Sadly, we have an idiot running the country.

In a fresh twist on U.S.-Venezuela drama, President Trump is clashing with Exxon Mobil over his ridiculous push to revive the country’s massive but battered oil sector following the U.S.-backed ouster of Nicolás Maduro.

At a White House meeting on Friday with top oil executives, Trump pitched big incentives: unspecified U.S. security guarantees for companies willing to invest heavily in fixing Venezuela’s crumbling energy infrastructure. He envisions U.S. firms (and others) pouring in billions to boost production, lower global energy prices, and deliver economic wins back home.

But Exxon CEO Darren Woods wasn’t buying the hype. He bluntly called Venezuela “uninvestable” right now, citing the need for major overhauls to commercial frameworks, the legal system, investment protections, and hydrocarbon laws. Exxon has painful history there—assets nationalized twice (most notably in 2007 under Chávez/Maduro), leading to a long arbitration battle where they recovered only a fraction of the claimed $12 billion. Woods said any return would require “pretty significant changes” from past conditions, though he left the door open for a technical team to assess assets soon.

Trump didn’t take the caution well, and of course he’s acting like a child. On Sunday aboard Air Force One, he told reporters: “I’ll probably be inclined to keep Exxon out… I didn’t like their response. They’re playing too cute.” He claimed other companies are eager to jump in and dismissed past losses, saying, “We’re not gonna look at what people lost in the past. You’re gonna make a lot of money, but we’re not going to go back.”

Similar hesitancy came from ConocoPhillips (also burned for billions in 2007 nationalizations) and even Chevron (the only major U.S. player still active there), which offered modest ramp-up potential but no huge commitments.

This episode exposes the gap between Trump’s authoritarian delusions and corporate pragmatism. Trump seems to assume that toppling a regime and waving security promises is enough to get Big Oil marching into Venezuela’s fields like it’s a surefire gold rush. Yet executives remember the expropriations, outstanding debts, political instability, and the massive capital needed to revive dilapidated operations—risks that don’t vanish overnight with presidential assurances.

The result? A public spat where the president threatens to sideline the largest U.S. oil company from his own “America First” energy vision. It’s a stark reminder: oil isn’t pumped by fiat. Even with military-backed regime change, companies won’t ignore billions in past losses, legal uncertainties, or the need for durable protections just because a president says “come on in.”

This is another pathetic example of Trump’s foolishness, thinking you can conquer a country, seize its oil, and have corporations line up like it’s a government contract. Reality check: Exxon isn’t a branch of the military; it’s a business that learned the hard way Venezuela isn’t a reliable partner.

Also, there’s the reality US oil companies have strong incentives not to support (or eagerly participate in) a rapid flood of cheap Venezuelan oil onto global markets. These companies are heavily reliant on fracking, particularly the independent shale producers in places like the Permian Basin. Frackers don’t want to fund competition that tanks their margins in an already oversupplied world. Trump’s vision of cheap Venezuelan oil as an “America First” win ignores how it could hurt the very US energy sector he champions, highlighting yet another gap between idiotic political bravado and market reality.

Donald Trump has created a mess with his tariffs, and we’re starting to see evicence across various industries.

The spirits industry in the U.S. is facing all sorts of challenges. Young people are drinking much less alcohol. The post-Covid booze boom has subsided. And there’s a ton of supply. One executive in the beer business told me this is the worst year of his 35-year career.

The recent news from Jim Beam has certainly rattled people. The company is pausing production of its flagship bourbon product for all of 2026! That’s a real punch in the gut.

The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board doesn’t mince words as they place blame squarely and Trump an dhis tariffs. Even as some tariffs are lifted, the damage has been done. Canadians hate him and gleefully avoid American products. So it’s much more than a simple cost issue. It’s a destruction of the American brand. It will be interesting to see how this starts to manifest in other industries.

This post highlights a serious problem facing Starbucks – consumers are spending less time in their stores, and this trend continues to get worse.

Starbucks’ once-dominant model involved packing urban corners with cozy cafés for work and socializing. But this relied on full offices and daily commutes. Remote work changed everything, erasing weekday rushes and gutting downtown profits.

This had led to closures of many Starbucks locations. A third of recent LA shutdowns were in the city-center, with similar trends in Chicago, New York, and Seattle.

