Tag: Economy

Private Equity’s Greed Is Catching Up: Why Ordinary Americans Will Pay the Price

Posted on by Nkozi Knight

April 30, 2025 • By NKOZI KNIGHT

Many of us do not realize that private equity firms has always been about extraction, not creation. The model is simple. Borrow heavily, buy a company, slash jobs and benefits, sell off assets, and walk away with fees long before the damage shows. Communities are left with shuttered stores, abandoned buildings, bankrupt chains, and broken promises.

The list of casualties is long. Toys “R” Us was loaded with more than $5 billion dollars in debt by Bain Capital and KKR before it collapsed, taking 30,000 jobs with it. Payless ShoeSource closed its doors, erasing 18,000 jobs. J. Crew, Gymboree, Shopko, Forever 21, and Sears each followed the same path. Behind nearly every failure was a private equity deal that turned once-profitable companies into vehicles for debt. Blackstone, the largest of them all, drew criticism for gutting nursing homes and rental housing, where residents and tenants bore the consequences. Carlyle, Apollo, and Sycamore Partners engineered deals that enriched executives while leaving behind bankruptcies across retail, energy, and health care.

The damage has never been limited to debt. Private equity firms extract billions in fees on top of what they load onto companies. They sell the land and buildings, forcing the very businesses they own to pay rent back to them. In franchise models, they skim off royalty payments while cutting services and staff. They charge management fees to companies they already control, ensuring that even if a business fails, the firm still profits. These practices are not side effects. They are the business model.

For years the system ran on cheap money. With interest rates near zero, debt was abundant and investors were eager. Firms could buy, bleed, and flip companies in two or three years. That era is gone. Interest rates now sit above five percent. Debt costs more, buyers are scarce, and the IPO market has dried up. Firms are stuck holding companies that are drowning under the very leverage designed to enrich their owners.

The numbers are staggering. Nearly $12 trillion dollars in private equity assets now sit unsold. Exit activity has collapsed more than 70 percent since 2021. To raise cash, firms are borrowing against their own portfolios with NAV loans or dumping stakes at steep discounts on the secondary market. Even the giants like Blackstone, KKR, Apollo, Carlyle, Bain are stuck with bad debt no one wants. They cannot sell, yet their investors are demanding cash.

The quiet truth is that these firms are already maneuvering for Washington’s help. During the 2008 financial crisis, banks and insurers were rescued with taxpayer dollars. Private equity, which profited handsomely off that same collapse, is positioning itself for similar treatment.

This is not just an elite problem. It is a national one. When private equity runs out of road, it is not the billionaire partners who suffer. It is the workers whose jobs are cut, the retirees whose pensions cannot meet obligations, the students whose tuition rises because endowments cannot keep pace, and the taxpayers who are asked to backstop the system.

The parallels to 2008 are frightening. Then it was mortgage backed securities. Now it is unsellable companies and illiquid funds. In 2008, families lost homes and jobs while Wall Street was saved. Today the scale is even larger. With trillions in assets frozen, the next bailout could dwarf the last one.

Meanwhile, private equity’s destruction also extends into America’s hospitals and nursing homes and people are paying with their lives. Studies show that Medicare patients undergoing emergency surgeries in private equity–owned hospitals are 42 percent more likely to die within 30 days compared to those treated in community hospitals . A nationwide study found infections, falls, and other preventable adverse events increased following private equity takeovers of hospitals . Even the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services condemned the impact, warning that private equity ownership of nursing homes led to an 11 percent increase in patient deaths .

Recent reporting shows the financial calculus behind these tragedies. Nursing home operators in New York’s Capital Region diverted Medicare and Medicaid funds through inflated rent and bogus salaries. That left facilities chronically understaffed and suffering neglect so severe that it led to cases of serious injury and death .

By turning hospitals and nursing homes into profit centers rather than care centers, private equity firms aren’t just bankrupting businesses, they are literally killing people. And when that business model collapses, it will be everyday Americans who pay the cost once again.

The message is not subtle. If private equity’s gamble fails, the richest players will once again be saved. For ordinary Americans, the reckoning will look like it always does. Lost jobs. Higher taxes. Vanishing pensions. Rising tuition. And another generation paying for someone else’s greed.

This is the American cycle. The profits are privatized, the losses are socialized, and working families are forced to carry the cost.

The Private Equity Trap: How Harvard, Yale, and Princeton Got Caught in a Liquidity Crisis

Posted on by Nkozi Knight

For decades, private equity was the hottest corner of finance. The model was simple. Buy a company, cut costs, load it with debt and fees, polish the books, and sell it again within two to three years for a hefty profit. It was called the “flip,” and it made fortunes for firms like Blackstone, KKR, and Carlyle. Endowments and pensions rushed to get a piece of it.

That model is now broken.

The exits that once came fast and lucrative have slowed to a crawl. A world of near-zero interest rates is gone. Debt that once financed buyouts at minimal cost now comes with punishing interest, squeezing margins and stretching holding periods. Instead of flipping companies in two years, funds are sitting on assets for six, seven, even ten years. The portfolio backlog is staggering: more than $12 trillion worth of private equity assets sit unsold worldwide.

And at the center of this crisis are the universities that built their wealth on the promise of private equity. Harvard, Yale, and Princeton reshaped modern investing by betting heavily on illiquid alternatives. They now face the consequences of that bet.

The Death of the Flip

The two-year turnaround was never sustainable, but for a time it worked. Cheap debt fueled endless rounds of leveraged buyouts, where firms borrowed heavily, stripped assets, cut staff, and pushed companies back to market at inflated valuations.

But the cycle depended on two things: cheap money and eager buyers. Both have disappeared. The Federal Reserve’s rate hikes have doubled and tripled the cost of debt financing. Buyers are cautious, corporate balance sheets are tighter, and the IPO window remains largely shut.

Exit activity tells the story. In 2021, private equity firms sold $840 billion worth of companies. By 2023, that figure had collapsed to $234 billion, a drop of 72 percent. Even with a partial rebound in 2024 to $468 billion, exits are far too low to clear the backlog. Funds are holding twice as many assets as they did in 2019, but are selling them at the same pace as five years ago.

Without exits, distributions to investors dry up. Endowments that expected cash back to fund university budgets are left waiting.

Interest Rates as the Choke Point

Private equity’s entire model is built on leverage. A firm that buys a company for $10 billion may finance $7 billion of that price with debt, leaving just $3 billion of investor equity. If interest rates are low, debt is cheap, and any improvement in the business magnifies returns.

But with rates at five percent or higher, the math no longer works. Debt service eats into earnings. Refinancing becomes expensive or impossible. Companies bought at lofty valuations in 2020 and 2021 are now struggling to cover interest costs, let alone generate attractive profits for resale.

For the funds that hold them, paper valuations remain high, but real buyers demand discounts. That gap between reported NAV and market reality is another reason sales have slowed.

