CMR is the leading provider of funding and management support for small to medium-sized businesses and entrepreneurs 

Chipotle Mexican Grill shares chopped around last week after the fast-casual chain delivered an underwhelming outlook for annual comparable sales forecast. But by week's end, it was not the earnings print making the rounds on social media; it was a snippet from the CEO's remarks on the earnings call that went viral on X.

*CHIPOTLE SEES 2026 COMP SALES ABOUT 0%, EST. +1.84%

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) February 3, 2026

First off, X users framed CEO Scott Boatwright's remarks as if he'd been "caught on a recording." That's complete nonsense. He said it openly on an earnings call with Wall Street analysts. But sure, whatever fuels the engagement algo machine on X.

On the call, Evercore ISI analyst David Palmer asked Boatwright:

And I wonder, you're going to be existing among these giant fast-food players that are rolling out value menus, and you've done some things along the way. You have an entry price point cup with the new protein menu. You said you have some price-pointed things. It looks like you have a new style of advertising, where you've pointed out, pretty clearly, there's a di?erence in the way Chipotle makes its food versus what you'd see at a traditional fast-food place.

I just wonder, is there any, do you feel like, the o?ense might be working with these price-pointed things and the messaging? And I'm just wondering, if there's anything you can do to really shorten this cycle -- this, reinvestment cycle, rather than just wait for your price to underprice inflation for a while? And thank you.

... and here's where the outrage on X was triggered.

Boatwright responded:

Yes. Thanks, David. I'll tell you, with what the momentum we saw in early January, the first part of January, it gives us confidence that the strategy is exactly what our consumer is looking for. I talked earlier about doing this deep-dive on the core Chipotle consumer to really parse out, who that consumer is and what they want.

What we've learned is the guest skews younger, a little more higher income is typically a digital native, and that their grounded purpose aligns with our Northstar as a brand around clean food, clean ingredients, high protein, and we are the way they want to eat. And we're going to lean into that in the most meaningful way.

Now, I'll tell you, after looking at the data last week, we learned that 60% of our core users are over $100,000 a year in income -- in average household income. That gives us confidence that we can lean into that group in a more meaningful way, whether it's the solo occasion and or group occasions to really drive meaningful transaction performance in the year.

Chipotle CEO: 60% of users make over $100,000 a year in income. ???? pic.twitter.com/cuezE5rv1K

— Yahoo Finance (@YahooFinance) February 7, 2026

Translation: Chipotle will raise burrito bowl prices even higher. There was a time when these bowls were sub $10 - even less.

Not a great look for the CEO at a moment when the Trump administration is pushing ahead with affordability. But there's a simple solution for the youngsters: eat at home.

Via Remix News,

The visible decline in production in Europe’s chemical sector could soon have far more serious consequences. Production capacity is disappearing, and the further consequences will be alarming, warn leaders of the largest companies in an industry that recently experienced a period of prosperity.

They are calling for swift and far-reaching changes to EU law, writes Polish Business Insider.

In just a few years, nearly 10 percent of production capacity on the Old Continent has disappeared. Industry representatives are warning that cheaper products from Asia and the Middle East are taking their place, as European companies suffocate under the weight of energy prices, CO2 costs, and a thicket of regulations. This is the view of both state-owned (Azoty), private (Qemetica), and foreign companies operating in Poland (BASF).

The chemical sector accounts for approximately 7 percent of the EU’s total industry and generates over 1 million direct jobs, with 3-5 times as many indirect jobs, primarily in small and medium-sized companies. Meanwhile, according to Katarzyna Byczkowska, CEO of BASF Polska, over the last three years, approximately 9 percent of chemical production capacity has been liquidated in Europe, and in 2023-2024, the European chemical industry alone will shrink by 14 percent. During this same period, chemical production grew in countries such as China, Russia, and the United States.

“In Europe, we’re playing a different game than the rest of the world, but on the same playing field. We’re starting to lose,” warns Kamil Majczak, CEO of Qemetika (formerly Ciech), during a debate organized by Siemens with other representatives of the chemical sector. In his opinion, Europe still believes it can impose its rules on others, while China, the U.S., and India view the world as a field for expanding their spheres of influence and taking over markets.