The other problem involves the flood of mobile orders, which optimized speed but killed ambiance. Starbucks stores now feel much more transactional: order, grab, go. We see the long lines both at the drive-through and inside the store. When I want to meet someone for a coffee, whether for business or socializing, Starbucks is no longer the top option. I’ll try to find a Panera or a local brand coffee shop, as I know the Starbucks experience isn’t what it used to be.

The key metric of customers lingering 10+ minutes has fallen over a year, even with changes implemented by new CEO Brian Niccol. Stayers drive revenue with second drinks, snacks, repeat visits, etc.

We’ll see if Niccol can find a way to reverse this trend. It doesn’t help that we’re facing an economic slowdown, and expensive coffee drinks will be a luxury that many consumers won’t be able to afford.

You probably saw this amazing ad created by PJ Ace for Kalshi during the NBA Finals. It was a massive success for the Kalshi brand and generated a ton of buzz.

And it was created completely by AI.

For small companies and less well-known brands, generative AI offers an amazing tool if used propoerly with the assistance of creatives like PJ Ace, who has built an ad agancy that makes AI commercials for clients.

But for bigger and well-known brands, they need to be a bit more careful. Using AI in a way that’s not perceived as authentic can harm a valuable brand. The scruntiny is much greater, and you may risk a backlash.

This article offers some useful guidelines for marketing departments as they grapple with these issues, with a focus on the beauty industry.

As the beauty industry continues to evolve, brands are under increasing pressure to innovate while maintaining their audience’s trust. Generative AI has emerged as a powerful tool for ideation, content creation and campaign design.

But while generative AI’s potential is undeniable, the way it’s used in advertising demands careful consideration. Missteps can compromise a brand’s authenticity, damage brand values and erode consumer trust — outcomes that no brand can afford.

There’s some great stuff here, with warnings on avoiding “AI slop” and creating ads perceived to be “AI sterile.” Transparancy is key, and the author argues for a hybrid approach where real actors are used in addition to AI tools.

Meanwhile, if you’re a new or smaller branded, you caan afford to take more chances and make bold statements using AI. So give PJ a call . . .

As businesses make more investments in AI, we’re going to start seeing more “custom AI” builds. “Custom AI” is the practice of taking a general foundation or large-language model (LLM) and adapting it so that it better reflects a particular organization’s needs. It all start with using that organization’s date, and then emplying tactics such as fine-tuning, continued pre-training, model-distillation, domain‐specific training, etc. to provide the most relevant and useful output. Think of a law firm using their own contracts to train their proprietary model, or a company using all of their own product specifications in the AI used for customer services.

Amazon AWS details this in a recent release: “Custom Intelligence: Building AI that matches your business DNA.” It outlines how they help customers create custom models and how these models can be fine-tuned over time.

Job losses tied to AI are accelerating.

In a move that underscores the relentless pace of technological disruption, Amazon announced on October 31, 2025, plans to eliminate approximately 14,000 roles across its corporate workforce. This latest round of reductions, detailed in an internal memo from HR SVP Beth Galetti, continues the e-commerce giant’s efforts to streamline operations amid explosive growth in artificial intelligence. While Amazon frames the changes as necessary for agility and customer focus, they highlight a stark reality: AI is not just augmenting jobs—it’s eliminating them in the short term, forcing companies to rethink workforce structures in ways that prioritize speed over scale.

Trimming the Bureaucracy

Amazon’s cuts target layers of middle management and administrative functions, building on similar actions from 2023 and 2024 that trimmed over 27,000 positions overall. Galetti described the reductions as “a continuation of this work to get even stronger by further reducing bureaucracy, removing layers, and shifting resources to ensure we’re investing in our biggest bets and what matters most to our customers’ current and future needs.”

Unlike broad-based slashes, these cuts are being explained as surgical: affected teams will receive direct communications from leaders, with the majority of roles in non-customer-facing corporate areas. The timing is telling. Amazon’s core businesses, e-commerce, AWS cloud services, and advertising, reported robust Q3 2025 earnings, with revenue up 11% year-over-year to $158 billion. Yet, as Galetti noted, “We’re convinced that we need to be organized more leanly, with fewer layers and more ownership, to move as quickly as possible for our customers and business.”

AI’s Double-Edged Sword

At the heart of Amazon’s rationale lies the emergence of AI, which Galetti called “the most transformative technology we’ve seen since the Internet, and it’s enabling companies to innovate much faster than ever before.” Generative AI tools are automating routine tasks (data analysis, report generation, and even code debugging) that once required human oversight. In Amazon’s case, AI is powering everything from personalized recommendations to warehouse optimization, allowing the company to do more with less.

