AwesomeCapital

Sunday, April 20, 2025

RFK Jr. calls autism an epidemic: It ‘dwarfs COVID’

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., in a new interview, said autism was an epidemic with an impact that surpasses the COVID-19 pandemic.

“This is an epidemic. It dwarfs the COVID epidemic and the impacts on our country because COVID killed old people. Autism affects children and affects them at the beginning of their lives, the beginning of their productivity,” Kennedy said during a Sunday interview with radio host John Catsimatidis on WABC 770 AM’s “The Cats Roundtable.”

“And it’s absolutely debilitating for them, their families, their communities,” he added.

His statements come after the secretary faced scrutiny earlier this week for claiming “autism destroys families” at a Wednesday press conference.

In the past, Kennedy has also promoted anti-vaccine rhetoric with unproven theories that vaccinations are linked to autism.

According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), children have a greater risk for autism if there’s a family history of the disorder, if the mother experiences complications at birth or if chromosomal conditions pose a threat to their development.

Kennedy’s comments to Catsimatidis insinuated that the rate of autism was rapidly increasing and causing an uptick in health costs.

“For our country, just the pure economic cost of autism is, will be by 2035, $1 trillion a year. That’s just the beginning because many of these kids are aging out and their parents worry every day. And I’m talking about people with severe autism, what’s called profound autism, which is about, which is about 26 percent of the total people who are diagnosed with autism,” he said.

“Those families, those children are non-verbal, they’re non-toilet trained. They have all this stereotypical features of autism, head banging, toe walking, stimming, agonizing gut pain and head banging. Those kids are kids that will not hold jobs. And many kids with autism, many of the higher functioning autism actually can, have tremendous potential to live independently, to get jobs, take care of themselves,” he continued.

However, CDC experts disagree and have noted autism cases are increasing due to better screening.

Minnesota’s first lady, Gwen Walz recently called out Kennedy’s comments surrounding autism and criticized the leader for downplaying the contributions of individuals diagnosed with the disorder.

“This is deeply upsetting, especially coming from our nation’s highest-ranking health official,” Gwen Walz said in her post Thursday on X. “Individuals with autism are family, neighbors, students, and coworkers and they contribute more to this nation than this man ever will.”

Kennedy’s comments about autism have also been condemned as “disrespectful,” “unrealistic and misleading” by lawmakers and awareness groups that have raised concerns over the secretary’s announcement last week launching a “massive testing and research effort” for the disorder.

“Referring to autism as a chronic disease…and using medical terminology like ‘epidemic’ are really dehumanizes autistic individuals and perpetuates stigma and stereotypes,”The Autism Society of America’s Chief Marketing Officer Kristyn Roth told The Hill in previous comments. “It really reverses a lot of progress that has been made over the last decades.”

She said the rate at which Kennedy is promising to provide the cause of the disability is alarming.

“It’s giving people a lot of false hope,” she said. “True, rigorous, peer-reviewed science takes time to find quality answers.”

In his Sunday interview with Catsimatidis, Kennedy touted his proposed research by slamming the National Institute of Health (NIH) and CDC for researching gene linkage to autism instead of more environmental contributors.

“The problem is that NIH and CDC have blocked all the studies that would determine the environmental exposure. So we don’t know. And instead they’ve studied genes and genes contribute to autism, but they, you know, like I said, you need an environmental toxin. And that’s what we’re, that’s what we are now going to look for,” Kennedy said.

“And we’re going to identify it and using AI [artificial intelligence] and the best scientific protocols, all of it, very transparent. We’re deploying 15 teams to look at all the potential exposures and that could be mold. It could be food additives. It could be pesticides. It could be vaccines. It could be ultrasound,” he proposed.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5257511-rfk-jr-calls-autism-an-epidemic-it-dwarfs-covid/

We barely recycle any EV batteries, but it would make us far less dependent on China

Despite an escalating trade war, the U.S. remains dependent on China for key imports, including electric vehicle batteries. The U.S. electric vehicle market continues to grow, but unless things change dramatically, so too will U.S. dependence on Chinese batteries.

Chinese firms control more than 70 percent of global battery manufacturing capacity. Unless the U.S. is willing to give up on electric vehicles, which would be unwise as well as unrealistic, national and economic security concerns dictate that policymakers must find a way to reduce dependence on Chinese battery imports.

Fortunately, there is a lower-cost way of doing just that: recycling.

