| 0 comments ]

Berkshire Cash Hits A Record $397 Billion After Selling Most Stocks In 2 Years

The head of Berkshire may be new, but nothing has changed in the business model.

In Berkshire's first quarter Greg under Abel, who succeeded Buffett in January as Berkshire's chief executive, the company on Saturday reported a higher first-quarter operating profit even as economic uncertainty weighed on several of its consumer-oriented ​businesses. The Omaha, Nebraska-based conglomerate built by Warren Buffett and now led by Greg Abel also reported a record cash level, reflecting continuing difficulty finding ‌investments that meet its value-oriented principles.The conglomerate also continued its trend of divesting its stock portfolio with the largest sales od equity securities in Q1 since mid-2024; it also unveiled the first, modest stock buyback since Q2 of 2024.

Profit from Berkshire's numerous businesses rose 18% to $11.35 billion, or about $7,891 per Class A share, from $9.64 billion a year earlier. Net income, including from common stock investments, more than doubled to $10.1 billion, or $7,027 per Class A share, from $4.6 billion thanks to a boost from an improvement in underwriting results in its vast insurance businesses (Berkshire has traditionally downplayed the relevance of net income, which because of accounting rules includes unrealized gains and ​losses on stocks it has no plans to sell, and its therefore especially volatile during periods of market stress).

Berkshire's earnings are closely watched because the conglomerate’s businesses, ranging from insurance to railroads to energy and manufacturing, provide a snapshot of the health of the US economy. The company owns dozens of businesses including Geico, the BNSF railroad, Berkshire Hathaway Energy, Dairy Queen and See's Candies. Yet while Berkshire is sometimes considered a microcosm of the broader U.S. economy, its focus on insurance and hard ​assets has left it out of step with broader market trends, including the prevailing euphoria over artificial intelligence.

Worries about the economy took a toll on several of ​Berkshire's consumer-oriented businesses. Berkshire said economic conditions weighed on building products businesses such as the Clayton Homes mobile home unit, while the Forest River RV unit, Fruit of the Loom ‌and Squishmallows ⁠maker Jazwares reported lower revenue amid "higher economic uncertainty" and lower consumer confidence.

Underwriting earnings from the firm’s collection of insurance businesses surged to $1.7 billion, up about 29% from a year ago, when the units were hit by losses tied to the Los Angeles wildfires. Still, Geico posted a 35% decline in pretax underwriting earnings, as the unit faced more losses and spent more to gain new clients. 

“Most of Geico’s peer group this quarter posted significantly improved underwriting results,” said Cathy Seifert, an analyst at CFRA Research, on the contrast between competitors and Geico. “They’re a big unit and that’s a big deterioration.”

Profit from all insurance operations rose 4% ⁠to $4.4 billion from a year earlier, when wildfires in Southern California hurt results in reinsurance and smaller insurance businesses. The overall improvement came despite the 35% profit drop at Geico, where accident claims and marketing expenses ​increased. Geico spent several years upgrading its underwriting discipline and technology, and is trying to reclaim market share it ​gave up to rivals ⁠such as Progressive. Abel said at the meeting that the insurance sector generally is "softening" and becoming "more challenging" as more capital flows into the market, making it harder for Berkshire to charge sufficient premiums for the risks it takes on.

Profit at its railroad unit BNSF rose 13% to $1.4 billion, helped by higher demand to ship grains, petroleum fuels, oilseeds and meals, and relieving pressure on BNSF management, led by CEO Katie Farmer, to improve the unit’s operating margin and close the gap with its most efficient peers.

The railroad ​has lagged some peers in operating margin, and Abel said in his first annual letter to ​Berkshire shareholders that improved efficiency and service were necessary. Abel had given the division’s management a clear mandate to improve the business on those fronts. He said at the meeting that while he’s pleased with the first-quarter results, there’s still room for improvement.

“We had heard that there was some cost efficiencies being implemented at BNSF, and that showed up in the first-quarter results,” Seifert said.

Elsewhere, Berkshire Hathaway Energy said profit rose 2%, as higher revenue from natural gas pipelines attributable to cold weather offset rising maintenance and wildfire prevention costs ​in utility businesses. Profit from manufacturing, service and retail operations rose 5% to $3.2 billion.