This isn’t unique to Amazon. In the short term, AI adoption is accelerating job displacement across tech. A 2025 McKinsey report estimates that 45% of work activities could be automated by generative AI, with corporate functions like HR, finance, and operations hit hardest—precisely the areas Amazon is targeting. We’ve seen echoes in Google’s 2024 cuts of 1,000+ roles in ad sales and recruitment, and Microsoft’s reduction of 1,900 in gaming amid AI investments. The pattern is clear: as AI handles the “grunt work,” companies reallocate human talent to high-value innovation, but the transition leaves thousands in limbo.

And we’re just getting started. AI can help knowledge workers handle anaysis and strategy, we will likely see job losses beyond workers that handle routine tasks.

For workers, the short-term pain is acute. Entry- and mid-level roles, often held by recent graduates or specialists in administrative tools like Excel or legacy software, are vanishing fastest. Amazon’s memo acknowledges this, committing to a 90-day internal job search window for most affected employees, with recruiting teams prioritizing internal candidates.

A Wake-Up Call for the Workforce

Amazon’s actions signal a seismic shift beyond Big Tech. In retail, manufacturing, and services—sectors employing millions—AI chatbots are supplanting customer service reps, while predictive algorithms optimize supply chains, reducing the need for planners. The World Economic Forum’s 2025 Future of Jobs report projects 85 million jobs displaced globally by 2027 due to automation, outpacing the 97 million created in emerging fields like AI ethics and data curation.

The short-term elimination of jobs isn’t malice; it’s math. AI delivers 20-30% efficiency gains in knowledge work, per Gartner, allowing firms to cut costs without sacrificing output. For Amazon, this means redirecting savings to “bold bets” like Project Amelia (an AI coding assistant) and Rufus (a shopping AI), which promise to redefine e-commerce. Galetti emphasized Amazon’s breadth: “I don’t know of any other company with the breadth of Amazon, the number of exciting bold bets we’re making, and all the ways we can make customers lives better and easier around the world.”

Looking Ahead: Short-Term Losses, Long-Term Reinvention

Amazon plans to hire aggressively in 2026 for strategic areas like AI development and customer experience, even as it hunts for more efficiencies. This duality—cuts followed by targeted growth—mirrors the AI economy’s trajectory: destruction before creation. For now, the short term favors the adaptable. As Galetti put it, Amazon aims to “operate like the world’s largest startup,” betting that a leaner, AI-powered machine will outpace competitors.

Lessons for Workers

If you’re a knowledge worker, learn how to use AI to be more efficient and effective. The reality of the job market is changing fast and you have to adapt.

The latest news from Chipotle is crushing the company’s stock, but it’s even worse news for the economy. Here’s a quote from the CEO:

“Earlier this year, as consumer sentiment declined sharply, we saw a broad-based pullback in frequency across all income cohorts. Since then, the gap has widened, with low to middle-income guests further reducing frequency. We believe that this guest, with household income below $100,000, represents about 40% of our total sales, and based on our data, is dining out less often due to concerns about the economy and inflation. A particularly challenged cohort is the 25 to 35-year-old age group. We believe that this trend is not unique to Chipotle and is occurring across all restaurants, as well as many discretionary categories.”

We’re hearing this from many companies, but here it’s even more explicit. The middle and lower classes are getting hurt by inflation and a slowing economy. And this suggests that it’s going to get worse. We’ll see if this leads to a recession.

Now we do have to put this in context. Chipotle has its own problems as it doesn’t seem to know how to cater to this younger demo in this environment. One use on X put it simply:

i could fix chipotle in 1 day as ceo. You just introduce a half priced burrito that isn’t the size of a newborn. Instead of 1500 calories, maybe you only eat 700. It’s under $10. There would lines would be out the door

This hit’s home.

So we may have a combination of factors here, but it’s difficult to deny the economic slowdown. We’ll be posting more examples.

There are plenty of warning signs for the U.S. economy, but the slowdown in Las Vegas might be the ultimate “canary in the coal mine.”

Las Vegas relies heavily on tourism, gaming, and hospitality, which account for about 40% of the local economy and support over 300,000 jobs. In 2025, the city has experienced a noticeable slowdown, with visitor numbers down approximately 7.3% through the first half of the year compared to 2024. This marks the steepest decline in over 50 years, surpassing drops during the Great Recession of 2008-2009. Hotel occupancy has fallen by nearly 6% and food and beverage sales dropped 1.6% (equating to a $191 million loss). While gaming revenue has held up—rising 5.5% in August 2025 to $1.22 billion—overall consumer spending on non-gaming activities like dining and shopping is down significantly.

