sides

No heroes, plenty of villains and lots and lots of nonsense and stupidity. But before getting into the nuts and bolts of this tragic “new” phenomena, take a second and think about all those media stories, in nearly every online media outlet, even hitting local news.

Each “take” on the story has a different slant and spin and almost none go into the boring and complex technical details of stock trading schemes. Most, it appears, are cheering on, implicitly, the “main street” buyers in an imaginary “war” on Wall Street.

[Disclaimer: Nothing in this article should be construed as legal or financial advice.]

That will get you more clicks.

A few will point out that GameStop, the company that is, which has no real prospect to rise from its comatose state into a Tesla-like world beater, regardless of how high the stock climbs for a few weeks or so.

And they will, rightly, warn that in this game, the “innocent” main street “investor” will lose in the end. Those are the boring stories. Not as many clicks for them.

The longer more accurate story of what is going on touches on the Great Depression, the Dot-com bubble, the financial crisis of 2008 and an understanding of stock trading that goes beyond the patience threshold of the general public and the media, even beyond most so-called Wall Street Insiders.

History does exist, even if it happened before your uncle was born

Up until 1934 many things were legal and rampant that today, technically, are not allowed. Insider Trading is the most obvious and best defined, look up Martha Stewart and jail time if you want to know more about that.

Collusion in the market is another less well known practice, also known as “pump & dump” that has as many variations as Ponzi schemes and, though illegal, will never be stamped out. The technical terms for Colluding in relation to stock trading are “securities fraud” or “market manipulation.”

Not to get technical but here’s an partial excerpt of the legal specifics:

15 U.S. Code § 78i – Manipulation of security prices

(a) – (2 To effect, alone or with 1 or more other persons, a series of transactions in any security registered on a national securities exchange, any security not so registered, or in connection with any security-based swap or security-based swap agreement with respect to such security creating actual or apparent active trading in such security, or raising or depressing the price of such security, for the purpose of inducing the purchase or sale of such security by others.

Enter Reddit’s r/wallstreetbets forum. Not saying that there is anything illegal about “loving” a company as a group and choosing to “support” it by buying its shares.

Even if the motivation (false and imagined) is to “hurt” the short sellers in some kind of Robin Hood attack, that’s probably not something the SEC would care about. Short selling professionals can take care of themselves.

Enter another part of history: the allegedly overvalued company effect

Attacking short sellers has become a kind of sport, particularly when it’s about an emotional connection that was partly responsible for a company’s shares being “overvalued” by traditional metrics in the first place. Once “overvalued” therefore, a target to be sold short by traders and hedge funds that believe in quaint things like profit to earnings ratios and the like.

While company’s share prices being “overvalued” is based on opinion and often wrong, there have been recent cases, since the NASDAQ bubble burst in 2000, that have added a somewhat new, larger, twist on the typical understanding of these types of situations.

Bubble is as bubble does

To take the biggest example, there is Amazon (AMZN) which would take a thousand page book to accurately and fully elaborate on, but for the sake of brevity a couple of points could be made.

It is well known that Amazon posted substantial losses for many years while the stock price generally continued to rise. This was attributed to shareholders’ willingness to forgo proof of financial success within the company and persisted in buying & holding in the hope that share prices would continue to rise and that the company eventually would show profits and more success.

All of that seemed to happen, in the case of Amazon, when viewed casually, and now there is a sense, among some, that overvaluation, in “outlier” cases, is no longer a valid reason to sell (or short) a stock. Everybody’s happy right?

The uses of inflated value is a sticky-wicket if you are the loser

Not everybody. Naturally there are many “bad” short sellers who likely lost by shorting Amazon during it’s unrelenting rise since 2000. They are unlikely happy.

But also, and here’s the rub, there were whole industries crushed by the power that came with that “over-valued” stock price that seems, from looking at reams of data, to have been used to finance the selling of goods at substantial losses for “as long as it takes” to damage competitors.

Ultimately, for Amazon, creating a possibly dangerous monopoly (or monopsony, as it were) position with the potential for further damage to not just competition, and the overall marketplace, but to society as a whole.

This is, of course, opinion but ask, if you will, the various agencies in charge of anti-trust actions for further concurring opinions.

Tesla is a whole other story, but a completely unique one

However, the situation is clearly not black and white. An alternate opinion could be held regarding the similar, yet very different, situation at Tesla (TSLA). Short interest throughout the rise? Absolutely. Overvaluation by traditional metrics, yup.