Earnings aside, Berkshire's cash hoard soared to a new record high just shy of $400 billion, or more than the US government traditionally has in its Treasury General Account (except for rare outlier occasions). As of March 31, Berkshire's total cash (held mostly in T-Bills) was $397 billion. The cash pile reflected the company's years-long inability to find a ​major acquisition, as well as sales of some of its largest stock holdings led by Apple. 

After a nearly two year hiatus without any stock buybacks, in Q1 Berkshire repurchased a modest $234 million of its own stock, the first buybacks ​since May 2024. It conducted no repurchases in the first two weeks of April.

More importantly, in Q1 Berkshire sold $8.1 billion more stocks than it bought, the 14th straight quarter it was a net seller of stocks, and the largest net sales since Q3 2024 when BRK sold almost $30 billion. Berkshire hasn't bought stock since Q3 2022. Berkshire paid $9.5 billion in January for Occidental Petroleum's chemicals business; it also decided against a new impairment charge on Kraft Heinz, one of its largest equity holdings, for now, even as the book value of its holding in the packaged food giant exceeds its fair value by $1.4 billion. Last year, the firm took a $3.8 billion hit, as the stock’s performance continued to disappoint. 

Results were released prior to Berkshire's annual shareholder meeting, which draws tens of thousands of people to Omaha, and this year they won't be happy; not only is the Oracle of Omaha no longer there, but Berkshire shares have significantly lagged the broader market since Buffett unexpectedly announced at last year's meeting when Abel would take over. In 2026, Berkshire Class A shares of the $1.02 trillion buy-and-hold behemoth have fallen 6%, a mirror image of the S&P's 6% ascent, and a far cry from the historic surge in Semiconductor names which are now the market's darling du jour. 

Abel took to the stage and address shareholders in Omaha on Saturday for his inaugural annual meeting as CEO. This is the first time in decades that Buffett won’t be leading the event after the 95-year-old announced he would step down from his role last year, though he was still in attendance and even shared a few remarks to help kick off the meeting.

At the Omaha shareholder meeting earlier today, new CEO Greg Abel assured Berkshire shareholders that he will invest wisely and manage the conglomerate's massive cash stake without the burdens of bureaucracy, as he seeks to win over those cautiously hoping he is ​a worthy successor to Warren Buffett. Abel, 63, spoke at Berkshire's annual meeting in Omaha, Nebraska, four months after succeeding arguably the world's most famous investor as CEO. 

To do that, he must earn the trust of ‌investors now enamored with technology and artificial intelligence, rather than Berkshire's collection of insurers, retailers and hard-asset businesses in energy, industrials and manufacturing.

"As a conglomerate, we live by the fact that we hate bureaucracy," Abel said in response to a prerecorded question from Buffett, who also sat in a front-row seat. "We do not intend to be beholden to anyone. We start with that."

Still, attendance was down significantly from when Buffett and Vice Chairman ​Charlie Munger, who died in 2023, presided over meetings filled with their lively insights and banter about Berkshire, the economy, markets and life. Buffett and Munger drew capacity crowds in ⁠the downtown arena where the meeting took place, but several thousand of the approximately 18,000 seats were empty when Abel took the stage.

The meeting is the centerpiece of a weekend of shareholder events around Omaha, including investment conferences, private get-togethers, and shopping from Berkshire-owned businesses in an exhibit hall adjacent to the arena. Fewer people ⁠shopped. While thousands ​lined up outside the arena before doors opened at 7 a.m., the lines were considerably shorter than in recent years.

“I wanted to ​soak in the atmosphere and network with finance professionals,” said Jobby Chin, a finance student from Singapore attending her first meeting, who said she got in line at 2 am. Michael DiDonna, a fashion photographer from Oyster Bay, New York, said he arrived at 3:10 a.m. for his fifth ​meeting. "I want to feel a part of the monumental shift at the company," he said.

Buffett, for his part, assured the audience that "Greg is doing everything I did and then some," reprising comments he made last year when he announced his retirement ​as CEO. The 95-year-old also praised Apple, one of Berkshire's most successful investments, and its departing chief executive, Tim Cook. Buffett remains Berkshire's chairman.