A few months ago, we set out to assess just how dependent the U.S. is on Chinese imports of lithium-ion batteries, the sort most commonly used in electric vehicles, and how practical it might be to develop alternative supply chains. Our findings are sobering: Chinese firms hold a commanding position in virtually all segments of the lithium-ion battery supply chain, and it would be extremely difficult to create U.S.-based alternatives. In particular, U.S. firms have low domestic production capacity.

There is, however, one important exception to this generally dispiriting conclusion: More and more U.S. firms are entering the lithium-ion battery recycling market. This activity is in turn increasing U.S. domestic production capacity in the end-of-life stage of the lithium-ion battery supply chain.

Currently, only 5 percent of lithium-ion batteries in the U.S. are recycled. This is alarmingly low figure, especially when compared to the 99 percent recycling rate for traditional lead-acid car batteries.

That contrast highlights both the scale of the challenge and the potential for progress. If we’ve achieved near-total recycling for one battery type, there’s no reason we can’t aim higher for lithium-ion batteries as well. Unlike other stages of the supply chain, countering China’s dominance in the end-of-life stage therefore builds on existing U.S. strengths and market trends.

Bolstering the U.S. battery recycling industry has several advantages. First, it decreases the environmental impact of electric vehicle batteries, mining for which can generate significant and highly toxic pollution. Second, recycling batteries in America means that fewer will have to be imported from China, increasing material and supply chain security. Third, and perhaps best of all, recycling is a low-cost alternative to completely rebuilding a battery supply chain from scratch. In contrast, trying to make new lithium-ion batteries in the U.S. would likely require extensive taxpayer subsidies and take years to get off the ground.

To be sure, recycling alone isn’t a panacea for America’s lithium battery dependency dilemma. Though less harmful than mining, battery recycling plants can still produce toxic substances and local pollution. And no amount of recycling will completely eliminate the need to import electric vehicle batteries from China. Instead, recycling should be thought of as a simple, lower-cost and commonsense strategy to reduce rather than eliminate import dependence. It also offers a short-term solution to mineral import dependence while domestic mining projects for critical minerals like lithium face legal battles, still years away from production.

Perhaps best of all, investing in battery recycling holds bipartisan appeal. Whether driven by climate goals, economic competitiveness or national defense, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle maintain strong support for energy, materials and supply chain security.

Sen. Bill Cassidy’s (R-La.) Foreign Pollution Fee Act is one example of an effort to reduce dependence on China-centric supply chains. Battery recycling fits squarely into this emerging policy framework. It strengthens domestic supply chains, supports cleaner production, and aligns with other economic priorities. In short, recycling isn’t just good environmental policy—it’s smart industrial strategy.

Policymakers can take several steps to support battery recycling. First, they can consider offering tax credits or other direct incentives to battery recycling operators. The Strategic Electric Vehicle Management Act of 2022, co-sponsored by former Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), aimed to maximize the reuse and recycling of end-of-life electric vehicle batteries in federal fleet vehicles. The act sought to reduce reliance on foreign battery components by promoting domestic recycling and bolster the U.S. supply chain. By potentially framing battery recycling tax credits within the context of bolstering American manufacturing and industrial capabilities, policymakers can find consensus in strategies to boost domestic battery manufacturing through tax credits.

Second, policymakers could help prioritize domestic recycling through federal procurement policies. The federal government is the largest vehicle fleet operator in the country. Requiring a minimum percentage of recycled content in federally procured batteries or electronics would create guaranteed demand, helping de-risk private recycling investment. Federal procurement rules could require that a growing share of electric vehicle batteries used in government fleets — especially by the General Services Administration and the Department of Defense — contain a minimum percentage of domestically recycled critical minerals.

This could also be expanded to technologies like drones or portable power systems used for defense purposes. The EPA already has procurement standards that prioritize recycled materials in everything from office supplies to steel. Expanding this logic to batteries is a natural next step.

Third, and finally, battery recycling facilities could be included in ongoing efforts to simplify permitting across the federal government, making them easier and quicker to build. In July 2024, Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) introduced the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 alongside former Sen. Joe Manchin (I-W.Va.). This bipartisan bill aimed to expedite the permitting process for energy and mineral projects, including those related to battery recycling, by reducing bureaucratic delays and fostering domestic energy production. By expediting review timelines and reducing red tape around permitting, policymakers could speed up battery recycling facility development, reducing investment risk and paving a much faster pathway for domestic mineral security.

Electric vehicles will likely continue to make up a growing part of the U.S. vehicle fleet. While dependence on the Chinese market is increasingly expensive and insecure, we can nonetheless reduce it, substantially, through smarter investment in battery recycling.