But in this case there is both a technological argument to be made, as well as a geopolitical / moral one, that the company’s wider mission: “Tesla’s mission is to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy” is a more than valid justification for wanting to support the company, in any way possible, including through the purchase of it’s purportedly overvalued shares.

That kind of goodwill is the x-factor that is now being twisted into a justification for pumping GameStop (GME) into the stratosphere, beyond the kind of overvaluations that either Amazon or Tesla ever enjoyed (and that’s saying a lot!) while downplaying the “dump” part of the “pump & dump” scenario.

Of course here’s the tragic part; the dump phase always comes, and in reality, is the whole point. Next… ooopsy, while writing this the dump started with GME in the form of a drop from around $500 per share to $226.

For a sub-$20 stock, of course, that’s still extremely high and there will no doubt be gyrations in both directions before the final drop back to obscurity.

Twas ever thus, but still not nice

But the tragedy is in the idea, bandied about in the media and amplified in social media infinitely, that there are “Robin Hood” actors in this game (not the company but the dude in the forest in the movie).

In the end there may be a few that knew all along that “dump” was an integral and necessary part of pump & dump and I am sure there will be plenty of celebration of their “genius” exploits.

But the focus from any of us in the media should be at the tragedy of those that got lost in the hype and stupidity and chose to offer themselves up to the gods of GameStop, the market and Reddit’s r/wallstreetbets as cannon fodder:

”I was in my early teens during the ’08 crisis. I vividly remember the enormous repercussions that the reckless actions by those on Wall Street had in my personal life, and the lives of those close to me. I was fortunate – my parents were prudent and a little paranoid, and they had some food storage saved up. When that crisis hit our family, we were able to keep our little house, but we lived off of pancake mix, and powdered milk, and beans and rice for a year. Ever since then, my parents have kept a food storage, and they keep it updated and fresh.”

”I bought shares a few days ago. I dumped my savings into GME, paid my rent for this month with my credit card, and dumped my rent money into more GME (which for the people here at WSB, I would not recommend). And I’m holding. This is personal for me, and millions of others.”

”You can drop the price of GME after hours $120, I’m not going anywhere. You can pay for thousands of reddit bots, I’m holding. You can get every mainstream media outlet to demonize us, I don’t care. I’m making this as painful as I can for you”.

ssauron on Reddit

Emphasis mine


Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac 

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Elon Musk rips off title ‘World’s Richest Man’ from Jeff Bezos: Net worth $180 billion

Above: Photo Collage / Lynxotic

Bezos knocked from #1 slot that he has held since 2017

According to Bloomberg, Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX just passed up Jeff Bezos as the world’s richest person. While this, in and of itself is a fact that many will likely fetishize, the real story here is why and how.

There could not, IMHO, be two people more diametrically opposed in terms of motivation, inspiration and method. Both obscenely rich now? Of course. In each case because of stock holdings in companies they founded? Right again.

After that it is all a study in contrasts and contradictions. For example, as recently as Christmas eve 20o8 Elon Musk was nearly bankrupt and was on the verge of losing both SpaceX and Tesla. Later as recently as 2019, Tesla was in a deep financial hole.

Was this a case of bad management? Apparently not. What it was related to was the prime difference between Bezos and Musk. Musk has always only had one mission. Was it having the world’s most dominant eCommerce company? (or any other kind). One that would destroy entire business categories and be called the “grim reaper” due to it’s destruction of markets and competitors?

No – Musk has always wanted to save the world from itself. Tesla’s stated official mission is:

Tesla’s mission is to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy. … Teslabelieves the faster the world stops relying on fossil fuels and moves towards a zero-emission future, the better.

Tesla / Elon Musk

Perhaps the cynical would say this is just some kind of veil hiding a capitalist and monopolist hunger a la Bezos. But they’d be wrong. Musk has openly stated that he is willing to share various proprietary technical information with his competitors if it would help the world’s transition to sustainable energy succeed faster. Would Bezos give away Amazon’s secrets. Take a guess.

Read more: Is Jeff Bezos soon to be World’s First Trillionaire? No Chance in Hell. Here’s Why

Another interesting tidbit – Both SpaceX and Tesla have publicly disavowed all copyright claims to their photos, videos or other marketing assets. They also do zero paid advertising. This is brilliant and has made them money in the end, but more importantly it is additional proof that it is the success of the mission, a mission that ultimately benefits all humanity more than any singe individual, that is paramount in his thinking.

Though Musk may not realize it, he and Steve Jobs are kindred spirits

The only other highly successful tech visionary that had this kind of focus on the real success, which can by definition only ever be success for all, if Steve Jobs. With so much misinformation and focus on meaningless stats, like whose stock is worth the most paper dollars (printed at will by the Fed) at any given moment, it is often misunderstood that the mission and the sincerity and effectiveness of the mission that will always matter in the end.

Read more: How Apple Created the Tech Universe and it Finally Makes Sense

Probably the greatest gift Bezos ever has or ever will give to humanity was via his divorce. Any other “charitable” act he will ever commit will be, first and foremost, have the goal of improving his image and stroking his massive ego.

Therein lies the difference.

Early Thursday Tesla shares (TSLA) rose by 6%, and further lifting the CEO’s stock holdings and options by $10 billion, resulting in the net worth of approximately $191 billion.  

Musk edged past the Amazon founder who is currently has the net worth of around $187 billion. 

He later added, “Well, back to work …”

Musk, who pinned the following past tweet from 2018 explained his intentions and how he will use money from his success, “You should ask why I would want money. The reason is not what you think. Very little time for recreation. Don’t have vacation homes or yachts or anything like that.”

Bill Gates is trailing as the third world’s richest person at $132 billion. 


Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

Find books on  Big Tech,  Politics, and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page.

Father of Fractals is Google Doodle Star: Who is Benoit Mandelbrot?

https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1329770660177047552/pu/vid/640x640/L6CqbeZPCfEz6Q9S.mp4?tag=10

Above: Photo Collage / Lynxotic

Mathematics and Philosophy meet in Fractal Pioneer’s Unique Career

Benoit Mandelbrot, the renowned French-American mathematician, died on October 14th, 2010 at the age of 85, and would have turned 96 today.  To celebrate, Google published a doodle in his honor.   An additional part of the celebration, Google launched an  interactive “Explore” feature to allow users to view the endless patterns of the Mandelbrot set. 

Click to see “Fractals and Chaos
and help Independent Bookstores.
Also available on Amazon.

If you don’t know what a fractal is, simply put, it is a never-ending pattern.  As defined by the Fractal Foundation: “They are infinitely complex patterns that are self-similar across different scales.  They are created by repeating a simple process over and over in an ongoing feedback loop“. There are many examples of fractals in nature, in fact virtually all natural phenomena can be seen as being fractal based. 

Mandelbrot is best known for fractal geometry, which is a term he coined in 1975 to describe a new branch of geometry that sought to explain of the irregular shapes and processes found within nature.  His research has contributed valuable knowledge in many different fields including physics, medicine, geology, art and even finance. 

Wide ranging influence continues to this day

His fractal theory have even found its way into pop culture, with graphical images created by his algorithm placed on t-shirts, posters, album covers, and even inspired a song called “Mandelbrot Set” by Jonathan Coulton and the text “The Colours of Infinity” by Arthur C. Clarke. 

The mathematician won numerous awards, including the prestigious ‘Wolf Prize” in 1993 for Physics and even had a small asteroid named in his honor in 2000 called ’27500 Mandelbrot’.

Mandelbrot made significant contributions to the study of financial markets as a fractal based system that conforms to the concept that all of nature, and the entire universe, is also fractal based. A great body of overlapping work exists between the studies of the financial markets done by Mandelbrot himself as well as the way his fractal concepts figured into the work of Ralph Nelson Elliott and Robert Prechter of the ElliottWave.com

The basis of Elliott’s theory is to describe price movements in financial markets as recurring, fractal wave patterns. This core insight was, in essence an outgrowth of the recognition that, when looking at various time frames in stock market charts, and therefore the human behavior that generated those patterns, the result is no different than looking at, for example, a sea coastline from various altitudes – which reveals a fractal. 

The insight that produced this theory not only established and inspired the stock trading strategy based on the Elliott Wave Theory, but also more recently led to Robert Prechter’s Socionomic Theory. Socionomics is a new science using the benefits of Elliott Wave Theory in understanding not only finance and economics but also social behavior, popular culture and politics which can be seen as interpreting nature using fractal based concepts. 


Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

Find books on Mandelbrot,  Big TechEconomics and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page.

Is Jeff Bezos soon to be World’s First Trillionaire? No Chance in Hell. Here’s Why

Above: Photo Collage / Lynxotic / Adobe Stock

Based on a 5 year extrapolation of the past into the future. Nope.

A recent “study” has been cited by a gaggle of digital media outlets. Featuring headlines such as “Jeff Bezos Could Be the World’s First Trillionaire, and the Overwhelming Response Is ‘Thanks I Hate It’ (Vice.com) and“Jeff Bezos could become world’s first trillionaire, and many people aren’t happy about it” (USA Today) and trending on twitter via the hashtag #bezostrillionaire and #RIPCapitalism.

The source of this nonsense projection appears to be a web site called “comparisun”, who are likely getting a lot of traffic from this, so congratulations.

Naturally, $150 billion of basically ill-gotten gains (more on that below) is enough to engender plenty of outrage, as it well should. The joke in this case is that this man’s net worth is almost as likely to be near zero in 5 years as to be a trillion dollars.

Read more: A Bully with a “Nice” Promise is Still just a Bully

Why’s that you ask? The answers are endless and all true, but here are a random few. Jeff Bezos wealth is mainly based on Amazon’s share price. That is likely to continue to be the case. That price is currently at all time highs due to many factors but one factor that will not likely continue is the buying that “investors” are engaging in based on the idea the our future economy will consist of Amazon, Netflix and some medical companies that will profit off the coronavirus pandemic.

Hmmm. How’s that likely to work out? Netflix has around 6,700 employees and are unlikely to hire the 20 million that just lost their jobs. Amazon has nearly a million workers but the vast majority are in terrible low paid jobs without bathroom breaks (allegedly).

Does that sound like an economy where stocks, even Amazon’s are likely to rise in price for 5 years straight? Nope. No jobs, no income, no prime .

The reality of the inner workings of his empire will one day be known. Midas touch terminated.

Digging deeper into the business model of the predatory monster from Seattle, there are also some difficult issues that will have to be faced. For example, it is a little known fact that nearly 60% of the income generated by the eCommerce site is based on fees charged to “marketplace sellers”. These sellers are so efficiently exploited that they are known to “source” new products from dumpsters in order to earn enough (after fees) to eat. To supplement what they eat out of those dumpsters, apparently. Don’t just read our article on this, try the Wall Street Journal article titled: “You Might Be Buying Trash on Amazon—Literally”.

And after the pleasure of that kind of “partnership” they are rewarded with zero job security and will be blamed for any and every problem, regardless if it is a small issue with a customer (all refunds and return postage are charged directly to the seller and is triggered at will by the host) or a P.R. problem (marketplace sellers are perfect scapegoats and weeding out the “bad apples” is the perfect cover, driving scrutiny away from the real issues).

The hatred for this system and the virtual impossibility to prosper has been growing steadily for years (ask Nike, Birkenstock or thousands of small companies driven out of business on a whim or tiny infraction by the behemoth) and will only grow. And then there’s the Gov. Both democrats and republicans have major issues with Bezos and his one man circus. Antitrust investigations are ongoing and not only in the US.

Read more: Dark Towers tells Deutsche Bank Story of Trump, post Bankruptcy yet Swimming in Loans

There are so many land mines waiting in the road ahead that that stock price has virtually no chance of rising, regardless of how many more competitors of the “grim reaper” are six feet under. Ironically, it is the lack of real competition, online or at the now soon-to-be-extinct shopping mall, that will focus even more of us on why this show needs to end, and soon, not expand at the obscene rate of the previous 5 years.

In a future dreamworld Bezos could have a trillion. In a better world he would be the one unemployed.


Find books on Robber BaronsSustainable EnergyEsoteric Spirituality and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac or subscribe to our newsletter.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page.

Income Absurdity: Majority Live Paycheck to Paycheck, while an Elite Few Hoard Astronomical Amounts

Comparing the Wealth of Jeff Bezos to those with less than $10,000 is like comparing Jupiter to a Golf Ball… Graphic by Lynxotic / Adobe

Income Divides So Vast We Cannot See The Forest For The Money Trees…

Income inequality has been talked about a lot over the past couple decades. The vast inequities between those who make the most and those who make the least amount of money have caused a noticeable change in the American populace. Class divides have become a significant topic of debate; socioeconomic status can dictate one’s entire wellbeing; and Socialism, once considered a quasi-dirty word in America, is now an ideology championed by several politicians and an enormous number of young voters.

Just how bad is income inequality, though?

As it turns out, our anxieties over the concept are well grounded, and class divides may even be worse than our minds are able to comprehend.

The Incomprehensible Disparity and Absurdity of Income Inequality:

According to data from the 2018 Sussie Global Wealth Report and the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, the number of people worldwide who have less than $10,000 total 3.2 billion. The bulk of those people fall in the $1,000-$10,000 range. Staggeringly, though, 1.5 billion of them have under $1,000. This is an enormous base, showing that the massive majority of people in the world are living on strained finances.

Bottom Net Worth of each bracketHow Many AdultsWho
$1001,500,000,000Subsistence Farmer
$1,0001,700,000,000Median U.S. Renter
$10,0001,300.000,000Median U.S. Family with no College
$100,000436,000,000A.O.C. after a few years in Congress
$1 million40,000,000UK’s current P.M.
$100 million49,000Exxon CEO
$1 billion2,700Berlusconi
$10 billion150Musk, etc.
$100 billion2Bezos and Gates

**Data: Credit Suisse Global Wealth Report 2018, Bloomberg, Federal Reserve

The difference between the billions of people at the bottom of this income pyramid, and the handful of people at the top is almost too much to truly conceptualize. To visualize it is to compare golf balls to planets. The number of people holding the majority of wealth is infinitesimal, hardly perceptible compared to those who live in fiscal straits.

Of course, there are certain variables that this global data may not take into account. For example, countries that do not have monetary economies or egalitarian societies that place less emphasis on individual earnings may fall into lower brackets, but they may measure their wealth in different ways.

Systemic Problems Rooted in Politicians’ Undeniable Marriage to Capitalism Portends a Bleak Future

However, from the Western perspective of a developed nation, this data is quite shocking. In the United States alone, income equality is alarming, almost too much to really wrap one’s head around. As aforementioned, the numbers are impossible to visualize in their entirety. While we can see people living in poverty and signs of inequity, the true extent of the issue is borderline unfathomable. We cannot imagine billions of people compared to figures in the single digits. The problem is evidently systemic at this point, the result of nearly 250 years of capitalism and hundreds of choices made by politicians, businessmen, and everyday citizens along the way.

Furthermore, while there has been increased awareness and conversation about this issue in recent years, the immediate future does not look promising of any reformation. In 2018, the first time ever in America, billionaires paid lower tax rates than the working class. This is in no small part due to the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, a cornerstone of President Trump’s trickledown economics plan.

Thus, the lower class citizens of our country are not just earning less than our billionaires, but they are also forking over a larger slice of their paycheck to the government. It all adds significant insult to the injury that is our persistent income inequality issue. 

Although we cannot visualize or even really even begin to understand income inequality all together, what we can see is that there is a form of unfairness at hand, that resources are distributed unevenly, and that many people are getting the short end of the stick that falls from the almighty money tree.


Find books on Big TechSustainable EnergyEconomics and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac and subscribe to our newsletter.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page.

Apple Card is Now Available: Daily Cash Expanded, All USA can Apply in Wallet App

https://www.apple.com/105/media/us/apple-card/2019/c90ec3fe-63dc-4557-b1ea-50d7539c76bd/films/this-is/apple-card-this-is-tpl-cc-us-2019_1280x720h.mp4

Uber and Uber Eats added to Daily Cash at 3%, more vendors expected soon…

As with most things financial, there are lots of details, but some interesting perks, particularly for frequent customers of Apple products.

Immediate sign up on your iPhone

First perk: no lengthily complicated application process. According to the pre-launch information (see video above), just go to the Wallet app and tap on the Apple Card interface (once the Card is live) and go through the simple activation steps.

Read More: 2019 Was a Huge Year for Apple: Here are some Milestones that will Lead to the “Apple Decade” in the 2020s

Once the sign up steps are complete, you can immediately start using the card as you would Apple Pay.

Small but expected caveat: For non-Apple Pay purchases in a traditional store setting you will need to wait until your physical card arrives in the mail. Also, although a pre-approved status will often be in place, availability is still subject to qualification, like any credit card.

Using the Card

The card will function as would any other card in your wallet for Apple Pay. This includes online purchases and in-store checkout where you normally would use Apple Pay.

You can designate the Apple Card as your default payment method in your wallet for purchases using your iPhone, iPad, Mac or Apple Watch.

https://video-lynxotic.akamaized.net/AppleCard_Keynote_M.mov
video of keynote announcing launch of apple card

The MasterCard Goldman Sachs Connection

The extended uses for the digital and physical version of the card are enabled through the partnership between MasterCard and Apple. You will be able to use the Apple Card anywhere that a MasterCard is accepted.

Goldman Sachs is the credit provider for your Apple Card and they will set your interest rate based, as would be expected, on your current credit score. Rates are projected to be in the range of 13.24% to 24.24% which is below the average in the US.

An extended fixed payment system is likely to be offered for large purchases according to the pre-release data.

Read More: 2020 Pulitzer Picks: “The Nickel Boys” Makes History, “A Strange Loop” and Susan Sontag Bio Take Gold

Main Perks and Advantages

There are many unconventional and improved aspects to the use and especially the user experience associated with the new card. In the keynote announcement earlier this year (see video above) a great emphasis was made on the ways that the project was focused on improving the experience and helping users attain a healthier financial lifestyle.

This includes various features designed to help reduce interest charges, not only by offering lower overall rates, but by giving the user options and calculations that can provide payment alternatives to the traditional “minimum monthly” payment currently the norm.

Payments can be made from your linked bank account or can be transferred from Apple Cash in your Wallet app.

There is no annual fee for the card, no international fees and no fee for exceeding your credit limit or making a late payment. Also, there is not increased interest rate penalty, per se, for late payment, which is common in some other credit card accounts. Late payment will, naturally, result in interest accrual, but based on your current rate.

There is an separate app, particularly useful on iPad, which does not have the Wallet app, where data on transactions, payments and other details are provided. This, in typical Apple style, is far superior to any credit card app interface from banks and lenders.

Rewards and “Daily Cash”

Rather than a points system commonly seen on traditional credit card accounts, the Apple Card has a cash back system which can kick back up to 3% on a daily basis.

They call this “Daily Cash” and, as the name implies, your rebated cash will be credited to your account every 24 hours and be directly transferred to your Apple Cash account. If you do not sign up for Apple Cash, you will get your rebates sent to your bank account monthly.

Percentages vary, 3% is for all purchases made directly from Apple, 2% for all Apple Pay transactions and 1% for using the physical card at any non-Apple Pay retailer.

There is no cost to transfer your rewards cash to your bank account and this can take from one to three days. There will be an option to get instant transfers, which will incur a 1% fee. The transfers are done through the Apple Cash card from the Wallet app to the linked bank account.

Best Features and Conclusion

The overall sense is that this is going to be a very popular offering, based on the positive attributes of the card and the deal.

Although the terms are clearly slanted towards encouraging financial activity benefiting the emerging Apple financial eco-system, with the reward percentage on direct Apple purchases and Apple Pay coming in higher than the “out of network” transactions made with the physical card only, the rest of the perks are more than enough to pique the interest of a great number of iPhone users.

The titanium card appearance, styling and feel will attract many for that reason alone. Quel chic! And it is likely that the card will cause an increase in Apple Pay transactions, with double cash back for pulling out your iPhone instead of the physical card.

Ultimately, the software tools enabling privacy – no data to Apple and Goldman Sachs promising never to use or sell your data – along with the fantastic tools for tracking transactions, spend, payments and interest are perhaps the most likely to create love.

Who doesn’t hate dealing with credit card companies and their antiquated interfaces and systems? Some credit card providers do not even allow automatic payment scheduling, apparently hoping you will pay late so they can rack up those late payment penalty fees. Doing away with even the worst, most evil, aspects of credit card accounts is already a huge step forward.

Let’s hope that Apple will manage this as well as it appears. It looks like a top flight offering that has plenty of advantages that make it head and shoulders above the pack, and, for iPhone users it seems like a “must have” if there ever was one.

  • Easy sign-up on iPhone
  • Accepted worldwide (wherever Mastercard is available)
  • Up to 3% cash back
  • Daily cash back
  • No fees
  • Engraved Titanium physical card with concealed numbers
  • Spending tracking
  • Clear transaction labeling with more data
  • Built-in Privacy

Find books on Big TechSustainable EnergyEconomics and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac and subscribe to our newsletter.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page.