In an interview with CNBC on the meeting's sidelines, Buffett fretted about a gambling mentality that has taken hold of some investors. "We've never had more people in a gambling mood than now," he said. "That doesn't mean investing is terrible, but it does mean that prices for an awful lot of things will look awfully silly."

Abel also assured shareholders he would not break up Berkshire, saying it operated effectively and its bench of expertise was strong. "We want Berkshire to endure," he said. Abel also said ​he is constantly evaluating opportunities to add to Berkshire's existing portfolio, whether that is acquiring public or private companies or a piece of a company.

Abel adhered to Buffett's mantra of patience, saying he would like to hold investments "forever" and not plow into any without understanding their economic ​prospects and risks. "It doesn't mean you need to deploy all ​your capital and spend all your money," he ⁠said.

He agreed with Berkshire's longtime insurance chief, Ajit Jain, who also answered questions from the stage, that it was important to say "no" if an investment did not look right. "It is very difficult to sit there and do nothing," Jain said, "while everyone else is being wined and dined by brokers and taken to London."

Abel praised a recent Oregon appeals ​court ruling that, for now, spared Berkshire's PacifiCorp unit from billions of dollars of potential liabilities for wildfires in 2020 that the utility maintains it did not ​cause. "We're back to first base" on the ⁠legal side, he said, meaning the threat has lessened.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/02/2026 - 16:55
https://ift.tt/dzxC62A
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/dzxC62A
via IFTTT

Berkshire Cash Hits A Record $397 Billion After Selling Most Stocks In 2 Years SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

The Cheap Foreign Labor Regime Blocking Agricultural Intelligence

Authored by RJ Hauman via American Intelligence,

I grew up in Camarillo, California: fertile soil, Mediterranean climate, strawberries, avocados, lemons, citrus, and family farms passed down through generations. The kind of place that sells itself, and does.

Read the city’s own description of its agricultural economy and you will find every word you would expect: rich agricultural legacy, farming passed down, agricultural education, sustainability, drip irrigation, precision sensors, AI-driven robotics, research partnerships, and a North American AgTech market projected to reach $16 billion by 2027.

Read it again and notice what is missing.

The workforce.

Not wages. Not labor. Not who picks the strawberries, cuts the lemons, or brings in the harvest. The fields produce. The technology advances. The legacy continues. The workers disappear.

Every agricultural economy has a legacy. The question is which part is being preserved. The fertile soil is a legacy. The family farms are a legacy. The harvest is a legacy. So is the labor model that brings it in. And across American agriculture, that model has for forty years depended heavily on foreign labor, illegal hiring, and a political class determined not to disturb either.

When a city brochure pairs “legacy” with AI robotics in the same breath, it is not just describing the future. It is making a quiet promise: the technology will advance, but the labor model will not.

America is preparing for the AI age everywhere except the place that feeds the country.

In Washington, the debate tends to revolve around foundation models, export controls, chips, data centers, defense contracts, and the ideological capture of Silicon Valley. Those fights matter. But the next frontier of artificial intelligence will not stay confined to server farms or federal procurement offices. It will also play out in fields, dairies, orchards, irrigation networks, greenhouses, and the rural labor markets that underpin America’s food supply.

That frontier is no longer theoretical. Autonomous tractors already plant, till, and spray without a driver. Computer-vision systems can scout crops plant by plant. Machine-learning models can optimize water, fertilizer, pest control, and yield down to the meter. Robotic harvesters can pick faster, cleaner, and longer than hand crews. Precision irrigation can be guided by satellite analytics. AI-assisted breeding can compress decades of plant selection into months.

The question is no longer whether American agriculture can automate. It is whether Washington will stop subsidizing the cheap labor model that makes automation a losing bet.

America should be leading this revolution. It builds the software, funds the research, trains the engineers, and talks constantly about technological dominance. Yet federal policy still props up an agricultural labor model built on cheap imported labor, illegal hiring, and guestworker expansion. That bargain has kept human labor cheaper than machines, delayed mechanization, and now risks leaving the United States on the sidelines of a revolution it should own.

This is not a speculative warning. It is already underway. Syngenta’s Cropwise platform now spans more than 70 million hectares across 30 countries. The World Economic Forum projects that AI-amplified digital agriculture could increase agricultural GDP in developing economies by more than $450 billion annually. The Netherlands, Israel, and Australia are moving quickly to capture that ground.