The Mechanics of Desperation

To keep investors from revolting, firms have engineered liquidity out of thin air. NAV loans lines of credit secured by the assets in a fund allow managers to borrow cash and hand it back to investors as if it were a distribution. Continuation funds where a firm sells a portfolio company from one of its funds into another fund it also controls in effect creates the illusion of an exit, while extending the holding period indefinitely.

On the investor side, endowments and pensions have turned to the secondary market, selling their stakes in private equity funds to buyers willing to take them at a discount. In 2024, secondary volume hit a record $155 billion. Harvard sold $1 billion worth of fund stakes. Yale is preparing to sell as much as $6 billion. The New York City pension system sold $5 billion. Buyers snapped them up at 10 to 15 percent discounts to stated value. For venture portfolios, the discounts were as steep as 50 percent.

These maneuvers do not solve the problem. They buy time. The only true fix is exits with real sales, IPOs, or recapitalizations and the industry is years away from clearing the overhang.

Case Studies: The Ivy League Squeeze

Harvard has a $53 billion endowment, the largest in the world. Nearly 40 percent of it is tied up in private equity. In April 2025, Harvard moved to sell $1 billion of those stakes through Jefferies, while simultaneously planning to issue $750 million in bonds. The official explanation is liquidity management, not distress. But the resemblance to 2008, when Harvard was forced to borrow billions to cover private equity calls, is unmistakable.

Yale built the “Yale model,” with nearly half of its $41 billion endowment allocated to private assets. For years, this made Yale the envy of institutional investors. But in 2024, Yale returned just 5.7 percent, compared to 13.5 percent for a basic stock-bond index. Now it is exploring a $6 billion secondary sale, nearly 15 percent of its endowment. The sale is not about strategy. It is about cash.

Princeton has a smaller endowment, about $35 billion, but the same exposure. Its longtime CIO Andrew Golden called 2023 the worst liquidity environment he had ever seen. Princeton raised $1.4 billion in bonds to shore up its balance sheet. Like Harvard and Yale, it insists the strategy is intact. But the reality is that illiquidity has become a liability.

Why This Matters to Everyday Americans

It is tempting to see this as an elite problem, billion dollar universities mismanaging their fortune. But it is not.

Endowments fund scholarships, financial aid, and core research. If Harvard or Yale faces a liquidity squeeze, it means fewer students receive aid. It means tuition rises to fill the gap. It means labs lose funding and staff lose jobs. What begins as a crisis in private equity becomes a crisis for students and families.

The same holds true in pensions. State retirement systems have billions tied up in private equity. When distributions dry up, they cannot meet obligations to retirees. That shortfall has to be covered by raising taxes, cutting benefits, or, in the worst case, turning to the federal government for relief. For millions of working and middle class Americans, this is not abstract. It is their retirement on the line.

The parallels to 2008 are chilling. Then, it was mortgage backed securities that turned toxic. Homeowners defaulted, banks failed, and Washington rushed in with taxpayer bailouts. Families lost houses, jobs, and savings, while Wall Street was rescued. Today, the scale is even larger. With twelve trillion dollars in unsold assets stuck on private equity books, the next bailout could dwarf 2008.

Imagine the politics of that moment. A populist like Donald Trump could frame it as Ivy League elites and Wall Street executives begging for lifelines while ordinary Americans pay the price. But the structural interdependence is real. If endowments and pensions buckle, the pressure on Washington to intervene may be irresistible. The federal government does not have the fiscal room to absorb another trillion dollar rescue, yet that may be exactly what is asked of it.

The burden would not fall on universities or private equity firms alone. It would fall on taxpayers, on students already struggling with debt, on workers who depend on pensions, on families already squeezed by inflation and high borrowing costs. In short, it would fall on the very people who had no hand in creating the mess.

Private equity sold itself as the smartest bet of modern finance. But the two year flip is dead, interest rates have choked the model, and endowments that once trusted in illiquidity now find themselves trapped. For everyday Americans, the lesson is as clear as it was in 2008: when the smartest people in the room gamble with other people’s money and lose, it is everyone else who ends up paying the price.

Behind Washington’s Latest Bipartisan Marvel: The Quiet Power Grab in the GENIUS Act

Posted on by Nkozi Knight

Date: Wisconsin, June 28, 2025

When the Senate voted 68-30 last week to pass the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act, or better known as the GENIUS Act, the moment barely registered in a news cycle crowded with updates from the Diddy trial, ominous talk of World War III, and who does and does have have nuclear warheads a in the Middle East. Yet the bill is poised to reshape American money itself, setting the stage for bank-issued digital dollars and a vastly expanded federal role in everyday payments that will impact every Americans for the next decade.

House leaders now plan to bundle the measure with a separate market-structure bill, the CLARITY Act, and move both to the floor in a single vote as early as the week of July 7. President Trump has already signaled he will sign the package “without delay.”  

A $265 Million Campaign Pays Off

Passage caps the costliest crypto lobbying blitz on record. Industry groups and super PACs spent more than $265 million during the 2024 election cycle, which is nearly double the previous year, to elect crypto-friendly candidates and draft the very language that now governs them.  

Much of that money flowed through Fairshake, a super PAC bankrolled by Coinbase, Ripple and venture fund a16z, which alone poured over $130 million into congressional races. Thirty-three of its thirty-five endorsed candidates won which ties them with AIPAC.

The bill’s corporate sponsors read like a who’s-who of finance:

JPMorgan Chase filed a trademark for JPMD, a deposit-backed token it can now launch on Coinbase’s Base network.   PayPal and several regional banks lobbied for an exemption that lets them issue “payment stablecoins” under state charters.   World Liberty Financial, the Trump-family venture behind the USD1 stablecoin, secured a new $100 million investment from a UAE fund days before the vote.  

What the Bill Actually Does

This bill re-labels stablecoins as “payment systems,” taking them out of securities law and handing primary oversight to the Fed and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, creating an aura of legitimacy. It also creates a licensing moat: only banks and “permitted issuers” that meet 1-to-1 reserve, audit and AML rules can mint tokens—locking smaller DeFi projects outside the gate. Mandates monthly disclosures of reserves but allows issuers to hold short-term Treasuries, providing fresh demand for federal debt.   Bars members of Congress and their immediate families from trading stablecoins—but notably leaves the White House exempt. Senator Elizabeth Warren called this “a loophole big enough to drive a truck full of crypto through.”

The Bipartisan Pattern: Crypto and Foreign Wars

The only other legislation that has moved this smoothly across party lines in recent years is foreign-aid spending for Ukraine and Israel. In April 2024 Congress passed a $95 billion package for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan with overwhelming majorities in both chambers, with all packages hovering over $300 billion in the last 5 years.

Critics argue the same donor class such as defense contractors abroad and crypto financiers at home, dictates both agendas. “If it involves new weapons or new money rails, Congress finds consensus,” says Sarah Bryer, a former Senate banking staffer now at watchdog group Public Citizen. “Everything else stalls.”