“We can’t expect developing countries to suddenly make everything green, three times more expensive, because we think it’s the right thing to do,” he adds.

Majczak emphasizes that the consequences of rising costs are already tangible. More and more plants are closing in Europe, and some companies have survived the last two or three years by leveraging previous profits. “This buffer is running out, and once a plant closes, it won’t reopen. People will leave, production capacity will disappear, and it won’t return after a year or two,” warns the CEO of Qemetica.

In the case of fertilizers, the price of gas accounts for 75-80 percent of the product’s production cost. For years, Europe has been an importer, now forced to use much more expensive sources than before. This poses a significant challenge for fertilizer companies like Azoty.

This is especially an issue for the chemical sector, as it is such an energy-intensive industry, says Pawel Bielski, vice-president of Grupa Azoty.

“At certain points, gas in the U.S. was 4-6 times cheaper than in Europe,” recalls Katarzyna Byczkowska, CEO of BASF Poland. The differences in energy costs are immediately visible in the profit and loss accounts of European and American plants, admits Kamil Majczak, CEO of Qemetica, who compares the results of factories in Europe and the US. CO2 emissions fees must also be added to the total, which, Majczak says, are practically nonexistent outside of Europe, with the exception of a specific system in California.

Industry representatives emphasize that they are not questioning the direction of decarbonization, but the pace, scale, and structure of regulatory burdens in a situation where Europe is already starting from a worse position, because it is more expensive in terms of energy.

Katarzyna Byczkowska highlights two levels of regulatory costs.

First, there are direct costs resulting from regulatory compliance, as in the case of the EU’s CLP regulation. The change in font on chemical labels was reportedly costing her company over €300 million before, after a year of intense negotiations, some of the provisions were withdrawn.

Second, there is the increasing structural burden resulting from the sheer number and volatility of regulations, which generate chaos, reduce predictability, and drain resources from research and development.

“In Europe, we already spend twice as much on regulatory compliance as on research and development,” notes the head of BASF Poland. Across the continent, this translates to an 8 percent decline in R&D spending, while in China and the US, spending is rising year over year.

Pawel Bielski, Vice President of Grupa Azoty, points out that the EU climate package and subsequent elements of Fit for 55 were developed under completely different conditions than those in which the industry operates today. “The Green Deal was adopted when no one took into account the pandemic, the war in Ukraine, or the rapid change in Europe’s energy balance,” he argues. In his opinion, the direction of decarbonization will remain unchanged, even if some regulations are formally suspended, but the rules themselves should be improved.

A symbolic example is the ETS system, or emissions trading. Free allowances are shrinking every year, and, as Byczkowska explains, companies are unable to “add” another billion euros a year to purchase certificates in a time of crisis and blocked new investments. “We need someone to stop tightening their grip on us even more,” she says.

The clash between European climate ambitions and the realities of global competition is most acute in the clash with Asian production. “We used to be an exporter, now we’re an importer, and that fundamentally disrupts the balance,” says Majczak. China has built vast, modern production capacities in recent years to satisfy its own market, but the slowdown in demand has freed up a significant portion of this capacity for export. 

Taking advantage of cheaper energy and less restrictive regulations, Chinese producers are aggressively entering the European market, from fertilizers to plastics.

Pawel Bielski points out that until recently, Europe had a strong polymer industry, including the production of polyamides for automotive, construction, and packaging. Today, China’s dominance is overwhelming in many segments — in one of them, as he points out, as much as 67 percent of global production capacity is already located in China. He believes a similar trend is visible in fertilizers: Massive installations are being built in Russia, the U.S., and the Persian Gulf countries, which will not consume all of their production domestically, but will instead direct it to Europe, among other countries.

One positive sign is that technological advances reduce costs. “We’re seeing increased activity from companies investing in solutions that enable faster, cheaper, and safer production,” says Maciej Zielinski, CEO of Siemens Polska.

Read more here...

Political identity in the U.S. is changing, and the divide is increasingly generational.

Younger Americans are stepping away from traditional party labels, while older generations remain more closely tied to the two-party system.

This visualization, via Visual Capitalist's Niccolo Conte, shows how political affiliation varies across generations, highlighting the growing role of independents in American politics.

The data comes from Gallup. It is based on annual averages from Gallup’s telephone interviews, asking respondents whether they identify as Republican, Democrat, or independent. “No opinion” responses are excluded, and figures may not total 100% due to rounding.

Younger Generations Favor Being Independents

A majority of both Generation Z and Millennials identify as independents. Among Gen Z, 56% say they are independent, compared with just 17% identifying as Republican and 27% as Democrat. Millennials show a similar pattern, with 54% identifying as independent.

Party Loyalty Rises With Age

Political affiliation becomes more evenly split among older generations. Generation X shows a more balanced distribution, with 31% Republican, 25% Democrat, and 42% independent. Among Baby Boomers, party identification nearly overtakes independence altogether.

The Silent Generation is the most partisan group, with roughly seven in 10 identifying as either Republican or Democrat. This cohort came of age during periods when party affiliation was more stable and closely tied to identity, such as the New Deal era and the Cold War.

Implications for U.S. Politics

The rise of independents among younger generations has major implications for elections and governance. While independents may still lean toward one party, their lack of formal affiliation makes voter behavior less predictable. It also complicates messaging for political parties trying to mobilize younger voters.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out The Distribution of Income in America (2024 vs 1974) on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Authored by Daniel Lacalle,

The Spanish Prime Minister, Pedro Sánchez, has appeared at a summit along with autocratic and undemocratic leaders from Georgia and Burundi to talk about protecting citizens and democracy. Fascinating. It is very revealing.

The president talks about protecting minors from the harms of social networks and launches tirades against alleged techno-oligarchs. However, the evidence shows that beneath the supposedly “noble” goal of protecting minors, there is an agenda that includes the introduction of digital identities, biometric control for all, and prior censorship accompanied by state surveillance.

It is obvious to everyone that the objective is to silence independent media.

If the digital control law had been implemented in 2018, the corruption scandals surrounding the Socialist government would never have come to light. Koldo García, accused of embezzlement, would still be a member of the board of public train company Renfe today; Jose Luis Ábalos, under investigation for various corruption scandals, would still be minister; Salazar, investigated for sexual assault, would be an exemplary socialist; Venezuela’s dictatorship’s Delcy Rodriguez would be a VIP nighttime visitor; and the Socialist party’s number two, Santos Cerdán, would still be “Super Santos.” For Sánchez, all those cases were “disinformation” and “fake news” from the “far right”; do not forget it.

If he really cared about teenagers, he would not condemn them to unemployment and ruin and would give greater responsibility to parents, based on freedom. But he wants to ban access to social media because the goal is to silence dissenters.

It is no surprise that his words have been met with enormous enthusiasm by millionaires such as Alex, the son of George Soros, or by defenders of censorship and propaganda who see their dream of social engineering and control slipping away these days.

Hadn’t this inquisition shifted to Bluesky, with the intention of ending X and establishing the true social majority? They treat Bluesky as though it were a non-governmental organization.

Curiously, what Sánchez calls techno-oligarchs does not bother him if they serve his interests. Elon Musk, when aligned with the Democrats, set a global example. Sánchez courted Soros, Gates, Fink, and anyone he could for years. If anyone has used social networks to spread hate, division, polarization, and disinformation, it has been his government and his far-left partners. However, it is important to note that his objective is not to restrict young people’s access to communist propaganda messages, but rather to prevent them from voting for the right. They thought teens were ideal and wanted them to vote when they thought they’d vote left. Now, when they see that young people are of no use to them, they launch their other favorite social-engineering tool: the mass regularization of irregular immigrants.

Sanchez lies on immigration policy by deliberately misleading the public about the regularization of illegal immigrants in the country with the highest unemployment rate in the euro area. This tactic serves as a form of social engineering and control, similar to his digital protection strategy, rather than being based on economic logic.

This is not solidarity. The objective is to create a dependent subclass, buy votes, and inflate GDP through immigration, which is why, according to the IMF, Spain’s per capita GDP is expected to increase by only 1.1% from 2017 to 2026 with 10% “official” unemployment (14% real). It delays all those trying to enter legally and passes the enormous cost and social challenges to taxpayers.

Cornered by corruption and the disastrous management of infrastructure and public services, Sánchez launches yet another smokescreen operation to try to silence independent opinions.

The reality? His flagship socialist propaganda projects have failed, TikTok has not helped them win elections, and freedom is advancing. That is what bothers them.

The far left perceives X as a threat, yet none of their criticisms mention TikTok. One is free, and the other is controlled by a dictatorship. Fascinating.

The left loves social networks and billionaires when they serve its purpose of control.

Just remember how thrilled they were with Davos a few years ago. What bothers them is freedom and diversity of opinion. Furthermore, what fills them with uncontrollable rage is that the Grok community dismantles their propaganda in the notes section.

If Musk calls Sánchez a traitor and a tyrant, it is a grave insult against an elected president and against Spain, according to the extreme left, but if socialists and the far left call the elected president of the United States or of Argentina a murderer, dictator, fascist, Nazi, terrorist, and racist, that is fantastic and normal.

The evidence of X’s independence and plurality is that every time I open the app, I see posts from socialist cheerleaders, whom I neither follow nor search for.

All this crisis is yet another example of Sánchez’s mastery in applying the 11 principles of propaganda, especially that of the single enemy and reversal: demonizing a supposed all-powerful enemy to present himself as victim and savior, and accusing everyone else of being guilty of corruption and negligence, pointing at others to cover his government’s issues.

Whenever corruption scandals or negligence in infrastructure management put the Spanish government under fire, Sanchez creates a smokescreen and applies the main propaganda principles to shift attention. His favorite tactic is to select a “special enemy” for vilification. The far-left government even fabricated a fake “bomb threat” to portray Sanchez as both a victim and a savior to stay in power at any cost. Sanchez has targeted various groups for vilification, including tech companies, energy companies, banks, supermarkets, social media, the independent press, specific nations, and any political opponent, as well as the far-left government’s favorite tactic, promoting antisemitism. Choose one. Divert attention. Move on.

A man who is incapable of winning elections presents himself as the voice of the social majority. It is ridiculous when he is held hostage by the minorities that keep him in power. And power is the only thing he cares about. That is why he seeks censorship at all costs, to silence the majority that does not suit him.

Sánchez wants to create a state of surveillance and censorship in Spain under the pretext of digital “protection.” To all the Sánchez-aligned press that is defending this outrage against freedom of expression, maybe thinking that being political commissars will benefit them, I would like to remind them that purges come afterwards.

If you believe that supporting Sánchez’s totalitarian whims will be advantageous for you, remember that actions you consider acceptable when “your side” does them can also be used by the opposing side against you.

Disinformation and polarization may happen in a free society, but those risks are 100% certain when information is controlled by the state.

Boston Dynamics has released new footage of its flagship humanoid robot program, "Atlas," showcasing next-level mobility and reinforcing our greatest fears that when these bots are paired with "brains," adoption can quickly move from factory floors to offensive defense missions.

"Now that the Atlas enterprise platform is getting to work, the research version gets one last run in the sun. Our engineers made one final push to test the limits of full-body control and mobility, with help from the RAI Institute," Boston Dynamics, which is owned by Hyundai Motor Group, wrote in the description of a video titled "Atlas Airborne."

The video shows Atlas pulling off an impressive cartwheel, capped by a near-perfect backflip landing, at the Robotics & AI Institute testing facility. The institute is a research organization focused on solving fundamental challenges in robotics and AI. The video also highlights several other mobility accomplishments.

What's clear to us is that these humanoid robots are set to march en masse onto assembly lines, warehouses, and other factory floors this year.

As we noted earlier, “robot brains” are already here, accelerating the shift from promotional stunts to real-world use cases and, ultimately, mass commercial adoption across manufacturing settings.

We think there is a rising probability here, frankly high enough that someone should start a Polymarket bet, that humanoid robots for dual use could show up at testing grounds in Ukraine as soon as this year.

We have warned about the dual-use risk even as leading companies, including Boston Dynamics, Agility Robotics, ANYbotics, Clearpath Robotics, Open Robotics, Unitree, and Figure AI, publicly state they will not weaponize their bots.

To our knowledge, Foundation is the only U.S. humanoid robotics developer with an offensive contract with the Department of Defense.

Read the latest on where the humanoid robotics space is headed:

• Humanoid Robots Get "Brains" As Dual-Use Fears Mount

• AI's Next Frontier Is Physical As Humanoid Robots Begin March On Assembly Lines And Beyond

• Watch: Russian Soldiers Surrender To Gun-Wielding Robot; Humanoid Warfare Nears

• AI 'Kill Chains' And Rise Of Skynet-Like Weapons Offer Glimpse Of 2030s Battlefield

These bots have gone from clunky machines that could barely walk in a straight line to running and doing flips in just several years. Our reporting should give readers a framework for the 2030s that makes dual-use humanoid robots unavoidable.

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

In Groß-Gerau, Hesse, a billion-euro project has been blocked by citizen opposition and the local council’s majority. The town now seems the epitome of Germany’s decline: backward-looking, stubborn, and hopelessly lost in an era that leaves no room for passive solipsism.

With roughly 27,000 residents, Groß-Gerau benefits from direct connections to Frankfurt and Darmstadt, making it an ideal commuter town. Here lives Germany’s traditional middle class: partly insulated from the nation’s economic and social upheavals, yet close enough to major developments to suddenly find itself in the public eye.

CDU Votes for the Project

Last week, the town council rejected a data center from the U.S. company Vantage Data Centers following protests from residents. With votes from SPD, Greens, and the Left, the town turned down a private investment of roughly €2.5 billion. 

The planned facility would have been part of the Rhein-Main region’s digital infrastructure, anchored by DE-CIX, one of the world’s most significant internet hubs. It’s about the world’s new data highways—AI, autonomous systems, autonomous driving, cloud solutions—all the infrastructure major economies like the U.S. and China rely on to escape economic stagnation.

For Germany, these developments are treated as marginal at best. The prevailing attitude cloaks itself in ideological-moral superiority, using regulation to ensure companies and users do not “go too far.” In European politics, the digital sphere is little more than a playground for polemic opposition and petty criticism of the master plan to build a green-socialist ideal state.

With an 18-14 vote, the town council ultimately opposed the project. Only the CDU, alongside the Kombi-FWG, supported it. This illuminates German political dynamics: absent the AfD, the CDU surprisingly acts independently—even defying the so-called “firewall” party cartel. Could this hint at Germany’s potential political liberation? Or was this local CDU action merely a fluke within the party’s otherwise steadfast Brussels-aligned ideology?

The proposed site would have been a few hundred meters from residential areas, separated by an industrial park. Yet this was enough for alleged noise concerns to dominate local discourse. The Greens argued the data center would create “heat corridors” and depress property values—a concern never applied when building wind turbines. While public interest routinely overrode private property during wind farm construction, here ideology replaced rational risk assessment. From the outset, local politics sought excuses to kill the project—driven by avoidance, fear of responsibility, and bureaucratic inertia.

Excuses and Evasion

Justifications for rejecting the investment were as bizarre as they were German: timid, defensive, and devoid of any vision. Expected tax revenues were deemed insufficient, potential jobs minimal—excuse piled on excuse. Bureaucracy has so deeply entrenched itself that private investment is now perceived as a threat rather than an opportunity.

This system has eroded abstraction skills and converted real weakness into moral superiority. The future is no longer seen as malleable, change is perceived as a burden, and imagination is systematically weakened. People learn to follow rules instead of solving problems.

The solution is breaking free from this iron cage of regulation—reviving innovation and building the infrastructure essential for tomorrow’s economy.

The Gaulish Village of Green Ideologues

German politics has never had a serious problem dispossessing homeowners for wind turbines. So-called citizen participation is little more than soothing ointment over real, material losses imposed on residents. Even symbolic compensation schemes in some states fail to address the structural disregard for property rights. Private property is viewed with suspicion and treated as a fiscal quarry for ideological ambitions.

Groß-Gerau’s project could have been a chance to implement a market-oriented model of fair compensation, putting economic principles above ideological command politics. Instead, Germany remains in a psychological “Gaulish village”: perpetually defensive against modernization, with bureaucracy and NGOs nurturing provincialism.

For U.S. companies, this is standard practice: property rights enforce serious negotiations with affected residents, or litigation ensures balance. France offers a contrasting example: President Emmanuel Macron recently poured €30 million into his nation’s “Silicon Valley,” while U.S. private investment dwarfs such state initiatives by hundreds of billions. The lesson is clear: Europe remains shackled by centralization, unable to compete with more agile, market-oriented systems.

It’s high time Germany abandoned climate-socialist rigidity and started embracing new business models. Stubbornness and timidity should no longer prevent the country from recognizing opportunities for growth and innovation.

* * *

About the author: Thomas Kolbe, a German graduate economist, has worked for over 25 years as a journalist and media producer for clients from various industries and business associations. As a publicist, he focuses on economic processes and observes geopolitical events from the perspective of the capital markets. His publications follow a philosophy that focuses on the individual and their right to self-determination.

The U.S. Small Business Administration said Friday it has suspended more than 100,000 California borrowers amid suspected fraud tied to pandemic-era relief programs, a move the agency said represents one of the largest enforcement actions since Covid-19 aid was rolled out.

111,620 California borrowers were linked to suspected fraudulent activity involving Paycheck Protection Program and Economic Injury Disaster Loan funds. Those borrowers received 118,489 loans totaling more than $8.6 billion, according to the agency.

SBA Administrator Kelly Loeffler said the action reflects a broader crackdown on abuse of emergency lending programs created during the pandemic. “Once again, the Trump SBA is taking decisive action to deliver accountability in a state whose unaccountable welfare policies have created a culture of fraud and abuse at the expense of law-abiding taxpayers and small business owners,” Loeffler said in a statement.

‘WE’RE PROSECUTING’: SBA Administrator Kelly Loeffler says the agency suspended more than 111,000 California borrowers after uncovering $8.6 billion in suspected fraudulent activity linked to the COVID pandemic:

“We're gonna continue to work with our federal partners to ensure… pic.twitter.com/qBg3eHZrJL

— Fox News (@FoxNews) February 7, 2026

The programs were designed to help businesses stay afloat during pandemic shutdowns - however both have been plagued by fraud since their rapid deployment, prompting years of investigations by federal watchdogs and law-enforcement agencies.

The California action follows a similar enforcement effort announced last month in Minnesota, where the SBA said it suspended 6,900 borrowers after identifying what it described as widespread suspected fraud. In that review, the agency flagged nearly $400 million in potentially fraudulent PPP and EIDL loans tied to about 7,900 approvals during the pandemic, according to Loeffler. 

“As we did in Minnesota, we are actively working with federal law enforcement to identify the criminals who defrauded American taxpayers, hold them to account and recoup the stolen funds,” Loeffler said. “As we continue our state-by-state work, our message is clear: Pandemic-era fraudsters will not get a pass under this administration.”

The SBA has previously said at least $2.5 million in PPP and EIDL funds were linked to a Somali-connected fraud scheme based in Minneapolis, underscoring how organized networks exploited gaps in oversight as billions of dollars were rushed out the door during the public-health emergency.

Loeffler said the scale of the California suspensions highlights what she characterized as years of insufficient enforcement. The announcement criticized what she described as tolerance of fraud under the Biden administration, while framing the current actions as part of a renewed push under the Trump administration to recover misspent funds and pursue criminal accountability.

The SBA said its review of pandemic lending is ongoing, with additional state-by-state actions expected as investigations continue.