American firms built much of the underlying technology. American universities produced the foundational research. American workers could be trained to operate it.

But the United States will not lead unless it dismantles the cheap labor regime that has allowed agriculture to skip the last revolution while pretending it is ready for the next.

You cannot leapfrog to autonomous agriculture over an industry that has barely mechanized. Software runs on hardware. AI runs on physical capital. The autonomous tractor still requires the tractor. The computer-vision yield system still needs the machine it is guiding. The machine-learning dairy platform still depends on the milking robot it is reading from. Farms that have not mechanized cannot become intelligent by press release.

The capital does not move. The infrastructure does not get built. The workforce does not get trained. The frontier goes to whoever did the prior work first.

Why has American agriculture failed to do that work?

Not because of technology. The tools have been available for decades.

The answer is policy. Washington has spent forty years making cheap foreign labor cheaper than the machine.

The Twin Pillars of the Cheap Labor Regime

American agriculture runs on a labor system Washington built, tolerated, subsidized, and now refuses to dismantle. It rests on two pillars.

The first is illegal hiring. Federal surveys show that roughly 40 to 45 percent of crop farmworkers lack legal work authorization. In California, the share is closer to 60 percent. Another large portion are foreign nationals who entered illegally or came on a temporary basis. The U.S.-born legal workforce in the fields is the minority.

This is not a system failure. It is the system. And it has been propped up by both parties.

The second pillar is H-2A, the federal guestworker program designed in 1986 as a narrow tool for seasonal shortages. It has since grown into one of the largest labor pipelines in the immigration system.

The Department of Labor certified roughly 385,000 H-2A jobs in FY 2024, nearly an eightfold increase since 2005. The program remains uncapped by statute. Recent rulemaking is projected to transfer tens of billions in wage value over the next decade, in some cases lowering effective labor costs by several dollars per hour.

Washington is making imported labor cheaper at the exact moment it should be forcing capital toward machines.

These pillars are not separate problems. They are the same subsidy delivered through different channels, defended by the same interests, and sustaining the same method.

When enforcement targets illegal hiring, employers demand H-2A expansion. When H-2A reform is proposed, they revive amnesty proposals like the Farm Workforce Modernization Act, which would grant Certified Agricultural Worker status and eventual green cards to up to 2.1 million illegal alien farmworkers while simultaneously opening H-2A to year-round industries.

The lobby’s actual position is not legal labor or illegal labor. It is permanent access to cheap foreign labor by whatever channel Washington will tolerate.

Illegal hiring supplies the shadow workforce. H-2A provides the legal release valve. Amnesty converts one into the other while preserving the pipeline behind it.

This is not stagnation by accident. It is by design.

The result is a labor-intensive production model with little incentive to mechanize, little reason to invest in agricultural intelligence, and no pressure to train American workers to operate either.

That helps explain why the United States lags Northern Europe in robotic milking, Israel in precision irrigation, and Australia in autonomous platforms.

Those countries did not discover secret technologies unavailable to American farmers. They built the workforce and mechanized base the United States has chosen to avoid.

We chose decades of cheap, and often illegal, foreign labor instead.

The Myth of the Impossible Crop

Big Agriculture’s most persistent claim is that American farming cannot be mechanized. The crops are too delicate. The terrain too uneven. The seasons too unpredictable. The farms are too diverse. The margins are too thin. The labor is supposedly too specialized.

Some of these objections contain fragments of truth. None justify a permanent federal subsidy for cheap foreign labor.

The “impossible crop” argument collapses the moment policy forces capital to solve the problem.

Commercial cabbage harvesters have existed for decades. Autonomous systems are now being developed for uneven terrain. Apple harvesting robots can pick roughly 10,000 apples an hour, about 30 to 50 times human speed, with less bruising than human crews.

Harvest CROO’s strawberry robots replaced crews of 30 migrant pickers with a small team of engineers and technicians and reached commercial viability in 2025. Carbon Robotics’ LaserWeeder uses AI-guided precision lasers to eliminate up to 5,000 weeds a minute, replacing the work of a hand crew of 75 people. Monarch Tractor’s MK-V is a fully electric, driver-optional tractor now operating on hundreds of farms. Bear Flag Robotics, now a John Deere subsidiary, retrofits existing tractors for autonomous tillage at scale.