Causes of the Slowdown

The dip stems from a mix of domestic and international pressures, many tied to broader U.S. economic and policy dynamics:

Economic Uncertainty and Inflation

Persistent inflation (hovering around 3-4% nationally) and high interest rates have made consumers more cautious with discretionary spending. Surveys show Americans planning smaller vacation budgets, even as more intend to travel. Traffic across the California-Nevada border on Interstate 15 fell 4.3% in June, signaling fewer road trips from key markets like Southern California.

Price Gouging

Prices in Las Vegas are completely out of control, and the problem goes well beyond simple inflation. Hefty “resort fees” are just one example.

Policy Impacts Under Trump

The administration’s escalated trade wars, tariffs on imports from China, Mexico, and Canada, and stricter immigration enforcement have chilled international tourism. Canadians, Las Vegas’s largest international visitor group, are down sharply due to trade tensions and a new $250 “visa integrity fee” that pushes total costs to $442 per visitor—one of the world’s highest. Mexicans and Europeans are also visiting less, with some attributing it to fears of deportations and economic “riled up” rhetoric. This aligns with a projected $12.5 billion national loss in international traveler spending for 2025, per the World Travel & Tourism Council. Locals are lamenting the “Trump Slump.”

Implications for the Broader U.S. Economy

Yes, this slowdown is a concerning signal for the U.S. economy, though not yet a definitive harbinger of recession. Vegas has rebounded before, so anything is possible. But this seems to be a serious problem. Reduced tourism hits suppliers, airlines, and even real estate (with slower investor demand). If this continues we may be on the way to a recession.

Intel has announced a massive investment in US manufacturing and in the state of Ohio.

Chip giant Intel plans to officially announce Friday that it will invest $20 billion to build two computer chip plants in Jersey Township in Licking County in what will be Ohio’s largest economic development project to date. State and local officials are set to gather in Newark this afternoon to celebrate the news.

The factories, called fabs, will employ 3,000 workers at an average salary of $135,000 per year. On top of that, the project is expected to create 7,000 construction jobs and 10,000 indirect jobs. And that’s just the start.

This is big news in so many ways. First, it’s a big step in bringing semiconductor manufacturing back to the United States. This is welcome news for the long-term health of U.S. manufacturing, but also due to the current chip shortage being experienced in many industries.

It’s also a major win for the state of Ohio. Another state offered more incentives, but Ohio offered a more favorable regulatory environment along with an ideal site that offers the opportunity for expansion. The proximity of The Ohio State University is also a major plus, along with the many other respected universities in the state.

This will be Intel’s first new manufacturing site in 40 years. Intel has been expanding production in other U.S. plants but this represents a massive new commitment by the company. The project could eventually include eight factories and $100 billion in investment over the next decade when you factor in Intel and its suppliers and partners. The ripple effects will be huge across the state of Ohio. Construction is expected to start this year with 2025 as the target completion date.

Columbus, Ohio is already booming, and this offers an opportunity for the state capital to become a high tech powerhouse. Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger explained that the site could eventually expand to 2,000 acres with eight fabs, with the new site becoming “the Silicon Heartland.” The benefits will ripple across the state as well. Depressed areas like nearby Akron/Canton could benefit as well, along with other parts of the state. But Columbus can now be a destination location for even more tech companies.

2021 was a boom year for cryptocurrencies and NFTs, with many investors realizing massive financial gains when selling crypto or NFTs. Meanwhile, this has moved so fats that we have some uncertainty as to how the IRS will treat these gains. Of course investors will need to declare realized gains, but the applicable tax rate may be different between crypto and NFTs:

Specifically, an investor who sells an NFT, such as digital art, may owe a top 31.8% federal tax rate on any earnings. By comparison, appreciation in bitcoin, ethereum and other digital coins is subject to a 23.8% top rate.

That’s because NFTs are likely collectibles, for tax purposes. Collectibles carry a higher maximum tax rate on capital gains relative to assets like stocks, bonds and cryptocurrencies.

The IRS has not made a formal announcement, but tax experts are fairly confident that NFTs will be treated as collectibles. Keep this in mind as you plan your finances for 2022.