Scott Moore is practice professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania and a former U.S. government official. Madeline Craig-Scheckman is a doctoral candidate at Northeastern University

https://thehill.com/opinion/technology/5256121-us-ev-battery-recycling-china/

Emmer disputes Van Hollen, says Abrego Garcia given due process

Majority Whip Rep. Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) disagreed with Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and said Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the recently deported Maryland man, was given due process.

Emmer joined CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday, where host Dana Bash asked him to weigh in on Van Hollen’s earlier accusation that the Trump administration deported Abrego Garcia without giving him his constitutional due process rights.

“It’s very interesting when people talk about the fact that this illegal alien, who is not a resident of the U.S., he is a citizen of El Salvador, actually did have due process in an asylum hearing, where his request for asylum was rejected by the Trump administration as part of the promise that they made during the campaign,” Emmer said.

Emmer, like other Trump allies, has accused Abrego Garcia of being part of the Venezuelan gang MS-13 and said the administration was deporting violent members of the gang. Abrego Garcia and his wife have both denied the accusation that he is part of the gang.

Bash pressed Emmer over the deportation and said there was no hearing to determine if Abrego Garcia was a criminal or gang member.

“Actually, I think he was afforded that due process,” Emmer replied. “In this case, an illegal alien was transported back to El Salvador. The administration initially thought it was a mistake. Subsequently, it said it was not a mistake.”

Bash again pressed the Minnesota Republican about what he meant by due process for Abrego Garcia, and if he meant the 2019 hearing that granted him the ability to stay in the U.S.

“I’m talking about when he requested asylum and it was rejected. I’m talking about that hearing, which I’m not going to get into the transcript,” Emmer said, later adding, “He had due process. It was rejected.”

Part of Abrego Garcia’s 2019 agreement was to shield him from violence in El Salvador. Bash noted that he had a protection order not to be deported specifically to El Salvador.

Emmer dodged Bash’s comments and said he found it interesting that Van Hollen and CNN are “doubling down on an illegal alien” and not supporting constituents who are harmed by migrants.

The congressman argued that the Supreme Court’s order for the administration to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return should be left up to El Salvador.

The Trump administration has made a similar argument, noting they cannot ask a foreign government to return someone. El Salvador has said they would not be returning Abrego Garcia.

“I see a citizen of El Salvador who is now in El Salvador. The United States can’t go in and extract people from countries. This is going to be up to the president of El Salvador, not the Trump administration,” Emmer said.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5257691-emmer-disagrees-with-van-hollen-due-process/

Apple buying frenzy pre-tariff pause raises eyebrows but Letitia James only has blinders for Trump

Charles Gasparino

Even before New York AG Tish James launched her insider-trading inquiry into whether Trump cronies got tips to buy stocks before the president’s tariff “pause,” Wall Street veterans flagged fishy tariff-related trades tied to Apple, On The Money has learned.

These involved some suspicious buying of beaten-down Apple shares after the markets opened last Friday. The trades in question predated by hours the White House’s surprise tariff exemption on smartphones, an announcement that would bolster the sagging fortunes of the big tech company and its stock, which had been getting hammered over its China ties since the Trump trade war began.

Suddenly with the carve out, a $3,500 iPhone appeared off the table. Billions in lost market capitalization in earnings models could be restored. Apple wouldn’t have to move all its factories from places like China back to the US to avoid the levies. Its stock was a screaming buy.

And as it turns out, some really prescient Wall Street types appeared to see the future and bought Apple shares right before the exemption announcement came out after the bell that Friday night; Apple shares that day rose 6.5% on no apparent news. When markets reopened the following Monday, Apple’s stock soared, meaning the timing of the trades was, as the kids say, a little sus.

At least that’s what trading sources have been telling me, namely that those Apple trades are ripe for an insider trading case, and maybe some indictments. Trading on material nonpublic information is a crime. People have gone to jail over it.

Maybe, or maybe not. True, insider trading involves stealing nonpublic information that rightly belongs to public shareholders, then trading on it for personal gain. But there’s a lot of room between a weird looking trade and an insider trading case, because the law, such as it is, is pretty nebulous.

That’s because there is no clearly defined piece of legislation that outlines what insider trading is or isn’t, just a bunch of court precedents, which means fitting that definition into a case is complex. It involves more than just trading on stuff that hasn’t been made public because most insider trading involves intermediaries, someone who hears something from the CEO or a corporate executive and then passes it along to someone who does the trading. To prove information theft, these parties need to have a financial relationship or there’s no case.

Casual conversations involving stock tips don’t apply. On top of it all, most of these insider trading cases involve corporate executives or insiders stealing information about a company’s internal operations that can move stocks, not the machinations of government. Yes, there is a law preventing members of Congress from trading on nonpublic information they get from briefings.

But when was the last time you saw one of them go to jail for doing so? The answer: Never. The reason: Those fuzzy court precedents don’t cover government officials.

Plus, I did a little research on what was bouncing around the markets just before the so-called Apple exemption announcement came out of left field and the alleged dirty trades went down. That same day, a Federal Reserve governor was quoted saying that the nation’s central bank would stabilize markets if they continued to implode. Fed intervention is always a positive for stocks. That could also have accounted for the buying of Apple and other tech names that afternoon.

James’s semi-investigation of Trump (she says she’s just kicking the tires for now) faces similar hurdles. She’s investigating whether Trump may have tipped off friends and family before announcing his April 9 “pause” on tariffs (except on Chinese goods) that took the Dow up close to 3,000 points.

The NY AG, it should be noted, has been trying to nail Trump on something for years, she even campaigned on it, so she’s not a neutral source.

This week, Trump punched back, sending a criminal referral on James for some shady-looking mortgage applications she filled out.

Given her biases, you can understand why she might have overlooked some exculpatory evidence, like Trump’s urging Americans to buy the market well before the pause announcement and just before the open on April 9, stating on Truth Social it was a “GREAT TIME TO BUY.”

He wrote that in all caps, presumably because he really believed it. Anyone who bought at the open would have made nearly as much money as anyone he allegedly tipped off, which means no one got screwed, so there’s probably no case.

Bottom line: If insider trading was so easy to prove, more than a few lawmakers and many more Wall Street traders would be in jail.

Meanwhile, it would be nice if Tish James could explain to us all those wonky mortgage applications she filled out.

https://nypost.com/2025/04/18/business/apple-buying-frenzy-ahead-of-tariff-pause-raises-eyebrows-but-letitia-james-only-has-blinders-for-trump/

Sam’s Club to eliminate checkout lanes completely with major change

Sam’s Club, the Walmart-owned membership warehouse, is rolling out a major change to its grocery payment system and embracing artificial intelligence (AI).

The retail giant plans to phase out traditional checkouts across its 600 stores and create a friction-free shopping experience which will include customers scanning goods on the go with an app and then having and AI scanner verify the goods as customers leave. The technology would eliminate the need for receipt checks at the door.

The system, known as “Scan & Go,” was initially launched in April 2024 and allows members to use the Sam’s Club mobile app to scan their products.

The latest announcement adds the AI check, known as “Just Walk”/”Just Go” exit, to the process and will see the option of traditional checkouts being eliminated.

The new plans were announced by Chris Nicholas, Sam’s Club president and CEO, who outlined the company’s growth ambitions at its 2025 Investment Community Meeting last week.

“This is one of the fastest, most scalable transformations happening in retail today,” Nicholas said. “We’re investing with intention — in our fleet, our associates and the member experience — to become the world’s best club retailer.”

The company said its newly opened store in Grapevine, Texas, already has the “Just Walk”/”Just Go” system in place and that store will be “setting the standard” for the club for the future. The new store has designed to make shopping faster, smoother and more enjoyable.

That store is also designed with AI in mind to create a better work environment for workers with upgrades like a vertical tire carousel, automated forklifts and a pizza robot in the café.

“It’s a place where human-centered design and technology meet convenience and discovery, offering a glimpse into the future of retail,” the company wrote in a December press release.

Walmart, meanwhile, is in the middle of experimenting with AI technology and monitoring the risks and benefits.

Costco, the company’s main rival, is taking the opposite approach and sticking with traditional checkout lanes only.

Sam’s Club said its 100,000 associates remain central to the company’s momentum.

The company said that the adoption of AI tools to streamline repetitive tasks has improved both operational efficiency and associate engagement, while there have also been investments in wages and career progression opportunities.

Sam’s Club said that the new technology will allow more time to enhance the member experience.

“When a member has a meaningful, positive interaction with an associate, they’re more likely to renew — and stay loyal,” Nicholas said. “We’re building a culture that supports our associates as much as our members, because that’s how we win.”

https://nypost.com/2025/04/19/business/sams-club-reveals-plan-to-eliminate-checkout-lanes-completely-with-major-change/