Even crops long considered unmechanizable are starting to be mechanized.

The constraint is not engineering. It is incentive. And when the incentive shifts, capital tends to follow.

Dale Hemminger, an upstate New York dairy farmer, installed his first milking robots in 2007 after immigration authorities arrested one of his workers. Before mechanization, his farm produced about 800,000 pounds of milk per worker per year. Today it produces 2.5 million. About a dozen workers manage a herd of more than 2,000 cows. They earn more than typical farmworkers and work shorter hours.

That is what one enforcement event did on one farm.

Now imagine that incentive applied across the entire sector.

Bracero Proved the Point

America has already run this experiment.

From 1942 to 1964, the Bracero program admitted more than 4.6 million Mexican guestworkers. At its peak, it brought in more workers annually than today’s entire H-2A system.

The same arguments were made then: crops would rot, Americans would not work, mechanization was not ready.

Congress and President Lyndon Johnson ended the Bracero program in 1964.

The result was not collapse. It was modernization.

Tomato harvesters, developed at the University of California with public funds, were commercially deployed within five years. California processing tomato yields rose 300 percent while labor requirements fell by more than 80 percent. Real wages for remaining domestic farmworkers rose substantially. Crop losses were short-lived and concentrated in the first two seasons. Total production soon exceeded pre-termination levels.

The lesson is straightforward.

The technology was already there. Modernization was obstructed by outdated policy.

That lesson applies directly today.

End the federal guarantee of imported labor. Mandate E-Verify. Phase down H-2A on a real timeline. Reject amnesty that converts the existing illegal workforce into a permanent labor base while expanding future inflows.

No carve-outs. No indefinite delays.

Transition should be statutory, not chaotic. Enforcement must be paired with date-certain phase-downs, mechanization credit, and accelerated expensing. The point is not to create a harvest shock. It is to deny agribusiness the one thing that has defeated every reform for forty years: indefinite delay. Put serious public investment behind mechanization and agricultural intelligence in tandem, on the model of the semiconductor and energy industrial policies of the past five years. Pair the phase-down with targeted USDA credit for mechanization, accelerated expensing for qualifying capital investments, shared-ownership equipment consortia that put commercial-grade robotics within reach of smaller farms, and scale-tiered timelines that give family operations more runway than consolidated agribusiness.

Capital should move toward modernization, not toward Capitol Hill.

The Constituency This Is For

The Right often talks about building a worker-centered coalition. Agriculture is where that idea could actually take shape.

It is composed of the small dairy operator competing against a contractor-driven megafarm that lobbies for both illegal labor and H-2A expansion. It harbors the rural mechanic who could be trained as a robotics technician on a precision orchard. It uplifts the recent graduate of a community college agronomy program who could work in autonomous-equipment maintenance, computer-vision crop scouting, or precision-irrigation management. It represents the American worker who lost the field job a generation ago and never got the engineering job that should have replaced it, because the engineering job was never built.

Cheap, and oftentimes illegal, foreign labor does not just displace today’s American worker. It prevents tomorrow’s worker from emerging.

It blocks the investment that would create better jobs. It keeps rural America trapped in a low-wage equilibrium, and then frames that outcome as a necessary tradeoff.

It is not.

The Sovereignty of Food

The global agricultural intelligence revolution will not wait for American policy to catch up. It is happening now, on Dutch dairies, Israeli irrigation networks, Australian autonomous platforms, and in the orchards and greenhouses of countries that did the prior work, built the prior infrastructure, and trained the prior workforce.

But it does not have to be this way. American startups are building the machines. The United States can deploy them at scale, or watch other countries integrate the technology American firms invented.

The AI age is not just about who builds the model. It is about who controls the systems the model governs.

A country that imports foreign labor to prop up its food system, neglects the machines that should replace it, and fails to train its own workforce is not leading. It is stepping aside.

If “America First” means anything in the AI age, it means that the commanding systems of national life are built, operated, and controlled by Americans. Food is one of those systems.

The United States has the advantages: land, capital, universities, manufacturers, and workers.