What Gets Missed While Washington Innovates

Poverty: The Supplemental Poverty Measure rose to 12.9 percent in 2023, the first increase in a decade.   Homelessness: More than 770,000 Americans were unhoused on a single night in January 2024, the highest count ever recorded.   Disaster Recovery: Communities from Maui to East Palestine still wait on promised federal funds years after their crises. To date the U.S. Congress has held nine hearings but passed no comprehensive relief bills for any of these victims.

Yet lawmakers devoted 18 months of hearings and four mark-ups to ensure banks can mint digital dollars.

A New Architecture for Control

Civil-liberties attorneys warn that putting money on permissioned blockchains invites mission creep. Once every transaction is traceable:

Payments can be geofenced or frozen at the click of a regulator’s dashboard. Political dissenters can be de-banked without ever seeing a courtroom. Cash’s untraceable refuge disappears, replaced by tokens that obey code written in Washington and often debugged on Wall Street.

Senator Warren, one of just eleven Democrats opposed, likened the bill to the 2000 Commodities Futures Modernization Act, which green-lit credit-default swaps before the 2008 crash. “We’re repeating history,” she warned on the floor. 

What Happens Next

If the House delivers the bill to President Trump before the July 4 recess, bank-branded stablecoins could hit the market within a year. JPMorgan’s JPMD pilot is ready; PayPal has quietly updated code to let its wallet swap into compliant tokens.

For ordinary Americans, the promise is faster payments, at least until the rules change. “Digital dollars are programmable,” notes Bryer. “Today they clear instantly. Tomorrow they refuse to buy a bus ticket to the wrong protest.”

The Bottom Line

The GENIUS Act is not just a regulatory tweak; it is the blueprint for a cashless, centrally mediated economy shaped by the largest banks, the loudest lobbyists and a White House with skin in the game. That it passed under the radar says as much about the media distractions of the moment as it does about the power of money in Washington.

As many households grapple with rising rents, increased living expenses, stubborn poverty and record homelessness, Congress has found rare harmony over who controls the future of money itself. When the dust settles, Americans may discover their new digital wallet comes with fewer rights than the battered leather one it replaced.

While You’re Watching Game 7 of the NBA Finals, We’re Being Sold Out Piece by Piece

Posted on by Nkozi Knight

We’re not watching a dramatic fall of America. There are no breaking news alerts about the end. No explosions in the streets. No economic sirens.

But make no mistake….something terrible is happening.

Piece by piece, decision by decision, we are being sold out. Our labor, our taxes, our future, it is all being extracted. And while it happens, we are told to look the other way while letting AI take many of our jobs.

Watch the game. Scroll the feed. Place a bet. Argue online about culture wars that do not affect your rent, your hospital bill, or your ability to afford groceries.

Meanwhile, the money keeps flowing. Out of your paycheck. Out of your neighborhood. Out of this country. Straight into the hands of foreign governments, defense contractors, and elite interests.

This is not the dramatic fall of a nation. It is a transfer of wealth, security, and stability away from ordinary Americans and toward a system that was never built to serve us. It is a system that acts globally, extracts locally, and survives only as long as we do not look directly at it.

You can call it a government. You can call it a machine. But what it really functions as is an empire. And the longer we ignore it, the more it takes.

The Cost of That Empire Is Being Paid in Evictions and Empty Refrigerators

While your tax dollars are used to fund missile systems in Israel, people across the United States are struggling just to keep a roof over their heads. Since 2020, the median price of a home has risen by more than 40 percent. Interest rates have climbed above 7 percent, making homeownership unreachable for millions (National Association of Realtors, 2024).

At the same time, Americans like myself, carry over $1.7 trillion in student loan debt. Medical bankruptcies remain the most common form of personal financial ruin. A premature baby that has to stay in a neonatal intensive care unit for over a month can cost well over a million dollars. On top of that, more than half of the country cannot afford an unexpected five hundred dollar emergency.

And yet, every year, tens of billions of dollars are approved for foreign aid without hesitation.

Israel receives more U.S. taxpayer money than any other nation on Earth. Since 1948, it has received over 300 billion dollars in aid, including nearly 4 billion annually in guaranteed military funding (Congressional Research Service, 2023).

That money has helped fund a public healthcare system, subsidized childcare, and modern infrastructure. Israel’s students have new schools. Their citizens have access to doctors without going bankrupt.

Meanwhile, in American cities, teachers work second jobs. Classrooms go without books. People drive across state lines to afford prescriptions. And in cities like Flint, Michigan and Jackson, Mississippi, families still live without safe drinking water.

This is not about scarcity. It is about priorities.

An Economy Built to Keep Us Consuming

We are told that the economy is doing well. But it only looks strong on paper because we are constantly spending to survive.

Wages have remained flat for decades, while the cost of everything else has gone up. Food, gas, housing, tuition, and insurance have all exploded. But instead of fixing the system, the solution we are offered is more debt.

–Buy now, pay later.

–Zero percent financing.

–Monthly subscriptions for everything, even the essentials.

Our economy runs on credit cards and desperation.

We are not building wealth. We are surviving one paycheck at a time, and no one is willing to admit it.

And when that stress becomes too much, we are handed another solution, a distraction. Sometimes it’s a RICO case of a famous celebrity, other times it’s the United States bombing an empty nuclear facility in Iran, and other times it’s something as simple as sports and sports betting.

There is always something to pull our focus. Sports betting is now a multi-billion dollar industry thanks to ESPN, Draft Kings, Prize Picks, and MGM Sports betting. On television, sex-laden reality shows dominate prime time and paid subscriptions. Viral celebrity drama trends daily. Meanwhile, airstrikes in Gaza or explosions in Tehran are buried beneath all this noise but we pay for all of it.

None of this is random. It is a carefully designed system.

We Fund a Better Life for Others While We Are Told to Settle for Less

The average American is constantly being told to sacrifice.

Tighten your belt.

Use credit.

Be patient.

Inflation is temporary.

Work harder.

But there is no austerity when it comes to military aid.

There is always money for war. There is always money for foreign governments. There is always money to rebuild somewhere else in a land most have never been, but there is nothing for Maui, East Palestine, Flint, New Orleans, and many other cities in America.

Since 1948, Israel has received over 300 billion dollars in U.S. assistance (Reuters, 2024). That money has helped create one of the best publicly funded healthcare and education systems in the world—for a country with fewer people than New York City.

In America, we have veterans sleeping on the street in every major city.

We have kids learning from worksheets because their school cannot afford books.

We have families rationing insulin and choosing between medication and rent.

This is not just a funding issue. It is a values issue.

We are paying for the stability of others while our own communities are crumbling.

They Keep Us Distracted So We Do Not See It

Every time the conversation gets too close to real issues, the distractions flood in.

The headlines suddenly shift, and Operation Mockingbird goes full tilt. The scandals erupt more salacious than the prior one. The outrage machine gets turns on, and Americans are pinned against each other.

We are told to obsess over celebrities, argue over culture wars, and follow political soap operas like they are sports teams.

This is not a coincidence. It is the only way this corrupt system survives.

Because if we stop fighting each other, we might start asking the real questions.

Where is the money going?

Why can’t we afford basic services while funding foreign militaries?

Why is our economy built on debt and distraction?

And who exactly is benefiting from all of this since it’s not US?

This Is Not Incompetence. It Is a Strategy.

The truth is that the United States has all the resources it needs to take care of its people….if it wanted to.

But we do not. Not because we can’t. But because we are not supposed to.

We are expected to work, consume, and remain distracted.

We are expected to stay tired, stay anxious, and stay divided.

And we are expected to believe that any attempt to change the system is unrealistic, unpatriotic, or impossible.

But the truth is, the system is not broken. It is functioning exactly as designed.

It is designed to take.

It is designed to distract.

And it is designed to leave us wondering why we are doing everything right and still falling behind.

Can You Relate

If you are working harder than ever but getting nowhere, you are not alone.

If you are wondering why another country has healthcare and you cannot afford a routine checkup, you are asking the right question.

If you are tired of being told that sacrifice is patriotic while billionaires and foreign allies get blank checks, then maybe it is time we stop playing along.

They do not fear Iran. They do not fear China. They do not fear Russia.

What they fear is that you will start paying attention.

Because the moment we stop watching the show and start watching the system, the game is over.

Sources

National Association of Realtors. (2024). Median home price trends

Congressional Research Service. (2023). U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel

Reuters. (2024). Israel aid totals and annual packages

CNBC. (2023). 80 percent of Americans live paycheck to paycheck

Cato Institute. (2021). U.S. Military Footprint: 750 bases in 80 countries

Al Jazeera. (2021). U.S. global base presence overview

Beneath the Clothes We Donate: How America’s Fast Fashion Addiction is lDrowning Ghana

Posted on by Nkozi Knight

By Nkozi Knight


A young boy stands amid mountains of discarded clothing and plastic waste on Ghana’s Chorkor Beach

Accra, Ghana –

The beaches of Ghana should be sanctuaries. Places where waves kiss the sand and children play in peace. But on the shores of Chorkor Beach, the tide doesn’t bring seashells. It brings sweaters from Shein, leggings from Lululemon, and Target tees soaked in salt and filth.

Week after week, a deluge of secondhand clothing arrives in Ghana from the United States, the United Kingdom, and other industrialized nations. Billed as “donations,” these shipments are not gifts. They are refuse. They are the castoffs of a culture addicted to overconsumption and numbed to consequence.

Ghana receives roughly 15 million garments a week, much of it dumped by consumers who believe they’re “doing good” by donating to local bins outside of Walmart or church parking lots. In reality, 40 percent of these clothes are unusable trash, exported to West Africa in bulk and eventually dumped, burned, or strewn across the coastline. Kantamanto Market in Accra, once a center of textile trade and reuse, has become overwhelmed and swamped by low-quality fast fashion designed to fall apart before its first wash.

“We are drowning in your clothing,” said a local vendor in a recent BBC Africa Eye documentary. “These aren’t donations. They are poison.”

This isn’t hyperbole. Synthetic fabrics, often polyester, don’t biodegrade. They clog drains, suffocate marine life, and release microplastics into the ecosystem. Some are so contaminated with dyes and industrial chemicals that simply burning them chokes nearby residents. Because Western brands outsource both the problem and the blame, few Americans ever witness the wreckage.

The Cult of the New

American corporations drive this destruction through a business model of planned obsolescence and psychological manipulation. Fast fashion giants like Shein, Fashion Nova, Boohoo, and H&M churn out hundreds of new styles weekly. And we buy them. On impulse. To feel something. To impress no one. To post once on social media and then forget.

A 2023 Vogue Business investigation reported that the average American throws away 81 pounds of clothing per year. That’s nearly 13 billion pounds of textile waste, most of which is either burned or exported. Out of sight. Out of mind.

The 2024 HBO documentary Brandy Hellville and the Cult of Fast Fashion peeled back the curtain on this global racket, revealing how corporations knowingly flood developing nations with clothing that cannot be sold, recycled, or reused. These companies profit from both ends of the pipeline, selling cheap clothes and then writing off their “donations” for tax breaks.

But in Ghana, the beaches tell the truth. Children walk barefoot through piles of wet fabric. Fishermen cast their nets into waters tangled with discarded bras and sweaters. Clothes meant for dignity now strip the land of its own.

Stop Pretending It’s Helping

The problem is systemic, but it starts at home.

Donating clothes in bins is not inherently virtuous. In fact, it’s part of the illusion. The vast majority of those clothes don’t go to shelters or local families. They are sold in bulk to global brokers who profit off Africa’s environmental misery.

We are not helping. We are offloading guilt.

The solution cannot be just more donation or wishful recycling. It begins with consuming less. Buy intentionally. Wear things longer. Mend. Repurpose. Swap. Or better yet, just don’t buy unless you need to. The world doesn’t need another $9 tee you’ll forget in a week.

And for the clothes that have truly reached their end? Perhaps it’s time to explore municipal incineration, compostable textiles, or clothing deposit programs where manufacturers are held financially responsible for their waste. We regulate plastic straws more than we regulate stores like Forever 21, H&M, and Walmart.

A Final Reckoning

Americans, if we do not change, beaches like Chorkor will disappear, buried under the weight of our vanity and excess. What once were coastal communities tied to fishing, family, and resilience are now becoming textile graveyards. The soil is dying. The water is choking. The air burns with the fumes of our unwanted clothes that takes 200 years to naturally decompose.

This is no longer just about fashion. It’s about justice.

Because let’s be honest: we know who’s responsible.

The responsible parties include: Shein, H&M, Zara, Forever 21, Fashion Nova, Boohoo, PrettyLittleThing, Temu, Target, Walmart, Old Navy, Uniqlo, Gap, Amazon’s in-house brands, and countless Instagram and Tik Tok shops. These corporations flood the global market with billions of garments each year. Their business model thrives on overproduction, cheap labor, and psychological manipulation. They manufacture the illusion of need. They sell you a fantasy of trendiness and self-expression at the cost of someone else’s environment and dignity.

And we, the consumers, buy in. Often literally.

Every impulse buy, every “haul” video, every $5 tee or $10 dress contributes to a planetary cycle of destruction. We wear it once, toss it in a bin, and tell ourselves we did something good by “donating.” But we’re not recycling. We’re relocating the problem. Our discarded clothes are not going to those in need. They’re going to countries like Ghana, Kenya, Chile, and Haiti, nations without the infrastructure to process the sheer volume of waste we produce.

Because the truth is: your closet might be clean, but someone else is paying the price for it.

And they’re paying with their soil, their seas, and their breath.

We need a global reckoning. Not just with corporations, but with ourselves.

Buy less. Buy better. Demand accountability. Push for laws that make brands responsible for the full life cycle of their products.

Until we stop treating clothing as disposable, we will continue to treat people the same way.

Boys play in the sea diving off a pile of clothing found washed up on the beach at Jamestown, Accra(Image: Adam Gerrard / Daily Mirror

For a video documentary, watch:

Ghana: Fast fashion dumping dumping ground

Further Reading and Resources:

Greenpeace Report: Fast Fashion, Slow Poison

HBO Documentary: Brandy Hellville & The Cult of Fast Fashion

AP News Article: Fast fashion waste is polluting Africa

The Guardian: Where does the UK’s fast fashion end up?

What Happened to America First? Early Policies Say Anything But…

Posted on by Nkozi Knight

5128-5130 W. Center St. and 5124-5126 W. Center St. Photo by Jeramey Jannene.

MILWAUKEE — From 1st and Center Street west to Sherman Boulevard, abandoned buildings sit like open wounds on both sides of the street, remnants of factories, stores like Family Dollar, and once-thriving Black-owned businesses that used to anchor Milwaukee’s north side. For residents here, the phrase “America First” hits different. It’s not just a slogan. It’s a question.

What happened to America First?

When Donald J. Trump returned to the White House in January, he promised a revival of the economic nationalism that swept him into power in 2016. He talked about lifting up working-class Americans, restoring pride, and rebuilding the nation from the inside out. But early policies out of Washington tell a different story, a story where billions are sent overseas, while communities like this one are left to decay.

Foreign Priorities, Local Consequences

In the first 100 days of Trump’s second term, more than $22 billion has gone to foreign military aid, including a $3.8 billion annual commitment to Israel until 2028, and billions more to Ukraine. Meanwhile, federal programs that fund youth service, veteran reintegration, and inner-city job development are facing the axe.

The Corporation for National and Community Service , the agency behind AmeriCorps, is on the chopping block with $400 Million already cut from the budget in April. In Milwaukee, where City Year corps members help stabilize struggling schools, the impact will be immediate. “These cuts aren’t abstract,” said Vanessa Brown, a local educator and Marquette University graduate. “They take away people, resources, and hope.”

A Tale of Two Budgets

Supporters of the Trump administration say the military spending is about protecting American interests abroad. But on Milwaukee’s North Side, where gun violence, underfunded schools, and housing insecurity dominate daily life, the disconnect feels personal.

“You can walk five blocks and count ten boarded-up or burned down houses,” said Art Jones, a university professor and youth mentor. “But we’ve got money to build houses in Ukraine? Explain that to the kids sleeping in a shelter tonight.”

The Promise of Jobs, Still Waiting

Despite the tough talk on trade and manufacturing, many local plants never reopened after the last recession. Tariffs might have protected certain industries on paper, but they didn’t bring back the jobs and probably never will. What they did do, critics argue, is hike prices on everyday goods , from construction materials to car parts , squeezing small business owners and working families alike.

“It’s smoke and mirrors,” said Renee Evans, who owns a small contracting firm near Burleigh. “We were promised revitalization projects. What we got was new empty buildings and shuttered storefronts.”

The Border and the Backlash

While the administration has doubled down on mass deportations and immigration crackdowns, there’s been no meaningful investment in immigration courts or visa reform, creating longer delays and more confusion for legal immigrants, employers, and even military families. It’s a harsh policy with little planning, and local economies like Milwaukee’s which is reliant on immigrant labor in many work sectors is feeling the strain.

Is “America First” Just a Slogan Now?

For many here, the question isn’t whether America First has failed, it’s whether it was ever real to begin with. The country’s resources still seem to flow upward and outward, not inward to the communities that were promised revitalization.

“If this is America First,” said Kaleb Tatum, shaking his head outside a shuttered youth center on North Avenue, “we must not be part of America.”

BlackRock Doesn’t Just Own Tech. It Owns Your Future.

Posted on by Nkozi Knight

BlackRock doesn’t just own parts of Apple, Microsoft, and Amazon. It owns your food supply. It owns farmland. It owns water infrastructure. And through those investments, it owns a growing stake in the future of human survival itself.

What began in 1988 as a modest Wall Street firm built on risk management is now the largest asset manager in human history. BlackRock controls over $11 trillion , which is larger than the GDP of every country in the world except the United States and China.

But what most people still don’t realize is that BlackRock’s most important power grab didn’t happen on Wall Street. It happened quietly, across America’s farmland, its food systems, and its natural resources.

How Did We Get Here?

BlackRock’s expansion strategy was never about flashy takeovers. It was about ownership without attention. They don’t need to buy entire companies when they can buy enough shares to influence them all.

Through complex index funds and ETFs (Exchange-Traded Funds), BlackRock has quietly become a top shareholder in nearly every major corporation in America. Coca-Cola. PepsiCo. Kraft Heinz. Nestlé. Tyson Foods. Monsanto-Bayer. Even the companies that compete with each other are often owned by the same hand, BlackRock.

That includes food production, packaging, seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, farmland, water rights, grocery store chains, and agribusiness suppliers.

It is a spider web so vast that very few industries operate outside of its reach.

Farmland: The New Oil

In recent years, farmland has quietly become one of the hottest investments among America’s wealthiest. But few players have been as aggressive as BlackRock and its peers like Vanguard and State Street.

Why Farmland you may ask?

Simple. Land produces food, controls water access, and holds its value against inflation. In a world of uncertainty, farmland is power.

BlackRock has invested in farmland directly and indirectly through real estate investment trusts (REITs) like Farmland Partners and Gladstone Land Corporation. In some regions, institutional investors now own an estimated 30-50% of all available farmland.

For local farmers like Paul Rettler, this creates an impossible game that no one can win. Competing against trillion-dollar firms backed by infinite capital means the consolidation of agriculture isn’t slowing down, rather it’s accelerating.

The ESG Illusion

Much of BlackRock’s public messaging has centered around ESG, which stands for: Environmental, Social, and Governance investing , a framework designed to steer money toward sustainable and ethical practices.

But behind the marketing, ESG has often allowed BlackRock to reshape industries while still investing heavily in the very corporations most responsible for environmental harm.

Larry Fink, BlackRock’s billionaire CEO, has framed ESG as both a moral obligation and a business necessity. Yet BlackRock remains one of the largest shareholders in fossil fuel giants, industrial agriculture companies, and food manufacturers responsible for deforestation and soil degradation.

As environmental groups have pointed out daily, BlackRock has the ability to change the food system overnight. But profit almost always wins over principle and we have seen this outcome time and time again.

So What Does BlackRock Want?

It’s simple: Control. Influence. Permanence.

The more essential needs a company controls such as food, water, housing, energy, the less it matters who holds political office. Ownership is the real power.

When a handful of corporations control the basic elements of survival, the public becomes renters of everything, including their health, their homes, and their future.

This is the world being built right in front of us.

Water rights in California. Farmland in the Midwest. Global seed patents. Packaging monopolies. Shipping routes. Grocery store chains. Pharmaceutical partnerships. Tech platforms controlling communication.

This is not just about selling products.

This is about owning life itself.

So what can everyday people do?

Waiting for a politician to fix this system is like waiting for a thief to return what they stole. It is not going to happen.

But the answer is not fear. The answer is awareness. The answer is action.

It starts with taking back control wherever you can.

Buy from local farmers when possible. Grow your own food even if it is just herbs in your kitchen window. Filter your water. Cook your own meals. Learn how to read ingredient labels. Support local businesses over corporations when you can.

Most importantly, do your own research. Step outside of Google, mainstream media, and the same recycled talking points coming from media companies owned by the very corporations profiting from your confusion.

Seek independent sources. Read books. Listen to people on the ground, not just those in boardrooms. Question convenience when it comes at the cost of your health.

Learn how to be less dependent on the systems designed to keep you dependent.

Because at this point, we cannot wait for RFK. We cannot wait for politicians. We cannot wait for the same people who helped build this system to suddenly tear it down.

We have to start building something different starting in our homes, in our families, in our communities.

Not because it is trendy.

But because survival has always belonged to the people willing to think for themselves, take responsibility for their lives, and protect their future by any means necessary.

Donald Trump’s $500 Billion Stargate AI Project: Bold Innovation or Dangerous Gamble?

Posted on by Nkozi Knight

When President Donald Trump unveiled the $500 billion Stargate AI venture on Tuesday, a partnership involving OpenAI, SoftBank, and Oracle, he touted it as a groundbreaking step toward cementing U.S. dominance in artificial intelligence. Trump claimed the project would ensure “the future of technology” while creating hundreds of thousands of jobs and tackling issues like cancer detection. Wall Street initially responded with cautious optimism, but as the details of Stargate emerge, skepticism is mounting, and for good reason in my opinion.

A Bold Promise Without a Foundation

At first glance, Stargate appears ambitious, even transformative. Backed by OpenAI’s cutting-edge technology, SoftBank’s financial clout, and Oracle’s infrastructure expertise, the venture has been pitched as a game-changer for AI research and development. Yet, serious doubts are surfacing about its feasibility and motives.

Tech billionaire Elon Musk, a former co-founder of OpenAI and a longtime critic of the organization’s direction, wasted no time questioning the project’s funding. “They don’t actually have the money,” Musk wrote on X. SoftBank CEO Masayoshi Son claims an initial $100 billion commitment with plans to grow it to $500 billion over four years, but whether those funds will materialize remains unclear. It’s not the first time SoftBank has made lofty promises and its track record includes overestimated ventures like the Vision Fund.

AI for Good or AI for Profit?

One of the most striking concerns is the ethical implications of Stargate. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison described the project as a way to solve pressing societal issues, like developing cancer vaccines through AI-driven genetic sequencing. While this paints a rosy picture, skeptics question whether these lofty claims are just a smokescreen for profit-driven motives. Musk has repeatedly accused OpenAI of abandoning its original mission to develop AI for the public good, turning instead into a profit-driven enterprise that prioritizes corporate interests.

Donald Trump’s decision to repeal his predecessor’s AI guardrails and policies designed to ensure ethical and safe development of AI, has opened the door to unchecked advancements. Without these safeguards, Stargate’s potential for misuse, whether through biased algorithms, privacy violations, or the militarization of AI, is alarming. Who will ensure that this technology is developed responsibly and does not deepen societal inequalities or threaten democratic systems?

An Economic Boon or Another False Promise?

Trump and Altman have touted the potential for Stargate to create hundreds of thousands of American jobs, particularly in construction and data center operations. However, these promises are eerily reminiscent of past grandiose projects that failed to deliver from the Biden administration. Mega-investments often come with overblown job projections, only to fall short once automation replaces human labor. Even if Stargate reaches its employment goals, questions linger about the quality of these jobs and their long-term sustainability.

A cornerstone of the Stargate project is the construction of massive data centers, which are essential for powering the AI infrastructure envisioned by OpenAI, SoftBank, and Oracle. While these centers promise to create jobs and drive technological advancement, their environmental and societal impacts are deeply concerning. Data centers consume enormous amounts of electricity and water, often straining local resources without providing long-term economic benefits to surrounding communities. Questions about data privacy, cybersecurity, and ownership also loom large, as these facilities will centralize vast amounts of sensitive information in the hands of private corporations. With promises of rapid scalability and a $500 billion price tag, it’s unclear whether such an ambitious undertaking can be achieved responsibly or whether the public will once again bear the hidden costs of unchecked corporate ambition.

Geopolitical Implications: Competing with China

Stargate is also being framed as a key weapon in the U.S.’s competition with China for AI supremacy. While strengthening America’s technological edge is important, rushing into a $500 billion project without transparency or strategic oversight risks creating a “tech cold war” that prioritizes dominance over ethical innovation. Accelerating AI development without proper international collaboration could exacerbate global tensions and lead to a dangerous arms race in AI technology.

What Stargate Really Represents

Beneath the glossy promises of economic growth and transformative technology, Stargate raises deeper questions about power, control, and the future of AI. By handing the reins to corporate behemoths like SoftBank, Oracle, and OpenAI, the U.S. risks placing critical technological advancements into the hands of entities more interested in profits than public welfare. This is not just about building data centers or detecting cancer, it’s about who gets to decide how AI shapes our world.

Trump’s willingness to prioritize corporate interests over ethical considerations should alarm all Americans from both parties. Without a commitment to transparency, regulation, and equity, Stargate could deepen societal divides and erode trust in technology. As history has shown, unchecked technological advancements often come at a steep cost to those least equipped to bear it.

Unveiling Africa’s Economic Boom Behind the Headlines

Posted on by Nkozi Knight

By Nkozi Knight, GreenHomeHub, Knight Investment Group

April 19, 2024

Embracing Africa’s economic upswing, a group of entrepreneurs mirrors the continent’s colorful ascent on the global stage.

African Original travel-reality series, Ebuka Turns Up Africa, featuring celebrated Nigerian star Ebuka Obi-Uchendu.

My journey into the heart of Africa’s economic boom began with conversations with my oldest daughter Nkozia who is a frequent visitor to the continent, and my curiosity further peaked from my sectional sofa as I became captivated by Amazon Prime’s series “Ebuka Turns up Africa”. In this television series, Ebuka Obi-Uchendu travels across the continent, exploring hidden gems and navigating the complexities of friendships, relationships, finances, and loyalties. Inspired by the vibrancy and spirit shown in each episode, I was interested in diving deeper and upon my research, I discovered a reality about the continent that is vastly different than the Western media portrayals that mostly reflect poverty and conflict.

The Children of Hope campaign in Malawi presents a snapshot often seen in Western media: youthful faces finding joy amidst the challenges often depicted across the continent.

For years, Africa’s narrative has been dynamically shifting. Long portrayed as a continent primarily of destitution and despair, the real Africa has a much different story. A rich story of booming economies, groundbreaking technologies, and cultural renaissance. This narrative shift reflects a continent ripe with opportunities and a hotbed for growth and innovation in places like my home country of Nigeria, challenging the outdated views held by much of the Western and European media.

Nigeria: The Economic Powerhouse
Leading Africa’s economic charge is Nigeria, currently the continent’s richest country with a GDP of $477 billion as of 2022. With projections by the International Monetary Fund suggesting an ascent to $915 billion by 2028, Nigeria’s economy, fueled by its diverse sectors including oil, gas, and technology, shows no signs of slowing down. Its burgeoning tech industry, particularly in cities like Lagos and Abuja, underscores a broader trend across the continent: a leap into digital and technological entrepreneurship.

The city of Lagos has the tallest skyline in Nigeria. 

Infrastructure and Regional Giants
Significant infrastructural developments such as Ethiopia’s Renaissance Dam and Kenya’s expansion of the Mombasa-Nairobi railway illustrate serious strides toward modernization and improved regional connectivity. These projects not only support economic growth but also enhance the daily lives of millions, with technology at the forefront of this renaissance.


Africa’s tech revolution extends beyond my home country of Nigeria. Innovations in mobile banking and renewable energy are pivotal. Mobile banking has transformed financial access for millions, demonstrating a leapfrog over traditional banking barriers. In the realm of sustainable development, nations like Morocco, where my daughter attends school, and South Africa are harnessing wind and solar power, setting new benchmarks for renewable energy.

The cultural sectors throughout Africa is thriving, making significant inroads on the global stage. Nigerian music, South African films, and Ghanaian fashion are capturing international audiences, showcasing the continent’s rich and diverse cultural heritage, and its something to truly be admired.

Cape Town South Africa

Economic Landscape

The economic landscape across Africa is as rich and varied as its cultural tapestry, with nations like South Africa and Egypt featuring robust, diversified economies that span mining, agriculture, and a burgeoning service and tourism industry. Algeria’s substantial oil and natural gas reserves play a crucial role in its financial health, echoing Angola’s reliance on its natural resources. Morocco’s vibrant economy thrives on tourism, agriculture, and a growing industrial sector.

Also, Kenya’s status as a regional economic hub is cemented by its diverse economy that embraces services, agriculture, and tourism. Ghana’s growth is buoyed by its agricultural base, complemented by significant oil and gas sectors. Tanzania, where my daughter recently visited, leverages its natural beauty and resources with a flourishing tourism and finance sector. Meanwhile, the beautiful people of Ethiopia are charting a path of rapid economic expansion, driven by sectors such as agriculture, manufacturing, and ambitious infrastructure projects.

The economic diversity across Africa is a story we need to hear more of as it reflects the resilience of the continent’s people who still deal with the theft of resources from European countries who often threaten to make topple their governments if they refuse to comply. Despite this, Africa’s adaptive and innovative spirit helps shape a new narrative of prosperity on the global economic stage.

Ethiopian Airlines pilot and flight crew

Confronting Stereotypes

Yet, despite these successes, Western portrayals often remain focused on negative aspects, overshadowing the continent’s achievements. This skewed narrative can influence public perception and policy in ways that are not reflective of the current African reality. African leaders and thinkers are calling for a more balanced portrayal that recognizes both the challenges and the immense progress being made.

Ebuka Turns up Africa

As the stories of 2024 unfold, it’s evident that Africa’s rise is not just in spite of Western media narratives but perhaps because it defies them. From the bustling markets of Cairo to the stunning vineyards of Cape Town, innovation, growth, and cultural vibrancy weave a rich tapestry that demands a global reevaluation. The legacy of resource extraction by countries like France and Great Britain is being overwritten by a new chapter of African self-determination and prosperity.

Shows like Ebuka Turns up Africa serve as a clarion call, inviting viewers to step beyond the screen and witness firsthand the continent’s transformation. The call is not just to watch, but to participate; to swap the well-trodden paths to Europe or the beaches of Mexico for the opportunity to immerse oneself in the tapestry of Africa’s economic prowess and cultural renaissance.

Let 2024 be the year where more travelers like myself, choose African destinations, where investment flows not just to traditional markets but to the burgeoning cities and industries across the African continent. This is not just an invitation; it’s a call to be part of a historical movement where one can witness a continent coming into its own, with success stories like Ebuka’s becoming the norm, celebrated and shared with the world. It’s time to rise from our sofas, set foot on African soil, and experience the continent’s heartbeat for ourselves.

BRICS Expansion: The Biggest Challenge to the US Dollar?

Posted on by Nkozi Knight

BRICS, a coalition of emerging markets comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, is welcoming six new members: Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt, Argentina, Ethiopia, and the United Arab Emirates. This growth aims to craft a fairer, inclusive, and prosperous world, says South African President Cyril Ramaphosa.

Historically, BRICS has aspired to strengthen its geopolitical standing to challenge Western dominance. Notably, the integration of significant energy exporters like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and the UAE will bolster this mission. Moreover, the potential lineup of countries eager to join BRICS reflects the world’s increasing disaffection with a primarily US-led global order.

However, some economists, like Gregory Daco from EY-Parthenon, express skepticism about BRICS matching the power of Western alliances like the G7 in the foreseeable future. The ambition to reduce dollar dependence (de-dollarization) appears ambitious, especially given the differing strategic priorities of BRICS members.

The concept of a unified BRICS currency to counterbalance the dollar has been a recurring theme, stirred up by remarks from Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva questioning the US dollar’s dominance. Yet, not all are on board with the idea. South Africa’s finance minister, Enoch Godongwana, recently voiced reservations about losing monetary policy independence with such a move. Moreover, the term BRIC’s creator, Jim O’Neill, called the idea of a shared currency “ridiculous,” referencing the challenges posed by political tensions between members like India and China.

While the prospect of a unified BRICS currency remains distant, the bloc is undeniably trying to lessen its dollar dependency. The group has expressed intentions to decrease reliance on the US dollar in international trade. Emphasizing this sentiment, Russian President Vladimir Putin highlighted the growing momentum of de-dollarization efforts. Moreover, there’s talk of promoting the Chinese renminbi as a reserve currency.

However, these ambitions face steep challenges. As of 2022, the US dollar was used in nearly 90% of global foreign exchange transactions. The renminbi represented a mere 2.5% of foreign exchange reserves, making its rise to challenge the US dollar, at least for now, a far-off dream. While BRICS grows and evolves, the journey to a post-dollar world seems laden with complexities and hurdles.

Fitch Downgrades U.S. Credit Rating Amid Rising Deficits and Political Turmoil

Posted on by Nkozi Knight

In a recent blow to the United States, Fitch Ratings has downgraded the nation’s credit rating from the highest possible AAA to AA+. The rating agency attributed the drop to increasing deficits and political conflict, which they believe threaten the government’s capacity to service its debts.

This decision was made two months following a last-minute agreement between the Biden administration and House Republicans to temporarily raise the debt ceiling, thereby narrowly dodging a potentially catastrophic federal default.

This isn’t the first time the U.S. has faced such a demotion. Back in 2011, amid a similar crisis regarding the debt ceiling, Standard & Poor’s reduced the United States’ AAA rating. At present, Moody’s Investors Service is the only major credit rating agency that continues to assign the U.S. the top AAA rating.

Despite recognizing the robustness of the U.S. economy and the benefits reaped from the dollar’s position as the world’s primary currency, Fitch expressed concerns about the escalating deficits and both political parties’ reluctance to address long-term fiscal issues. Fitch voiced limited faith in the government’s ability to effectively manage the country’s finances.

In response to the downgrade, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen criticized Fitch’s decision as “arbitrary” and reliant on obsolete data. She emphasized that “Treasury securities remain the world’s preeminent safe and liquid asset” and affirmed the underlying strength of the U.S. economy.

According to Fitch, the expenditure caps set as part of the recent debt agreement in June merely scratch the surface of the overall budget and do not confront enduring issues, such as financing Social Security and Medicare for an aging populace.

With tax reductions and elevated government expenditure leading to an expansion of deficits in recent years, and coupled with increasing interest rates, the fiscal burden has grown. Government interest payments in the first nine months of the current fiscal year amounted to $652 billion, marking a 25% rise from the same period last year.

Maya Macguineas, the president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, responded to the downgrade, terming it a “wake-up call.” She stressed the urgent need for fiscal responsibility, stating, “We are clearly on an unsustainable fiscal path. We need to do better.”

The repeated political standoffs over the debt ceiling have not only eroded the faith in U.S. fiscal management but also put the longstanding reputation of U.S. government bonds at risk. For close to a hundred years, these bonds have been considered some of the safest investments globally, primarily because the U.S. seemed unlikely to default on payments.

However, with the recent debt ceiling impasses, there is growing concern that the U.S. might default for the first time. Over a decade ago, S&P pointed out political discord as a significant risk to the country’s governing ability, and many experts opine that the situation has deteriorated since.

How the FDIC bailouts will impact the economy and impacts all taxpayers

Posted on by Nkozi Knight

The recent bank failures and the FDIC bailout can have significant impacts on our economy. Here are some ways it may affect us:

  1. Confidence in the banking system: The bank failures and the FDIC bailout may erode consumer and investor confidence in the banking system. When people start to doubt the stability and safety of their banks, they may withdraw their deposits, which can lead to a liquidity crisis and a domino effect of more bank failures. This, in turn, can cause a ripple effect throughout the economy, including decreased lending, lower consumer spending, and a potential recession.
  2. Cost to taxpayers: The FDIC bailout is funded by taxpayers’ money, and the cost of resolving failed banks can be significant. The more banks fail, the higher the cost to the FDIC and the taxpayers. This can divert resources from other government programs and cause budget deficits, which may have long-term consequences on the economy.
  3. Impact on small businesses: Small businesses heavily rely on loans from banks to finance their operations, and the recent bank failures can make it more difficult for them to access credit. With fewer banks and tighter lending standards, small businesses may have to pay higher interest rates or be forced to scale back their operations, which can slow down economic growth and job creation.
  4. Impact on the housing market: The banking sector plays a crucial role in the housing market, as they provide mortgage loans to homeowners. The recent bank failures can lead to a tightening of credit standards and a decrease in the availability of mortgage loans. This can result in lower home prices, decreased demand for housing, and potential foreclosures.

In conclusion, the recent bank failures and the FDIC bailout can have significant impacts on our economy, including decreased confidence in the banking system, increased costs to taxpayers, reduced access to credit for small businesses, and potential impacts on the housing market. It is crucial for policymakers and financial institutions to take steps to stabilize the banking system and restore confidence to prevent further disruptions to the economy.

What Emmett Till’s Mother Taught Me About Grief and Justice

Posted on by Nkozi Knight

On Feb. 26, 2012, my entire life changed in ways that I could never imagine. Within an instant, after the brutal and inhumane killing of my son, …

What Emmett Till’s Mother Taught Me About Grief and Justice

Five ways of expanding your business internationally

Posted on by Nkozi Knight

The global economy is changing thanks to worldwide connectivity. Companies across the globe are communicating with others without delays or hassles …

Five ways of expanding your business internationally

Quad/Graphics plans to close plants, cut $100M in costs

Posted on by Nkozi Knight

hqdefault

By Rick Romell of the Journal Sentinel
Nov. 3, 2015
In the wake of disappointing financial results, Sussex-based Quad/Graphics Inc. said Tuesday it will begin closing plants and taking other steps to cut $100 million in costs.

“Our third quarter financial performance was challenging and below our expectations,” Joel Quadracci, CEO of the commercial printing firm, said in a statement.

Quadracci said the company would move swiftly to slice costs and bring them in line with sales.

Quad did not say how many jobs it might cut, or identify any plants for closing. However, spokeswoman Claire Ho suggested that the firm’s operations in Wisconsin, where it employs 7,000 people at 14 facilities, are not high on the target list for closures.

Quad continues to move work to its most efficient printing and distribution plants, and the Wisconsin operations are “among the most efficient platforms in the entire printing industry,” Ho said in an email. She said Quad is still hiring in Wisconsin.

The company, the biggest printer of magazines and catalogs in North America, operates 57 printing plants in the U.S. and another eight outside the country. It employs 24,000 people worldwide.

However, like other printers, it has seen demand dampened by the rise of the Internet and digital technologies such as iPads and other tablets.

In its annual report filed with securities regulators last March, Quad noted that prices for printing had “declined significantly in recent years.”

Tuesday, Quadracci said in his statement that pricing pressure accelerated during the three months that ended Sept. 30, while Quad’s manufacturing productivity declined.

The firm’s sales for the three months ended Sept. 30 totaled $1.16 billion, down 6.5% from the $1.24 billion in third-quarter 2014 revenue.

The company booked a loss of $552.2 million, or $11.50 a share, in the quarter. But that stemmed almost entirely from a $532.6 million non-cash, after-tax charge Quad recorded for “goodwill impairment” triggered by the decline in the firm’s stock price.

Before Tuesday’s announcement, Quad’s stock closed at $13.10, down 18 cents.

The company went public in July 2010 at $49. Its shares traded above $40 for almost a year, then plunged. They rebounded above $30 in 2013, but have trended downward for the last two years.

The slide in the stock notwithstanding, Quad generates enough cash to pay a hefty dividend — at least at the prices of the last two years. The current dividend of $1.20 a year amounts to roughly 9% of Tuesday’s closing price.

Quad on Tuesday declared another 30-cent quarterly dividend.

The company also reduced its 2015 revenue estimates by about $200 million. Previously, Quad had estimated sales of $4.8 billion to $4.9 billion for the year. The firm now expects $4.6 billion to $4.7 billion in revenue.

Since 2009, Quad has more than doubled its revenue, in large measure through acquisitions.

Quadracci may disclose details of the company’s cutback plans this morning during a conference call with analysts.

About Rick Romell

author thumbnail

Rick Romell covers retail and general business news.

Email:  
Quad/Graphics is an American printing company, based in Sussex, Wisconsin. It was founded on July 13, 1971, by Harry V. Quadracci, son of Harry R. Quadracci.
Headquarters: Sussex, WI
Company Website: qg.com
CEO: Joel Quadracci
Founded: 1971