Movies Are Now a National Security Threat, 100 Percent Tariffs Announced

The high cost of making a movie in Hollywood is one of the reasons why the industry has studios in other parts of the US. You’re partially correct about movies filmed in locations outside the US. However, the pre- and post-production stuff is a major part of the cost. Given the union cost, regulation, and risk of failure, Hollywood execs have little choice but to look for low cost alternatives.

We went off of the gold standard on Sunday August 15, 1971, over six years after the start of the Vietnam war buildup. As I recall at the time, France and then other countries lost confidence in the US ability to continue to redeem gold at $35 US an ounce and began to cash in its official holdings of $US for gold prior to the closing of the gold window. But as late as June 1973, I could still by regular gas for less than 30 cents a gallon in the western suburbs of Detroit. Inflation took off after the start of the Arab oil embargo in October 1973.

If your statement is true then why tariff a product that sucks and no one is watching?

I still watch lots of movies, just not at movie houses. I am disappointed that more movies have not been released in 4K versions to take full advantage of my 4K player and 4K TV.

you TDS is calling you to commit crimes of violence against your fellow citizens, perhaps it is best to continue the medication and understand everything is not a plot against you..

the fear is palpable. so many must rein in their inner demons. what country has the most guns in the hands of its citizens? what are the actual chances of Trump becoming emperor god king of America?

find another focus for your obsession, its driving you mad.

 
THE CONSEQUENCES OF COLLECTIVE SELF-DELUSION

As some readers will know, I recently chose to use a period of necessary travel to isolate myself, for a space, from all forms of purported “news” and “information”.

It is something that I can heartily recommend to anyone, even if it involves just a few hours spent fishing at a place where no fish are to be found.

During this period of reflection, I gained a much clearer perspective on how a chapter of instability masquerading as “modernity” will end, even if the basics – the unfolding failures of money and technology – were already apparent.

Whilst our understanding of these basics will continue to improve, the task now is to strengthen the correlation between the calculated and the experienced.

What is particularly striking is the contrast between the abundant evidence of economic contraction and a near-universal refusal to accept this reality.

In practical terms, this means that “modernity” will end, not gradually, but very rapidly indeed.

1
When we once stand aside from the slings and arrows of outrageous narrative, it quickly becomes clear that the fundamentals in our economic and broader predicament are comparatively few in number.

The first is that growth in global material economic prosperity has been decelerating relentlessly towards contraction, a process that we are utterly powerless to prevent.

Equally, there is, at the collective level, an absolute refusal to accept this reality, or to prepare to manage its consequences in practical and constructive ways.

Economic inflexion has become something ‘almost everywhere experienced, but almost nowhere admitted’.
Instead, we have been invited to swallow ideas that even Lewis Carroll’s White Queen – who prided herself on her ability to believe “at least six impossible things before breakfast” – would have found wholly indigestible.

Chief amongst these notions are the beliefs that we can spend our way to prosperity, borrow our way to solvency, and innovate our way past material limitations demarcated by the planet’s resources and the laws of physics.
Our specific ‘remedies’ for the ending and reversal of growth are monetary innovation and technological advance. Such propositions disregard the facts, which are that money commands value only as an exchangeable claim on the material, and that the potential scope of technology is bounded by the limits of physical possibility.

2
These considerations define two of the greatest shocks that we will encounter as reality refuses to submit to the imperatives of wishful thinking.

Bluntly stated, the financial system will crash into cascading defaults and runaway inflation, whilst technology will fail to deliver on the unrealistic expectations vested in it.

Both of these failures are already unfolding. Debts and quasi-debts are expanding at wholly unsustainable rates, whilst the activities that we term “tech” are trapped in a relentless process of diminishing returns.

The latter involves investing ever more to deliver ever less, a trend that is unlikely to be changed by a version of AI which is customarily assessed on the basis of what it can accomplish rather than what it can deliver.

The public is caught up in this process of denied inflexion, which is why, over the past year, incumbencies have lost ground, or been ousted from power altogether, in countries as diverse as Britain, America, India, Japan, Germany and France.
The Canadian administration would doubtless have gone the same way, had the Liberals not replaced an unpopular leader, and ridden the tide of resentment unleashed by Mr Trump’s tariffs and territorial tantrums.

Essentially, the problems of government are a compulsion, knowingly or not, to promise a prosperity, and a continuity, that cannot be delivered. The public, for the most part, seems to believe that all and more of the benefits of growth are being skimmed off by an already super-wealthy minority.

The underlying reality – which might come as scant comfort to a discontented majority – is that the economy has started to contract, and that the much-publicised gains of the elites exist only in a paper form which is GTC (“good till cancelled”) by the looming financial crisis.

In these conditions, cherished notions will be invalidated just as surely as existing systems will fail. Far from being the highest possible iteration of the human project, a post-capitalist economic model, powered by consumerism and dominated by multinational corporations, is nearing its end.

A further denied truth, visible everywhere but admitted nowhere, is that of nations and societies scrapping over decreasing resources.

None of this is to say that better outcomes are impossible, but ‘better’ can no longer mean an extrapolatory ‘more of the same’ now that less has become the irreversible tendency of the economy.

3 – https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2025/05/05/302-at-the-end-of-modernity-part-one/

Mel Gibson was born in New York City. A 5 his parents moved to Australia.

Bernie Sanders has a couple really nice houses, he does allright for a socialist, I think he knows what kinda foolish thinking makes his bank account fatter..

a lot of politics is theater.

what’s that saying ?? politics is hollywood for ugly people or something like that..