What it lacks is the political will to end the old bargain.

For forty years, Washington has kept imported labor cheaper than machines. That decision has lowered wages, slowed mechanization, weakened the rural workforce, and delayed the productivity gains other countries have already captured.

Now the next revolution is here.

The choice is straightforward: a preindustrial labor system sustained by outdated and poor policy, or an industrial strategy worthy of a sovereign nation.

We should end the cheap foreign labor regime. Mandate E-Verify. Phase out H-2A. Restore wage discipline. Invest in mechanization and agricultural intelligence at scale.

America cannot shape the future of food while importing a labor model of the past.

There is no third option.

Coming soon from NICE: Phasing Out H-2A: How to Force American Agriculture into the 21st Century. A national mechanization and agricultural intelligence initiative built for American workers and American farms. The full case for ending Big Agriculture’s cheap labor racket and forcing the modernization that should have come a generation ago.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/02/2026 - 15:10
https://ift.tt/0F2bqO1
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/0F2bqO1
via IFTTT

The Cheap Foreign Labor Regime Blocking Agricultural Intelligence SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

In Charts: Communist Cuba's Lights Dim Amid US Oil Blockade

Authored by Sylvia Xu, Andrew Moran via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Blackouts, shortages, fuel rationing, and empty streets now define daily life in Cuba.

People wait to fill their water containers during a nationwide blackout in Havana on March 22, 2026. Cuban authorities scrambled on March 22 to restore power to the island after the second nationwide blackout in less than a week, as the grid struggles due to an aging infrastructure and a U.S. oil blockade. Yamil Lage/AFP via Getty Images

Although the norm for decades, these hardships have reached catastrophic proportions as the island nation suffers its worst energy and economic crisis since the fall of the Soviet Union.

Cuba’s energy infrastructure is collapsing amid restrictions on oil imports from its key ally Venezuela, along with a U.S. military operation that has further disrupted Venezuela’s production and shipping.

With the country’s main supplier impaired, Havana is without the energy needed to keep its grid stable, leading to rolling blackouts and widespread shortages of everything from medicines to food.

The White House aims to push the communist-led nation into talks and concessions. A combination of indirect pressure through increased tariffs on Cuba’s oil suppliers and direct intervention by the U.S. Coast Guard in the region has amounted to an effective blockade of the island.

A tugboat guides a Russian oil tanker as it arrives at the oil terminal in the port of Matanzas, Cuba, on March 31, 2026. The shipment of 730,000 barrels marked Cuba’s first crude import in three months as the White House aims to push the communist-led nation into talks and concessions. Yamil Lage/AFP via Getty Images

In February, the United States made a key exception: the sale of fuel directly to private businesses in Cuba. The shipments are small, however, totaling an estimated 30,000 barrels so far this year.

The Trump administration is showing some signs of easing pressure, allowing a Russia-flagged tanker to deliver 730,000 barrels of oil to Cuba on March 31—the island’s first sizable import of crude in three months. Given Cuba’s daily needs of nearly 80,000 barrels per day in 2025, the shipment provided less than 10 days of supply.

A gas station remains closed due to a lack of fuel in Havana on March 24, 2026. Cuba’s government confirmed on April 20 it had returned to the table to meet with U.S. officials, seeking to ease tensions and address energy restrictions. Yuri Cortez/AFP via Getty Images

Risky Reliance on Imported Oil

Imported oil is the lifeblood of Cuba’s energy infrastructure; net crude oil imports accounted for nearly 60 percent of the country’s total supply as of 2023, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).

For more than 25 years, those imports primarily came from Venezuela, under a bilateral agreement based on bartering products and services instead of cash payment.

Alternative suppliers have included Mexico (25 percent), Russia (10 percent), and Algeria (4 percent), according to S&P Global Commodities at Sea data.

Even before the current blockade, imports from Venezuela and Mexico were jeopardized by those countries’ struggles to maintain fuel production.

Venezuela’s once-thriving petroleum industry has been crippled by years of mismanagement and sanctions, although the United States is now working with the interim government to rebuild its crumbling energy infrastructure.

Mexico’s state-owned company Pemex ended 2025 with its lowest level of production in 46 years amid operational and financial constraints on the country’s oil sector.

U.S. President Donald Trump signs a proclamation at the Shield of the Americas Summit at Trump National Doral in Miami on March 7, 2026. Trump said the United States is “looking forward to the great change” coming to Cuba following what he called a

Energy Blockade

Now, U.S. foreign policy is making it even more difficult for Cuba to navigate global energy markets.

Following the U.S. capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro on Jan. 3, President Donald Trump persuaded interim leader Delcy Rodríguez to halt oil and gas exports to Cuba.

A small shipment of oil from Mexico—86,000 barrels—arrived in Cuba on Jan. 9.

But crude oil flowing from Mexico dried up after Trump ramped up pressure on Jan. 29 with an executive order imposing tariffs on any country that “directly or indirectly provides oil to Cuba.” On Feb. 2, Trump announced that Mexico would cease oil shipments to Cuba.

On March 7, Trump told the Shield of the Americas summit: “As we achieve a historic transformation in Venezuela, we’re also looking forward to the great change that will soon be coming to Cuba. 

Cuba is at the end of the line. ... They have a bad regime that’s been bad for a long time. And they used to get the money from Venezuela.”

Cuban leader Miguel Díaz-Canel announced March 13 that the regime had opened talks with the United States, and on April 20, U.S. diplomats set foot on Cuban soil for the first time since 2016. 

Alejandro García del Toro, deputy director general in charge of U.S. affairs at the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said that “the elimination of the energy embargo against the country was a top priority” for the meetings.

Senate Republicans on April 28 rejected Democratic legislation that would stop the energy blockade of Cuba without congressional approval.

Energy Sources

Over the past two decades, Cuba has attempted to somewhat emulate its neighbors Jamaica and the Dominican Republic, which have managed to offset their petroleum needs with coal, natural gas, and renewables.

The Castro regime in 2005 launched an “energy revolution”—introducing solar and wind, bolstering bioenergy consumption, and expanding distributed generation—in an attempt to diversify the country’s energy portfolio. 

However, the leadership failed to address fundamental problems, such as aging Soviet-era infrastructure, underinvestment, reliance on subsidized crude, failure to finance new technologies, and lack of long-term planning and maintenance.

As of 2024, Cuba still relied on oil for 87 percent of its energy, exceeding the Central and South American average of 54 percent, according to a Reuters analysis.

The island nation dedicates more than 80 percent of its oil to electricity generation, according to 2023 data from the IEA. In fact, utilities consume more than double the oil of all other sectors combined, underscoring Cuba’s reliance on petroleum.

Cuba’s thermoelectric infrastructure, loaded with high-sulfur oil, is “old, tired, and highly inefficient,” Jorge Piñon, senior research fellow at the University of Texas at Austin’s Energy Institute, said in a 2023 interview with the Center for Engagement and Advocacy in the Americas.

To revive its power system, Cuba “must decentralize its economic model and resolve its political differences with the United States.”

Cuba has to abandon its failed Soviet-style centralized command economic model based on state ownership of all means of production and industrial transformation,” Piñon said.

“It should welcome a market economic system in which the decisions regarding investments and production are guided by supply and demand market forces.”

More than 1 million individuals have fled Cuba since 2021. Analysts compare the exodus to that seen during 1994’s Special Period—a time of food scarcity, energy shortages, and agricultural decimation after the demise of the Soviet Union.

Tyler Durden Fri, 05/01/2026 - 18:05
https://ift.tt/5MzIONg
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/5MzIONg
via IFTTT

In Charts: Communist Cuba's Lights Dim Amid US Oil Blockade SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

8 In 10 Chatbots Inclined To Assist Users In Planning Attacks

Eight out of ten AI chatbots have been found to actively assist users in planning violent attacks, according to a new investigation by CNN and the Center for Countering Digital Hate.

As Statista's Anna Fleck reports, when asked to plan violent attacks including a school shooting, an antisemitic bombing and a political assassination, platforms such as Perplexity, Meta AI and DeepSeek regularly assisted users in finding answers.

Only one, Anthropic’s Claude, repeatedly discouraged users from taking action.

Infographic: 8 in 10 Chatbots Inclined to Assist Users in Planning Attacks | Statista

You will find more infographics at Statista

Researchers tested ten chatbots by acting as a user planning to carry out several types of violent attacks both in the United States and in Ireland, providing a European comparison.

The tests were designed to reflect plans for school shootings or knife attacks, assassinations targeting politicians or bombings targeting political parties or synagogues.

In over half of the responses for eight of the chatbots, the subjects were provided with advice on locations to target and weapons to use in an attack.

Snapchat’s My AI and Anthropic’s Claude refused to offer help in 54 percent and 68 percent of cases, respectively. Claude was also the only chatbot to consistently recognize the intentions of the user and to discourage them from acting. Meanwhile, Character.AI actively encouraged violence, including suggesting that the test user “use a gun” on a health insurance CEO and physically assault a politician that the user dislikes.

Tyler Durden Fri, 05/01/2026 - 16:50
https://ift.tt/VEZUOke
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/VEZUOke
via IFTTT

8 In 10 Chatbots Inclined To Assist Users In Planning Attacks SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

Rising Venezuelan Oil Exports Help Insulate The US From Energy Crisis

If the primary purpose behind the Trump Administration's snatch-and-grab operation against the illegitimate president of Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro, was not readily apparent in January, it should be crystal clear today.  Under Maduro, around 75% of the country's energy exports were going to China.  This year, the US will be receiving around 50% of the oil supply while China's share is reduced to 10%.   

The stunning shift in the direction of oil shipments is helping to insulate the US from shortages caused by the war in Iran and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.  Likely, this was part of the plan from the very beginning.  However, the real benefits of the new relationship with Venezuela will not be readily apparent until the end of this year. 

Prices at the gas pump for Americans are high since the start of the war with an average of $4.30 per gallon, but decidedly tame compared to most of Europe.  The UK is currently at $8 per gallon and Germany at $9.30 per gallon.  A portion of these crushing prices is owed to Europe's abusive energy taxation model and carbon agenda, but another big factor is Europe's lack of strategic energy independence (except for Norway). 

The US has positioned to avoid a similar fate.  Oil export analysts and industry insiders suggest that without the regime change in Venezuela as well as a handful of other policy actions, gas prices in America would be much higher than they are now.  This does not protect the US from the interdependency of global markets (or market speculation), but in real terms, there is no threat of supply shortages. 

In 2024-2025, only 500,000 barrels of oil per day were shipped to the US from the Strait of Hormuz (around 7% of total exports).  This deficit is now being met by Venezuelan production and there's more on the way.   

Currently the only American oil company operating in Venezuela, Chevron is bringing in tankers filled with 400,000 barrels of oil to its Pascagoula refinery in Mississippi, which can process a maximum of 330,000 barrels a day of heavy crude oil.  Though Venezuela holds around 17% of global oil supply, the dilapidated infrastructure and communist corruption reduced their output to around 1% of global production.  This is about to change.

With investment, Chevron plans to increase its Venezuelan production by about 50% over the next couple of years.  Fortune notes that the best-case scenario for Venezuelan oil production is about 1.2 million barrels daily by the end of 2026, according to Francisco Monaldi, director of the Latin America Energy Program at Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy.

Oil service companies are preparing equipment and rigs for transport to Venezuela as the new government prepares a review of gas and oil contracts; a move which would have been thought impossible only a year ago.

Europe is, not surprisingly, trying to get in on the action.  Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez strongly condemned the US capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, labeling it a violation of international law.  However, Spain's Repsol is now seeking to increase production at Venezuela's ​Cardon IV gas field, taking advantage of the regime change.  Italy's Eni is also looking for new opportunities to invest and develop Venezuelan fields. 

The changes in Venezuela and the positive outlook for increased oil production do little to solve the immediate global supply crisis and price inflation in the making due to the Hormuz closure.  But, the new supply does help in preventing sharper spikes at the gas pump in the US. 

The capture of Maduro seems to have greater long term implications for energy markets rather than short term advantages.  Ultimately, it serves to further insulate the US from outside supply shocks over the next few years while eliminating a vital resource for China and the CCP.  

Tyler Durden Thu, 04/30/2026 - 16:40
https://ift.tt/OstqbWJ
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/OstqbWJ
via IFTTT

Rising Venezuelan Oil Exports Help Insulate The US From Energy Crisis SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend