Today’s News 22nd May 2020

  • Auto Registrations In Europe Plunge 76% In April, The Largest Drop On Record
    Auto Registrations In Europe Plunge 76% In April, The Largest Drop On Record

    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 05/22/2020 – 02:45

    The hits just keep on coming for the auto industry. Frozen amidst a global lockdown due to the coronavirus, auto sales and registrations data continues to be atrocious around the world and the industry that was mired in recession even before the pandemic became a problem continues to face odds that look insurmountable. 

    The latest batch of cheery optimism came out of Europe, where auto registrations plunged 76% in April. According to the European Automobile Manufacturers Association, the number of new cars sold fell from 1,143,046 to just 270,682 YOY. 

    The ACEA said: “The first full month with COVID-19 restrictions in place resulted in the strongest monthly drop in car demand since records began.” 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The data was driven by each of the 27 EU markets recording double digit declines in April, with Italy and Spain spearheading the misery, posting losses of 97.6% and 96.5% respectively. Sales plunged 61.1% in Germany and France dealt with an 88.8% contraction in April. The U.K. also posted a sales drop of 97.3%, according to CNBC.

    Sequentially, the numbers are worse than March, when new car sales fell 55%. It was in mid-March that most European countries instituted their lockdowns. 

    The global auto industry can only be best described as in the midst of imploding into itself right now. Just a couple of days ago, we reported the news that China NEV sales plunged 43% last month. 

    Last month we also reported that April was going to be the worst month on record for auto sales. 

    Earlier this month we noted how dealers were desperately turning to incentives to try and move inventory off their lots. The consequences of the shut down have been immense. Toyota reported a 54% sales decline in April, for example. Hyundai and Mazda reported drops of 39% and 45%, respectively. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Recall we also wrote last month  that ships full of cars were being denied entry to ports in California due to the massive inventory glut. Such was the case on April 24 when a cargo of 2,000 Nissan SUVs was approaching the port of Los Angeles. They were told to drop anchor about a mile from the port and remain there.

    John Felitto, a senior vice president for the U.S. unit of Norwegian shipping company Wallenius Wilhelmsen said:

    “Dealers aren’t really accepting cars and fleet sales are down because rental-car and fleet operators aren’t taking delivery either. This is different from anything we’ve seen before. Everyone is full to the brim.”

    “There are basically no sales,” we wrote about the auto industry heading into April. One automotive researcher said of the industry-wide crisis: “The whole world is turned upside down right now.”

  • How The British Empire Created And Killed George Orwell
    How The British Empire Created And Killed George Orwell

    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 05/22/2020 – 02:00

    Authored by Martin Sieff via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), happily amplified by the Public Broadcasting System (PBS) in the United States which carries its World News, continues to pump out its regular dreck about the alleged economic chaos in Russia and the imagined miserable state of the Russian people.

    It is all lies of course. Patrick Armstrong‘s authoritative regular updates including his reports on this website are a necessary corrective to such crude propaganda.

    But amid all their countless fiascoes and failures in every other field (including the highest per capita death rate from COVID-19 in Europe, and one of the highest in the world) the British remain world leaders at managing global Fake News. As long as the tone remains restrained and dignified, literally any slander will be swallowed by the credulous and every foul scandal and shame can be confidently covered up.

    None of this would have surprised the late, great George Orwell. It is fashionable these days to endlessly trot him out as a zombie (dead but alleged to be living – so that he cannot set the record straight himself) critic of Russia and all the other global news outlets outside the control of the New York and London plutocracies. And it is certainly true, that Orwell, whose hatred and fear of communism was very real, served before his death as an informer to MI-5, British domestic security.

    But it was not the Soviet Union, Stalin’s show trials or his experiences with the Trotskyite POUM group in Barcelona and Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War that “made Orwell Orwell” as the Anglo-America Conventional Wisdom Narrative has it. It was his visceral loathing of the British Empire – compounded during World War II by his work for the BBC which he eventually gave up in disgust.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And it was his BBC experiences that gave Orwell the model for his unforgettable Ministry of Truth in his great classic “1984.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    George Orwell had worked in one of the greatest of all world centers of Fake News. And he knew it.

    More profoundly, the great secret of George Orwell’s life has been hiding in plain sight for 70 years since he died. Orwell became a sadistic torturer in the service of the British Empire during his years in Burma, modern Myanmar. And as a fundamentally decent man, he was so disgusted by what he had done that he spent the rest of his life not just atoning but slowly and willfully committing suicide before his heartbreakingly premature death while still in his 40s.

    The first important breakthrough in this fundamental reassessment of Orwell comes from one of the best books on him. “Finding George Orwell in Burma” was published in 2005 and written by “Emma Larkin”, a pseudonym for an outstanding American journalist in Asia whose identity I have long suspected to be an old friend and deeply respected colleague, and whose continued anonymity I respect.

    “Larkin” took the trouble to travel widely in Burma during its repressive military dictatorship and her superb research reveals crucial truths about Orwell. According to his own writings and his deeply autobiographical novel “Burmese Days” Orwell loathed all his time as a British colonial policeman in Burma, modern Myanmar. The impression he systematically gives in that novel and in his classic essay “Shooting an Elephant” is of a bitterly lonely, alienated, deeply unhappy man, despised and even loathed by his fellow British colonialists throughout society and a ludicrous failure at his job.

    This was not, however, the reality that “Larkin” uncovered. All surviving witnesses agreed that Orwell – Eric Blair as he then still was – remained held in high regard during his years in the colonial police service. He was a senior and efficient officer. Indeed it was precisely his knowledge of crime, vice, murder and the general underside of human society during his police colonial service while still in his 20s that gave him the street smarts, experience, and moral authority to see through all the countless lies of right and left, of American capitalists and British imperialists as well as European totalitarians for the rest of his life.

    The second revelation to throw light on what Orwell had to do in those years comes from one of the most famous and horrifying scenes in “1984.” Indeed, almost nothing even in the memoirs of Nazi death camp survivors has anything like it: That is the scene where “O’Brien”, the secret police officer tortures the “hero” (if he can be called that) Winston Smith by locking his face to a cage in which a starving rat is ready to pounce and devour him if it is opened.

    I remember thinking, when I was first exposed to the power of “1984” at my outstanding Northern Irish school, “What kind of mind could invent something as horrific as that?”) The answer was so obvious that I like everyone else missed it entirely.

    Orwell did not “invent” or “come up” with the idea as a fictional plot device: It was just a routine interrogation technique used by the British colonial police in Burma, modern Myanmar. Orwell never “brilliantly” invented such a diabolical technique of torture as a literary device. He did not have to imagine it. It was routinely employed by himself and his colleagues. That was how and why the British Empire worked so well for so long. They knew what they were doing. And what they did was not nice at all.

    A final step in my enlightenment about Orwell, whose writings I have revered all my life – and still do – was provided by our alarmingly brilliant elder daughter about a decade ago when she too was given “1984” to read as part of her school curriculum. Discussing it with her one day, I made some casual obvious remark that Orwell was in the novel as Winston Smith.

    My American-raised teenager then naturally corrected me. “No, Dad, ” she said. “Orwell isn’t Winston, or he’s not just Winston. He’s O’Brien too. O’Brien actually likes Winston. He doesn’t want to torture him. He even admires him. But he does it because it’s his duty.”

    She was right, of course.

    But how could Orwell the great enemy of tyranny, lies and torture so identify with and understand so well the torturer? It was because he himself had been one.

    “Emma Larkin’s” great book brings out that Orwell as a senior colonial police officer in the 1920s was a leading figure in a ruthless war waged by the British imperial authorities against drug and human trafficking crime cartels every bit as vicious and ruthless as those in modern Ukraine, Columbia and Mexico today. It was a “war on terror” where anything and everything was permitted to “get the job done.”

    The young Eric Blair was so disgusted by the experience that when he returned home he abandoned the respectable middle class life style he had always enjoyed and became, not just an idealistic socialist as many in those days did, but a penniless, starving tramp. He even abandoned his name and very identity. He suffered a radical personality collapse: He killed Eric Blair. He became George Orwell.

    Orwell’s early famous book “Down and Out in London and Paris” is a testament to how much he literally tortured and humiliated himself in those first years back from Burma. And for the rest of his life.

    He ate miserably badly, was skinny and ravaged by tuberculosis and other health problems, smoked heavily and denied himself any decent medical care. His appearance was always abominable. His friend, the writer Malcolm Muggeridge speculated that Orwell wanted to remake himself as a caricature of a tramp.

    The truth clearly was that Orwell never forgave himself for what he did as a young agent of empire in Burma. Even his literally suicidal decision to go to the most primitive, cold, wet and poverty-stricken corner of creation in a remote island off Scotland to finish “1984” in isolation before he died was consistent with the merciless punishments he had inflicted on himself all his life since leaving Burma.

    The conclusion is clear: For all the intensity of George Orwell’s experiences in Spain, his passion for truth and integrity, his hatred of the abuse of power did not originate from his experiences in the Spanish Civil War. They all flowed directly from his own actions as an agent of the British Empire in Burma in the 1920s: Just as his creation of the Ministry of Truth flowed directly from his experience of working in the Belly of the Beast of the BBC in the early 1940s.

    George Orwell spent more than 20 years slowly committing suicide because of the terrible crimes he committed as a torturer for the British Empire in Burma. We can therefore have no doubt what his horror and disgust would be at what the CIA did under President George W. Bush in its “Global War on Terror.” Also, Orwell would identify at once and without hesitation the real fake news flowing out of New York, Atlanta, Washington and London today, just as he did in the 1930s and 1940s.

    Let us therefore reclaim and embrace The Real George Orwell: The cause of fighting to prevent a Third World War depends on it.

  • Infected US Troops & Re-Emerging ISIS: Dueling 'Disinfo War' In Syria Turns Bizarre
    Infected US Troops & Re-Emerging ISIS: Dueling ‘Disinfo War’ In Syria Turns Bizarre

    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 05/22/2020 – 01:00

    After the coronavirus pandmic gripped the globe and world headlines, the ‘information war’ in Syria and the broader Middle East took on a bizarre tone. 

    Starting late last month the Kremlin publicly charged that the Pentagon was keeping mum on a large-scale COVID-19 outbreak among the some one- to two-thousand American troops stationed in northeast Syria.

    The suggestion was that infected troops would become super-spreaders among the Syrian population under US occupation. At the time the Russian Foreign Ministry issued the perhaps unsupported assertion, “We receive reports of explosive Coronavirus infection spread among the US servicemen and of these facts being kept mum on.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    US occupying forces in northeast syria, Getty Images

    Pundits in the West in turn said Russia was genning up a ‘virus scare’ meant to damage US credibility in the region and among the local population where it had a presence. But at the time the vast majority of cases among the US military were to be found in the US Navy, with zero official reports of the disease among US personnel in Syria.

    The US Department slammed what it called Russia’s “disinformation campaign” in Syria to “exploit” the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a special briefing on the situation earlier this month.

    “Russian disinformation claims that the United States or Western powers are the origin of the virus while instilling uncertainty about the international response,” US special envoy James Jeffrey said. “Through such tactics, Russia clearly signals it’s willing to take advantage of a global crisis in order to pursue its own destabilizing agenda without any regard for the human consequences.”

    However, no doubt if there were an outbreak on American bases in Syria, where special forces are still assisting the Kurdish-led SDF in “securing” oil and gas fields, Pentagon brass would keep a lid on it for security concerns. 

    The Kremlin also warned that a “catastrophic” coronavirus outbreak could soon devastate refugee camps and prisons under US control in Syria, something which the UN and others have since voiced concern about. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “Washington bears full responsibility for the civilian population and provision for their humanitarian needs on territories under its control east of the Euphrates and in the south near al-Tanf, where the notorious Rukban camp for the internally displaced people is located,” a statement said last month.

    Fast-forward a month. On Thursday the Russian Foreign Ministry in fresh attacks on US operations in Syria charged that the US is facilitating a new ISIS resurgence, after the terror group had long been driven to operate ‘underground’. 

    Interestingly Kremlin spokeswoman Maria Zakharova linked the COVID-19 pandemic to the Islamic State’s reemergence taking place right under Washington’s nose. “We monitor the deterioration of the situation in the non-government-controlled areas in north-eastern Syria. (ISIS) decided to take advantage of the conditions of the spread of the coronavirus and escalated their aggression,” she told a news conference Thursday.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    ISIS file image via Homeland Security Today

    “Between 10 and 15 May alone, the terrorists carried out more than 20 attacks against Kurdish forces in the provinces of Deir Ezzor and Raqqa, killing more than 20 people and wounding more than 30 others.” She continued, “We were alerted by disturbing reports of the escape of seven ISIS elements from a prison at the Al-Hawl Camp for the displaced.” 

    She then pivoted to the US occupation in Syria’s North: “all these facts come as a new confirmation that the United States, which occupies areas beyond the Euphrates and its allies, does not pay attention to the population,” Zakharova said.

    Syria is but the latest contested sphere where coronavirus has figured central in geopolitical calculations and an information war between the US and its rivals – China being first and top of the list where COVID-19’s origins has largely defined the debate. 

  • The Slippery Slope To Despotism: Paved With Lockdowns, Raids, & Forced Vaccinations
    The Slippery Slope To Despotism: Paved With Lockdowns, Raids, & Forced Vaccinations

    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 05/22/2020 – 00:05

    Authored by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

    “You have no right not to be vaccinated, you have no right not to wear a mask, you have no right to open up your business… And if you refuse to be vaccinated, the state has the power to literally take you to a doctor’s office and plunge a needle into your arm.”

    – Alan Dershowitz, Harvard law professor

    You have no rights.

    That’s the lesson the government wants us to learn from this COVID-19 business.

    Well, the government is wrong.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    For years now, the powers-that-be—those politicians and bureaucrats who think like tyrants and act like petty dictators regardless of what party they belong to—have attempted to brainwash us into believing that we have no right to think for ourselves, make decisions about our health, protect our homes and families and businesses, act in our best interests, demand accountability and transparency from government, or generally operate as if we are in control of our own lives.

    We have every right, and you know why? Because we were born free.

    As the Declaration of Independence states, we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights—to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness—that no government can take away from us.

    Unfortunately, that hasn’t stopped the government from constantly trying to usurp our freedoms at every turn. Indeed, the nature of government is such that it invariably oversteps its limits, abuses its authority, and flexes its totalitarian muscles.

    Take this COVID-19 crisis, for example.

    What started out as an apparent effort to prevent a novel coronavirus from sickening the nation (and the world) has become yet another means by which world governments (including our own) can expand their powers, abuse their authority, and further oppress their constituents.

    Until now, the police state has been more circumspect in its power grabs, but this latest state of emergency has brought the beast out of the shadows.

    We are on a slippery slope to outright despotism.

    This road we are traveling is paved with lockdowns, SWAT team raids, mass surveillance and forced vaccinations. It is littered with the debris of our First and Fourth Amendment freedoms.

    This is what we have to look forward to in the months and years to come unless we can find some way to regain control over our runaway government.

    The government has made no secret of its plans.

    Just follow the money trail, and you’ll get a sense of what’s in store: more militarized police, more SWAT team raids, more surveillance, more lockdowns, more strong-armed tactics aimed at suppressing dissent and forcing us to comply with the government’s dictates.

    It’s chilling to think about, but it’s not surprising.

    We’ve been warned.

    Remember that Pentagon training video created by the Army for U.S. Special Operations Command? The one that anticipates the future domestic political and social problems the government is grooming its armed forces to solve through the use of martial law?

    The chilling five-minute training video, obtained by The Intercept through a FOIA request and made available online, paints a dystopian picture of the future bedeviled by “criminal networks,” “substandard infrastructure,” “religious and ethnic tensions,” “impoverishment, slums,” “open landfills, over-burdened sewers,” a “growing mass of unemployed,” and an urban landscape in which the prosperous economic elite must be protected from the impoverishment of the have nots.

    But here’s the kicker: what they’re really talking about is martial law, packaged as a well-meaning and overriding concern for the nation’s security.

    This COVID-19 crisis is pushing us that much closer to that dystopian vision becoming a present-day reality.

    For starters, let’s talk about the COVID-19 stormtroopers, SWAT team raids and ongoing flare-ups of police brutality.

    With millions of dollars in stimulus funds being directed towards policing agencies across the country, the federal government plans to fight this COVID-19 virus with riot gear, gas masks, ballistic helmets, drones, and hi-tech surveillance technology.

    Indeed, although crime rates have fallen dramatically in the midst of this global COVID-19 lockdown, there’s been no relief from the brutality and violence of the American police state.

    While the majority of the country has been social distancing under varying degrees of lockdowns, it’s been business as usual for the nation’s SWAT teams and police trained to shoot first and ask questions later.

    In Kentucky, plain-clothed cops in unmarked cars used a battering ram to break down Breonna Taylor’s door and carry out a no-knock raid on her home after midnight. Fearing a home invasion, the 26-year-old emergency medical technician and her boyfriend—who had been in bed at the time of the invasion—called 911 and prepared to defend themselves. Taylor’s boyfriend shot one of the intruders—later identified as police—in the leg. Police fired at least 20 shots into the apartment and a neighboring home, killing Taylor. The drug dealer who was the target of the late-night raid lived 10 miles away and had already been arrested prior to the raid on Taylor’s home.

    In Illinoispolice opened fire in a subway station, shooting a 33-year-old man who allegedly resisted their attempts to tackle and arrest him for violating a city ordinance by passing between two cars of a moving train. Ariel Roman, a short-order cook, claimed he was suffering from an anxiety attack when he was “harassed, chased, tackled, pepper-sprayed, tasered and shot twice” by police.

    In Maryland, police dispatched on a nuisance call to break up a crowd of neighborhood kids( half of them teenagers, and the other half youngsters around 4 and 5 years old) gathered in an apartment complex parking lot opened fire on a 29-year-old man seen exiting his car with a gun. An eyewitness claimed “the officer pointed a flashlight and his gun at the group immediately and began chasing and shooting a minute or two after getting out of the patrol car.” Police reportedly shot the man after he threw down his gun and ran in the opposite direction.

    In Virginiamore than 80 local, state, and federal police agents risked spreading COVID-19 to “a highly vulnerable population” when they raided a low income, public housing community in an effort to crack down on six individuals suspected of selling, on average, $20 to $100 worth of drugs.

    In Texasa SWAT team backed up with a military tank Armored Personnel Carrier raided Big Daddy Zane’s Bar whose owner and patrons were staging a peaceful First and Second Amendment protest of the governor’s shutdown orders.

    Police have even been called out to shut down churches, schools and public parks and beaches that have been found “in violation” of various lockdown orders.

    Now there’s talk of mobilizing the military to deliver forced vaccinations, mass surveillance in order to carry out contact tracing, and heavy fines and jail time for those who dare to venture out without a mask, congregate in worship without the government’s blessing, or re-open their  businesses without the government’s say-so.

    There are rumblings that the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) will start thermal screenings to monitor passengers’ temperatures in coming weeks. This is in addition to the virtual strip searches that have become routine aspects of airport security.  

    Restaurants in parts of the country are being tasked with keeping daily logs of phone numbers, emails, and arrival times for everybody who participates in dine-services, with no mention of how long such records will be kept on file, with whom they will be shared, and under what circumstances.

    With the help of Google and Nest cameras, hospitals are morphing into real-time surveillance centers with round-the-clock surveillance cameras monitoring traffic in patients’ rooms. Forget patient privacy, however. Google has a track record of sharing surveillance footage with police.

    And then rounding out the power-grabs, the Senate just voted to give police access to web browsing data without a warrant, which would dramatically expand the government’s Patriot Act surveillance powers. The Senate also voted to give Attorney General William Barr the ability to look through the web browsing history of any American — including journalists, politicians, and political rivals — without a warrant, just by saying it is relevant to an investigation. If enacted, privacy experts warn  that the new provisions threaten to undermine the free press by potentially preventing the media from exposing abuses of power or acting as a watchdog against political leaders.

    If we haven’t already crossed over, we’re skating dangerously close to that line that keeps us on the functioning side of a constitutional republic. It won’t take much to push us over that edge into a full-blown banana republic.

    In many ways, this is just more of the same heavy-handed tactics we’ve been seeing in recent years but with one major difference: this COVID-19 state of emergency has invested government officials (and those who view their lives as more valuable than ours) with a sanctimonious, self-righteous, arrogant, Big Brother Knows Best approach to top-down governing, and the fall-out can be seen far and wide.

    It’s an ugly, self-serving mindset that views the needs, lives and rights of “we the people” as insignificant when compared to those in power.

    That’s how someone who should know better such as Alan Dershowitz, a former Harvard law professor, can suggest that a free people—born in freedom, endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights, and living in a country birthed out of a revolutionary struggle for individual liberty—have no rights to economic freedom, to bodily integrity, or to refuse to comply with a government order with which they disagree.

    According to Dershowitz, who has become little more than a legal apologist for the power elite, “You have no right not to be vaccinated, you have no right not to wear a mask, you have no right to open up your business… And if you refuse to be vaccinated, the state has the power to literally take you to a doctor’s office and plunge a needle into your arm.”

    Dershowitz is wrong: while the courts may increasingly defer to the government’s brand of Nanny State authoritarianism, we still have rights.

    The government may try to abridge those rights, it may refuse to recognize them, it may even attempt to declare martial law and nullify them, but it cannot litigate, legislate or forcefully eradicate them out of existence.

    Up to now, we’ve been largely passive participants in this experiment in self-governance. Our inaction and inattention has left us at the mercy of power-hungry politicians, corrupt corporations and brutal, government-funded militias.

    Wake up, America.

    As I  make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, these ongoing violations of our rights—this attitude by the government that we have no rights—this tyrannical movement that is overtaking our constitutional republic and  gaining in momentum and power by the minute—this incessant auction block in which government officials appointed to represent our best interests keep selling us out to the highest bidder—all of these betrayals scream for a response.

    To quote the great Rod Serling: “If we don’t listen to that scream—and if we don’t respond to it—we may well wind up sitting amidst our own rubble, looking for the truck that hit us—or the bomb that pulverized us. Get the license number of whatever it was that destroyed the dream. And I think we will find that the vehicle was registered in our own name.”

  • Oil Is Crashing After China's "Great Uncertainty" Statement
    Oil Is Crashing After China’s “Great Uncertainty” Statement

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 23:46

    Although Beijing announced some new stimulus measures, it appears markets prefer to focus on the “great uncertainty” that Chinese officials see ahead (due to the coronavirus) leading to a decision to not release a target for economic growth has thrown the “v-shaped” recovery narrative out the window (for now).

    “We have not set a specific target for economic growth this year,” Li said, speaking in the Great Hall of the People.

    This is because our country will face some factors that are difficult to predict in its development due to the great uncertainty regarding the Covid-19 pandemic and the world economic and trade environment.”

    WTI has crashed over 9%, with the July contract trading back down at a $30 handle…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And US futures are notably weaker with Nasdaq leading the drop…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The shifting away from a hard target for output growth breaks with decades of Communist Party planning habits and is an admission of the deep rupture that the disease has caused.

    “The nascent demand recovery is still vulnerable, and the drop in prices today is an injection of reality,” said Victor Shum, vice president of energy consulting at IHS Markit in Singapore.

    “China not giving a GDP target means they are not quite certain about the recovery yet.”

    The question marks over China’s economy come as relations with the US deteriorate dramatically, clearly damaging the “v” or “u” shaped recovery narrative that has seemed to dominate both equity and oil markets in recent days.

  • China Is Hoarding PPE Again As It Braces For COVID-19's "Second Wave"
    China Is Hoarding PPE Again As It Braces For COVID-19’s “Second Wave”

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 23:45

    A while back, we reported on one notable US Intel leak claiming Beijing deliberately waited until Jan. 22 to warn the world about the possibility of a widespread outbreak (before that, Beijing insisted there was no evidence of human to human transmission, implying that this would likely be an isolated incident) so the CCP would have time to grab up all the PPE and other vital supplies.

    That was why, when the tidal wave of infections finally hit in the US, a sudden and inexplicable shortage of PPE forced nurses and doctors in some of the most notorious hotspots – including NYC – to work without masks and gowns. Many used garbage bags, or used one disposable mask for a week or more.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Now, Fox News reports that the CCP appears to be gobbling up all the capacity once again as businessmen complain about suppliers warning about being unable to process new orders.

    China’s Communist Party is again seizing factory lines churning out the world’s supply of medical safety gear — sparking fears the country is preparing for a second wave of the coronavirus, American traders in China told The Post.

    New Yorker Moshe Malamud, who has done business in China for over two decades, was moving tens of millions of pieces of protective gear to the U.S. at the height of the crisis but said suppliers in recent weeks had been overwhelmed with orders from the Chinese government.

    “I was placing a larger order with one of the bigger distributors and he tells me, ‘I can complete this order but after this we’ve been contracted by the Chinese government to produce 250 million gowns,’” said Malamud, who lived in China for a decade before founding aviation company M2Jets.

    Thermometer makers have also been inundated with government orders.

    He said he heard a similar story about another manufacturer making thermometers.

    “We hear how China is up and running and the virus is past them, so I asked, ‘What are they ordering 250 million gowns for?’ and of course no one is talking.”

    “I’ve been hearing this a lot from other manufacturing institutions that say, ‘We can give you a little bit, but basically we’re concentrated between now and the end of the summer manufacturing stuff for the Chinese government in anticipation of a second wave,'” he continued.

    Last month, leading U.S. manufacturers of medical safety gear told the White House that China had prohibited them from exporting goods as the crisis mounted, a Post report revealed.

    Beijing has already forced some 108 million Chinese in northeastern Jilin Province back under “partial lockdown” following another outbreak. They’re also carrying out a mass-testing campaign in Wuhan.

    Although Dr. Anthony Fauci has repeatedly warned that the US should brace for a second wave of the virus, a second wave isn’t a foregone conclusion. As NYT opinion columnist Nicolas Kristof wrote in his column published in Thursday’s paper, “epidemiology is full of puzzles.” In 2003, the WHO feared a deadly resurgence of SARS that fall. But instead, the virus petered out. As Dr. Fauci explained once several months ago, we know little for certain about the virus, and because of this, it’s important to be prepared for the worst-case scenario.

    And if the outbreak in Brazil continues to rage out of control, the possibility that Brazilians could reinfect the entire Western Hemisphere is looking increasingly plausible.

  • We're All In This Together… But Not In The Way You Think
    We’re All In This Together… But Not In The Way You Think

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 23:25

    Authored by Robert Blumen via The Mises Institute,

    We are all in this together. No, by that I do not mean what Andrew Horney calls “all those cloyingly saccharine, feel-good public service announcements being delivered by famous faces on television and social media platforms, telling us “we’re all in this together.” We are all interdependent through the production of goods and services that constitutes the market order.

    Some critics of the current crisis see it as yet another case of the rich getting one over on the rest of us. I will argue that this cannot be correct, because the rich as well as the poor (and the middle class) depend on the freedom to produce, and are all harmed by the lack of it.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Angelika Albaladejo writes, “The Rich Are Getting Richer,” citing a new report that “shows that some American billionaires are making substantial gains during the global health crisis.” Wilamette Week asks, “How Will the Rich Get Richer During the Pandemic-Fueled Economic Collapse?

    Israel Shamir in “Deep Pockets Love Lockdown” suggests that the rich do not like the widespread availability of travel:

    No more travels for us. The very rich folks will regain their solitary possession of Venice, the Côte d’Azur, and all the other elite destinations so recently inundated by mass tourism. Once again they will have it as good as they had it in the 19th century. Travel is a luxury, and ordinary people do not deserve luxury. They tried to keep us away by making travel as unpleasant as possible with body searches, but it didn’t help. If this global pandemic doesn’t stop us, they are simply going to cut us off.

    The greatest influence on everyone’s standard of living is the overall production of the society they live in. Under the current prohibitions, some businesses gain market share—a larger piece, but sliced from a much smaller pie. The rich, who enjoy and can afford luxury goods, depend on the productivity of all members of society for these goods. Those who can afford to fly first class, or perhaps in their own private planes, depend on the engineering advances from the mass production of airplanes that have reduced the cost and made private jets “affordable.” Time-shared private aviation costs in the low six figures.

    High-end travelers rely on the proliferation of airports made possible by the masses of middle-class travel worldwide; on the sizable labor pool of skilled pilots with commercial air travel experience to fly their private planes; on the development of air traffic control through the management of millions of flights annually; and on the gradual improvements in air traffic control to improve air travel safety.

    Fine hotels where the rich stay in suites exist nearly everywhere due to middle-class and business travel. International brands are able to bring quality hotels online and up to international standards quickly due to experience operating in many global markets, and they are able to staff new hotels with experienced managers from existing properties, where they have honed their skills.

    The private chefs that the rich hire to cook for them emerged from a vast food service industry consisting of culinary schools and fine restaurants even in small- to mid-market cities, where chefs learn their craft. The ingredients are available because of demand to feed the millions. Restaurants are often funded by investors who either specialize in the restaurant sector or made their money in another business. The top-tier chefs who work privately for wealthy people have reached the top of a competitive pyramid through years of restaurant experience, travel, studying under other experienced chefs, and trying out different restaurant concepts to develop recipes and techniques. The Gordon Ramseys of the world stand atop a vast competitive pyramid of chefs.

    The writers who suggest that the lockdown is another means for the rich to get richer, perhaps by buying up discounted assets in a financial panic and eventually monopolizing all commerce, lack an understanding of capital markets.

    Financier and political advisor Bernard Baruch is reported to have gone to cash, to have shorted the US stock market in the late 1920s leading up to the crash of 1929, to have advised friends to do the same, and to have made millions on the trade. Kennedy family patriarch Joseph P. is reported to have done likewise, realizing that the market was at a top when shoeshine boys gave him stock tips.

    Fortunes have been made by shorting bubbles before market crashes or buying up assets on the cheap in the aftermath—but does that benefit “the rich”? This ignores that for every Bernard Baruch who sold millions of dollars in assets there had to be another buyer who bought them near the top and suffered the losses that Baruch avoided.

    Those who own most of the assets are by definition “the rich.” A rich person is someone whose property consists mostly of capital goods—directly owned, through businesses or through stocks and bonds, which are claims on capital goods. When Baruch wishes to sell $1 million in assets, which, as Dr. Evil has observed, used to be a lot of money, there must be a buyer who has that much cash on hand to pay for them. This buyer can only be another rich person, or an organization that represents a large number of individuals—a pension fund, a life insurance company.

    Collectively all assets are at all times owned by someone. “The rich” as a whole can not exit asset ownership, because there is no external population of Martians who will take those assets off their hands (unless the Fed buys the entire stock and bond market, which I don’t rule out, and perhaps the Fed governors are from another planet).

    Most of the world’s wealth is in capital goods; those who own the most of them are the rich. When markets are repriced—downward—the rich as a whole suffer most of the market value losses. Those who cashed out at the top benefit at the expense of those who held the assets on the way down. And anyone, at any size, who has cash finds that the purchasing power of their cash has gone up when measured in terms of assets. The position of small investors who have cash on hand improves relative to the rich when asset markets crash. Even those who do not invest in capital goods at all find their position improved in relative terms, because the ability of the rich to bid for consumption goods by offering capital goods has diminished.

    At any moment in time, the upward or downward price movements in capital markets are a zero-sum game. But there is a more fundamental way in which we are interdependent. The capital goods underlying financial assets derive their market value from their role in the production of consumer goods. The value of a corporation is derived from consumer demand for its products. Many of the rich became so by starting a business that they still own which grew by satisfying consumer demand. Others have sold a business or inherited wealth which they try to preserve through the ownership (direct or indirect) of capital goods through financial assets.

    And from where do consumers derive their ability to demand? We know from Say’s law that consumers demand by supplying their own production to the market. Everyone who works and produces a good or a service, by supplying it to the market, demands some other good or service. In the general glut debate, the proponents of Say’s law used it to show that because every instance of supply constitutes a demand, and vice versa, aggregate supply and aggregate demand are not only equal, but simply different ways of looking at the totality of transactions that occur in the market as a whole.

    The demand that the rich depend on to support the valuation of their assets is largely not from other rich people demanding Cartier jewelry, Rolex watches, yachts, and custom basement wine cellars. It is largely from the mass market of consumers through division of labor, which provides the goods and services that we all depend on. The ability of the poor and middle classes to demand comes mostly from their wages, which they earn through their contribution to the production of a range of goods and services. Their supply in turn constitutes the demand for other—different—goods and services, which supports the valuations of businesses, and therefore financial assets.

    And although the rich consume higher-quality goods and services than the rest of us, they depend equally on the flow of goods and services, the division of labor, and the development of new products. Although they may cherry-pick the best off the top, there has to be a chocolate sundae underneath to support the cherry.

    Most mass consumer goods start out as luxury goods. Then, as the manufacturers work out the kinks and capital investment enables production at a larger scale, these goods become mass market goods. The 1987 movie Wall Street featured actor Michael Douglas in the role as a hedge fund titan. In one scene he is shown carrying what at the time passed for a mobile phone (a luxury good only available to the super rich) about the size of a large brick. When I have traveled in low- to middle-income countries (back in the days when we were allowed to travel more than one hundred yards from our residences), smartphones were ubiquitous. While it is true that the middle class and eventually low-income consumers benefit from the adoption of new products by the rich, the fall in these goods’ costs also makes the rich man’s dollar go further. Improvements in the design and function of the products through generations of products and mass production make better products available to all classes.

    Even the government depends on the market, innovation, progress, and falling costs for its nefarious objectives. Governments would like to surveil us all—even more than they already do. According to the BBC News, “More than a million Australians have downloaded a coronavirus contact tracing app within hours of it being released by the government.” The plan is clear enough, but if no people can afford a modern mobile phone with GPS any longer and lack the ability to pay for their data plan, this effort might fall a bit short. The phone, the network, and the existence of either wifi or a mobile signal nearly everywhere are due to carriers’ vast capital investment and the dramatic fall in these technologies’ prices. We can all afford these things because of our participation in the market, producing other goods and services.

    I will be the first to say that I do not understand why our insect overlords are attempting to damage social trust (through “snitch” portals) and to destroy our civilization itself through the prohibition of commerce, education, healthcare, athletics, professional sports, entertainment, dating and family formation, the arts, music, dining, family gatherings, religious observance, and all other forms of civilized life.

    Nor can I explain the “mask hysteria” that is spreading like a highly contagious virus on social networking websites such as NextDoor.com.

    Without an explanation that makes any sense, where does that leave us?

    What keeps me up at night is that we have not yet seen the end game, and that when we do it may be worse than what anyone can imagine.

  • Japanic! Tokyo Tourism Tumbles 99.9% In April
    Japanic! Tokyo Tourism Tumbles 99.9% In April

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 23:05

    Japan saw an estimated 2,900 foreign travelers in April, down 99.9% from a year earlier, as COVID-19 travel restrictions and lockdowns left the once-booming tourism sector in a state of paralysis.

    The drop in foreign visitors was the most significant percentage decline on record dating back to 1964, the Japan National Tourism Organization (JNTO) reported. It was the first time the monthly figure fell sub 10,000. The previous low for monthly foreign visitors was 17,543 set back in February 1964.

    The reason for the sharp decline stems from the government’s restrictions on international travel following a surge in domestic virus cases and deaths. On April 3, entry restrictions for international travelers were applied to 100 countries, including China, the US, and Europe, resulting in a collapse of inbound travel that severely impacted the country’s tourism industry.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Before the pandemic, tourism in the country was increasing at healthy growth rates. Around 31.8 million people visited Japan in 2019, up 2.2% over the previous year. Japan had high aspirations to boost tourism to a record 40 million this year, but those estimates were crushed due to the now-postponed Tokyo Olympics that have been rescheduled for 2021.  

    Travel restrictions and shutdowns have found success in mitigating the spread of the virus, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said on Thursday, adding that Japan could lift the state of emergency in Tokyo as early as next week, that is if virus infections can remain low. Emergencies were recently lifted in Osaka, Kyoto, and Hyogo because of a drop in confirmed cases. 

    Japan’s tourism industry is expected to remain in a slump throughout the year. The world’s third-largest economy dove into recession for the first time since 2015: 

    “The economy entered the coronavirus shock in a very weak position,” said Izumi Devalier, chief Japan economist at BofA, but “the real big ugly stuff is going to happen in the April, June print. It’s going to be three-quarters of very negative growth.”

    Read: “Japan Exports Worst Since Financial Crisis; Korea Early May Export Data Just As Dire” 

    Abe, like other world leaders, is quickly trying to reopen his crashed economy and simultaneously contain the pathogen’s spread. This difficult task could ignite into a second virus wave later this year.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Japan’s low rate of testing for the virus suggests the scope of the outbreak is still yet to be known. 

  • Escobar: China Updates Its "Art Of (Hybrid) War"
    Escobar: China Updates Its “Art Of (Hybrid) War”

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 22:45

    Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Asia Times,

    In 1999, Qiao Liang, then a senior air force colonel in the People’s Liberation Army, and Wang Xiangsui, another senior colonel, caused a tremendous uproar with the publication of Unrestricted Warfare: China’s Master Plan to Destroy America.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Unrestricted Warfare was essentially the PLA’s manual for asymmetric warfare: an updating of Sun Tzu’s Art of War. At the time of original publication, with China still a long way from its current geopolitical and geo-economic clout, the book was conceived as laying out a defensive approach, far from the sensationalist “destroy America” added to the title for US publication in 2004.    

    Now the book is available in a new edition and Qiao Liang, as a retired general and director of the Council for Research on National Security, has resurfaced in a quite revealing interview originally published in the current edition of the Hong Kong-based magazine Zijing (Bauhinia).

    General Qiao is not a Politburo member entitled to dictate official policy. But some analysts I talked with agree that the key points he makes in a personal capacity are quite revealing of PLA thinking. Let’s review some of the highlights.

    Dancing with wolves

    The bulk of his argument concentrates on the shortcomings of US manufacturing:

    “How can the US today want to wage war against the biggest manufacturing power in the world while its own industry is hollowed out?”

    An example, referring to Covid-19, is the capacity to produce ventilators:

    “Out of over 1,400 pieces necessary for a ventilator, over 1,100 must be produced in China, including final assembly. That’s the US problem today. They have state of the art technology, but not the methods and production capacity. So they have to rely on Chinese production.”  

    General Qiao dismisses the possibility that Vietnam, the Philippines, Bangladesh, India and other Asian nations may replace China’s cheap workforce:

    “Think about which of these countries has more skilled workers than China. What quantity of medium and high level human resources was produced in China in these past 30 years? Which country is educating over 100 million students at secondary and university levels? The energy of all these people is still far from being liberated for China’s economic development.”  

    He acknowledges US military power even in times of epidemic and economic difficulties is always capable of “interfering directly or indirectly in the Taiwan straits question” and finding an excuse to “block and sanction China and exclude it from the West.” He adds that, “as a producing country, we still cannot satisfy our manufacturing industry with our own resources and rely on our own markets to consume our products.”   

    In consequence, he argues, it’s a “good thing” for China to engage in the cause of reunification, “but it’s always a bad thing if it’s done at the wrong time. We can only act at the right time. We cannot allow our generation to commit the sin of interrupting the process of the Chinese nation’s renaissance.”

    General Qiao counsels, “Don’t think that only territorial sovereignty is linked to the fundamental interests of a nation. Other kinds of sovereignty – economic, financial, defense, food, resources, biological and cultural sovereignty – are all linked to the interests and survival of nations and are components of national sovereignty.” 

    To arrest movement toward Taiwan’s independence, “apart from war, other options must be taken into consideration. We can think about the means to act in the immense gray zone between war and peace, and we can even think about more particular means, like launching military operations that will not lead to war, but may involve a moderate use of force.”

    In a graphic formulation, General Qiao thinks that,

    “if we have to dance with the wolves, we should not dance to the rhythm of the US. We should have our own rhythm, and even try to break their rhythm, to minimize its influence. If American power is brandishing its stick, it’s because it has fallen into a trap.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In a nutshell, for General Qiao, “China first of all must show proof of strategic determination to solve the Taiwan question, and then strategic patience. Of course, the premise is that we should develop and maintain our strategic force to solve the Taiwan question by force at any moment.”    

    Gloves are off

    Now compare General Qiao’s analysis with the by now obvious geopolitical and geo-economic fact that Beijing will respond tit for tat to any hybrid war tactics deployed by the United States government. The gloves are definitely off.

    The gold standard expression has come in a no-holds barred Global Times editorial:

    We must be clear that coping with US suppression will be the key focus of China’s national strategy. We should enhance cooperation with most countries. The US is expected to contain China’s international front lines, and we must knock out this US plot and make China-US rivalry a process of US self-isolation.”

    An inevitable corollary is that the all-out offensive to cripple Huawei will be counterpunched in kind, targeting Apple, Qualcom, Cisco and Boeing, even including  “investigations or suspensions of their right to do business in China.”

    So for all practical purposes, Beijing has now publicly unveiled its strategy to counteract US President Donald Trump’s “We could cut off the whole relationship” kind of assertions.

    A toxic racism-meets-anti-communism matrix is responsible for the predominant anti-Chinese sentiment across the US, encompassing at least 66% of the whole population. Trump instinctively seized it – and repackaged it as his re-election campaign theme, fully approved by Steve Bannon.

    The strategic objective is to go after China across the full spectrum. The tactical objective is to forge an anti-China front across the West: another instance of encirclement, hybrid war-style, focused on economic war.

    This will imply a concerted offensive, trying to enforce embargoes and trying to block regional markets to Chinese companies. Lawfare will be the norm. Even freezing Chinese assets in the US is not a far-fetched proposition anymore.   

    Every possible Silk Road branch-out – on the energy front, ports, the Health Silk Road, digital interconnection – will be strategically targeted. Those who were dreaming that Covid-19 could be the ideal pretext for a new Yalta – uniting Trump, Xi and Putin – may rest in peace.       

    “Containment” will go into overdrive. A neat example is Admiral Philip Davidson – head of the Indo-Pacific Command – asking for $20 billion for a “robust military cordon” from California to Japan and down the Pacific Rim, complete with “highly survivable, precision-strike networks” along the Pacific Rim and “forward-based, rotational joint forces” to counteract the “renewed threat we face from great power competition.”

    Davidson argues that, “without a valid and convincing conventional deterrent, China and Russia will be emboldened to take action in the region to supplant US interests.”

    Watch People’s Congress

    From the point of view of large swathes of the Global South, the current, extremely dangerous incandescence, or New Cold War, is mostly interpreted as the progressive ending of the Western coalition’s hegemony over the whole planet.

    Still, scores of nations are being asked, bluntly, by the hegemon to position themselves once again in a “you’re with us or against us” global war on terror imperative.  

    At the annual session of the National People’s Congress, starting this Friday, we will see how China will be dealing with its top priority: to reorganize domestically after the pandemic.  

    For the first time in 35 years, Beijing will be forced to relinquish its economic growth targets. This also means that the objective of doubling GDP and per capita income by 2020 compared with 2010 will also be postponed.

    What we should expect is absolute emphasis on domestic spending – and social stability – over a struggle to become a global leader, even if that’s not totally overlooked.

    After all, President Xi Jinping made it clear earlier this week that a “Covid-19 vaccine development and deployment in China, when available,” won’t be subjected to Big Pharma logic, but “will be made a global public good. This will be China’s contribution to ensuring vaccine accessibility and affordability in developing countries.” The Global South is paying attention.

    Internally, Beijing will boost support for state-owned enterprises that are strong in innovation and risk-taking. China always defies predictions by Western “experts.” For instance, exports rose 3.5% in April, when the experts were forecasting a decline of 15.7%. The trade surplus was $45.3 billion, when experts were forecasting only $6.3 billion.

    Beijing seems to identify clearly the extending gap between a West, especially the US, that’s plunging into de facto New Great Depression territory with a China that’s about to rekindle economic growth. The center of gravity of global economic power keeps moving, inexorably, toward Asia.

    Hybrid war? Bring it on. 

  • Social Distancing Revives Drive-In Movie Theaters In Post-COVID World
    Social Distancing Revives Drive-In Movie Theaters In Post-COVID World

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 22:25

    In the 1950s, there were more than 4,000 drive-in movie theaters around the US. Now there’s less than 300 as America’s love affair with drive-ins died in recent decades. However, stop there, social distancing in a post-corona world could revive drive-ins as people keep their spaces while sitting in cars, watching a movie on a giant screen, which is much better than a crowded indoor theater where a COVID-19 carrier could infect everyone in the space

    We will revert our attention back to the US shortly, but first, drive-ins are becoming the next hottest thing in Dubai as traditional movie theaters remain closed. Reuters notes that the UAE has opened up an outside theater via VOX Cinemas that can accommodate up to 75 cars at a time.

    Tickets cost $50 per vehicle with popcorn, snacks and drinks included. 

    “We keep our social distancing so it’s a brilliant idea in my opinion,” Porsche driver Xavier Libbrecht told Reuters during a showing Wednesday. 

    The drive-in is located on top of the Mall of the Emirates, a shopping mall in Dubai. The giant screen was erected under the peak of the mall’s indoor ski resort. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    “Any excuse to get out the house during coronavirus times,” said Patrick, another moviegoer said on Wednesday. 

    “In the comfort of your own car you don’t have to worry about chewing too loud,” he added.

    Back to the US, Google search trends for “drive-in movie theater near me” has erupted to a five year high at the same time lockdowns are easing across the country.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    People, who are searching for drive-in movie locations the most, are located in states where partial reopenings are currently underway.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    It’s obvious that most Americans will not step into a movie theater anytime soon, considering a second coronavirus wave could be in the makings later this year. So their next best option, with social distancing in mind, and the luxury of their automobile, is to do something their parents or grandparents did decades ago: go to drive-in theaters. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Short traditional movie theaters, long drive-in theaters in a post-corona world? 

  • How Fear, Groupthink Drove Unnecessary Global Lockdowns
    How Fear, Groupthink Drove Unnecessary Global Lockdowns

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 22:05

    Submitted by Yinon, Weiss, a tech entrepreneur, US nilitary veteran and bioengineer, via RealClearPolitics,

    In the face of a novel virus threat, China clamped down on its citizens. Academics used faulty information to build faulty models. Leaders relied on these faulty models. Dissenting views were suppressed. The media flamed fears and the world panicked.

    That is the story of what may eventually be known as one of the biggest medical and economic blunders of all time. The collective failure of every Western nation, except one, to question groupthink will surely be studied by economists, doctors, and psychologists for decades to come.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Reliance on Faulty Models

    To put things in perspective, the virus is now known to have an infection fatality rate for most people under 65 that is no more dangerous than driving 13 to 101 miles per day. Even by conservative estimates, the odds of COVID-19 death are roughly in line with existing baseline odds of dying in any given year.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Yet we put billions of young healthy people under house arrest, stopped cancer screenings, and sunk ourselves into the worst level of unemployment since the Great Depression. This from a virus that bears a survival rate of 99.99% if you are a healthy individual under 50 years old (12).

    New York City reached over a 25% infection rate and yet 99.98% of all people in the city under 45 survived, making it comparable to death rates by normal accidents.

    But of course the whole linchpin of the lockdown argument is that it would have been even worse without such a step. Sweden never closed down borders, primary schools, restaurants, or businesses, and never mandated masks, yet 99.998% of all their people under 60 have survived and their hospitals were never overburdened. 

    Why did we lock down the majority of the population who were never at significant risk? What will be the collateral damage? That is what this series will explore.

    Experts took a measured approach early on

    In early February the World Health Organization said that travel bans were not necessary. On Feb. 17, just a month before the first U.S. lockdown, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the longtime director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases said that this new strain of coronavirus possessed “just minuscule” danger to the United States. In early March the U.S. surgeon general said that “masks are NOT effective in preventing [the] general public from catching coronavirus.” As late as March 9, the day Italy started its lockdown, Dr. Fauci did not encourage cancellation of “large gatherings in a place [even if] you have community spread,” calling it “a judgment call.” NBA games were still being played.

    So how did we go from such a measured tone to locking up 97% of Americans in their homes seemingly overnight?

    Enter faulty assumptions and faulty models

    China concealed the extent of the viral outbreak, which, if you believed its data, led many scientists to believe that 2% to 5% of all infected patients would die. This turned out to be off by a factor of 10, but academic epidemiologists have a history of wildly-off-the-mark doomsday predictions.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The March 16 report by Imperial College epidemiologist Neil Ferguson is credited (or blamed) with causing the U.K. to lock down and contributing to the domino effect of global lockdowns. The model has since come under intense criticism for being “totally unreliable and a buggy mess.” 

    This is the same Neil Ferguson who in 2005 predicted 200 million could die from the bird flu. Total deaths over the last 15 years turned out to be 455. This is the same Neil Ferguson who in 2009 predicted that 65,000 people could die in the U.K. from the swine flu. The final number ended up around 392. Now, in 2020, he predicted that 500,000 British would die from coronavirus. 

    His  deeply flawed model led the United States to fear over 2 million deaths and was used to justify locking down nearly the entire nation. Dr. Ferguson is a character of Shakespearean drama and tragedy. His March 17 presentation to British elites on the dire need to take action ironically may have infected Boris Johnson and other top British officials, as Mr. Ferguson himself tested positive for COVID-19 two days later. Then in May he resigned in disgrace after he broke his own quarantine rules to meet clandestinely with a married woman.

    But I don’t place most of the blame on people like Ferguson. If you are a hammer everything looks like a nail. I blame government leaders for failing to surround themselves with diverse viewpoints and to think critically for themselves.

    Politicians claim lockdowns were the cause of fewer deaths

    It would be highly embarrassing to force citizens to quarantine themselves only to later admit it was all a colossal blunder, so it is easier for politicians and modelers to claim the lower death rates were based on the lockdowns themselves. It was a success!

    But several inconvenient thorns keep bursting that narrative — and none larger than Sweden,  the only Western country not to lock down its citizens. Sweden never closed borders, restaurants, businesses, or primary schools. The only legal action officials took was to ban events that entail crowds larger than 50 people.

    One of the most well-known and respected models in the United States is from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation and is commonly cited by the White House. Since the IHME model accounts for lockdowns and social distancing, or lack thereof, they should be validated by their predictions on Sweden.

    Below is a screenshot of the IHME model for Sweden taken on May 3, along with actual results (black line). The model predicted up to 2,800 daily deaths within 11 days and a final death total as high as 75,000 if Sweden didn’t enact strict social distancing measures.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    These were not complicated long-term projections; they were predicting what would happen in the next two weeks based on months of data. Yet the daily death peak was 75% lower than the baseline prediction and 96% lower than the worst-case prediction.

    Not to be outdone, Uppsala University (the oldest university in Sweden) also presented a model that could have caused the Swedes to abandon course and lock down as the U.K. did. However, Sweden did not buckle. While the Uppsala University model predicted 90,000 deaths within a month, the actual result was around 3,500.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Besides deaths, there were also doomsday projections about hospital capacity, but those models also proved to be grotesquely exaggerated. On March 29, Columbia University projected a need for 136,000 hospital beds in New York City. The maximum ever used was under 12,000. At peak, New York City still had around 1 in 6 hospital beds open and around 1 in 10 ICU beds open. Hospitals had capacity, both in New York City and in Sweden.

    While far below projections, Sweden’s short-term results are worse than Norway, Finland, and Denmark, but better than the U.K., France, Spain, Italy, and Belgium. Sweden likely also benefits from longer-term herd immunity, faster economic recovery, and fewer deaths from lockdown collateral damage.

    Political leaders ignored early evidence when it conflicted with their models

    There are those who say that we couldn’t have known these outcomes early on, so even if lockdowns were unjustified later they were still necessary early due to lack of information. That is plainly false. Italy’s alarming number of deaths fanned many of the early fears across the world, but by March 17 it was clear that the median age of Italian deaths was over 80 and that not a single person under 30 had died in that country. Furthermore, it was known that 99% of those who died had other existing illnesses.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    A much more rational strategy would have been to lock down nursing homes and let young healthy people out to build immunity. Instead we did the opposite, we forced nursing homes to take COVID-19 patients and locked down young people. 

    There are now places like Santa Clara County in California, entering its third month of lockdown despite COVID-19 patients occupying less than 2% of hospital capacity and none on ventialtors. Yet there are 2 million county residents effectively under house arrest. Some doctors and nurses in the area had their pay cut by 20% so hospitals could avoid bankruptcy, reflecting perhaps the epitome of this senseless catastrophe.

    There were, of course, people warning us all along. Among them was as John P.A. Ioannidis of Stanford University School of Medicine, who ranks among the world’s 100 most-cited scientists on Google Scholar. On that pivotal day of March 17 he released an essay titled “A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data” — but it got little attention. Mainstream media was not interested in good news stories or dissenting views. The world instead marched lock step into its man-made calamity.

  • "This Is The End Of Hong Kong": China Congress Announces Crackdown On Hong Kong With New "National Security" Law; Abandons GDP Target
    “This Is The End Of Hong Kong”: China Congress Announces Crackdown On Hong Kong With New “National Security” Law; Abandons GDP Target

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 21:58

    With China’s ambitions toward Hong Kong having emerged as the top political fault line in recent days, the market was closely following the start of Friday’s National People’s Congress (NPC) where in addition to disclosures on Chinese political strategy, Beijing announces decisions on targets on GDP, CPI and fiscal deficit.

    Which is why many were surprised when in the text of Premier Li Keqiang’s annual address, for the first time China abandoned its usual practice of setting a numerical target for economic growth this year due to the turmoil caused by the coronavirus pandemic. 

    “I would like to point out that we have not set a specific target for economic growth this year,” the report said, according to Bloomberg which saw a leaked version. “This is because our country will face some factors that are difficult to predict in its development due to the great uncertainty regarding the Covid-19 pandemic and the world economic and trade environment.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    As Bloomberg adds, the shift away from a hard target for output growth not only breaks with decades of Communist Party planning habits, but is an admission of the deep rupture that the disease has caused in the world’s second-largest economy. With the growth outlook depending also on the efforts of trading partners to rein in the pandemic, the government is shifting its focus to employment and maintaining stability.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Among the various other economic goals disclosed by China, are:

    • The addition of 9 million urban jobs; surveyed jobless rate around 6% (as we reported recently, the People’s Liberation Army is aggressively hiring all those who lost their jobs due to the pandemic, so at least China’s army will soon be absolutely massive)
    • Plans 3.75 trillion Yuan of Special Local Govt Bonds in 2020 (a relatively modest number)
    • Sell 1t yuan of anti-virus sovereign bonds in 2020 (even more modest)
    • Deficit-to-GDP ratio this year is projected at more than 3.6% and the deficit increase is projected at 1 trillion yuan (about $141.6 billion) over last year (remember when China actually ran a budget deficit)
    • China to work with U.S. to implement phase 1 trade deal (a noble goal, also one which will never happen)
    • China sets 2020 CPI target at about 3.5% (China may have to launch another “pig ebola” virus to boost food inflation)
    • China to use innovative monetary policy tools to finance real economy (so China will do QE as well?)
    • China’s monetary stance unchanged; to make prudent monetary policy more flexible, appropriate
    • China to use RRR cuts and interest rate cuts, relending
    • China to guide money supply ‘significantly’ higher than 2019
    • China targets more stable, high-quality imports, exports
    • China to keep yuan at reasonable and equilibrium level
    • China targets basic equilibrium in balance of payments
    • China to cut taxes, fees by about 500b yuan this year
    • China to asks large banks to boost lending to small firms by 40% (the US doesn’t hold a trademark on a debt bubble after all)
    • China sees defense spending up 6.6% to 1.268 trillion yuan (see “China’s Military Seeks Bigger Budget Amid “Growing Threat Of US Conflict”“)

    While none of the above was especially remarkable (with the exception of the hint at QE), the reason why stocks gave the report a thumbs down is because as Premier Li also said, China will safeguard national security in Hong Kong, i.e., China plans on expanding its crackdown on Hong Kong sovereignty, a step that comes one day after China announced dramatic plans to rein in dissent by writing a new law into the city’s charter, and just hours after the Senate passed a bill that will retaliate against China should it do precisely that, effectively ensuring an even further deterioration in US-Sino relations.

    Specifically, the National People’s Congress confirmed plans to pass a bill establishing “an enforcement mechanism for ensuring national security” for Hong Kong, with Reuters adding that China’s draft Hong Kong legislation says Hong Kong “should finish enacting as soon as possible the regulations in basic law regarding national security” and that Hong Kong government and legal bodies should effectively prevent, stop and punish activities that endanger national security.

    Chinese lawmakers were preparing to soon pass measures that would curb secession, sedition, foreign interference and terrorism in the former British colony, local media including the South China Morning Post reported Thursday, citing unidentified people.

    “We will establish sound legal systems and enforcement mechanisms for safeguarding national security in the two special administrative regions, and see that the governments of the two regions fulfill their constitutional responsibilities,” Li said according to prepared remarks on Friday.

    As Bloomberg adds, any attempt to impose security laws now could reignite the unrest that hammered the city’s economy last year and serve as a flash point amid broader U.S.-China tensions. Protesters urged democracy advocates to hold rallies across the city Thursday night, with one poster describing the moment as a “battle of life and death,” but mass demonstrations didn’t immediately materialize.

    “This is the end of Hong Kong,” said Dennis Kwok, an opposition lawmaker representing the legal sector. “I foresee that the status of Hong Kong as an international city will be gone very soon.”

    More importantly, we now have a timeline: the law is expected to pass China’s parliament before the end of its annual session May 28, so retail investors have about a week to ramping stocks higher before the trapdoor opens.

    The legislation would still require several procedural steps including approval by the NPC’s decision-making Standing Committee, which could come as early as next month, the SCMP said. The move comes before citywide elections in September in which opposition members hoped to gain an unprecedented majority of the Legislative Council.

    * * *

    Although national security laws are required to be passed by Article 23 of the Basic Law, Hong Kong’s mini-constitution, successive governments have failed to pass them, with one effort in 2003 resulting in widespread street demonstrations. This new strategy could potentially allow authorities to skip the local legislative process, although the mechanics of how that would work remained unclear.

    “It is absolutely necessary that the country’s top legislature fulfill its obligation to guarantee national security, by strengthening the legal framework with regard to Hong Kong,” the state-run China Daily said in a commentary. “There is nothing untoward in this as all countries attach the utmost significance to national security, and the introduction of such a law will safeguard the long-term stability and prosperity of Hong Kong.”

    In addition to a more than 3% drop in Hong Kong stocks following the report of the imminent crackdown, three- and 12-month forwards on the Hong Kong dollar rose in New York trading, indicating traders expected more weakness ahead for the currency, which slipped the most in six weeks earlier in the day.

    “The market is taking this news negatively for Hong Kong given the likely return of violent protest activities, higher risk for the U.S. to remove certain preferential terms for Hong Kong, such as the special tariff status, and risk-off sentiment,” said Becky Liu, head of China macro strategy at Standard Chartered Bank Ltd.

    In addition to an imminent return of violent Hong Kong protests, China’s position sets up an election-year showdown with Trump, who has come under pressure in Washington to reconsider the special trading status before the city’s return to Chinese rule under a promise to maintain its liberal financial and political structure. Secretary of State Michael Pompeo has delayed an annual report on whether the city still enjoys a “high degree of autonomy” from Beijing, telling reporters Wednesday that he was “closely watching what’s going on there.”

    On Thursday, Trump warned that the U.S. would respond to any move to curtail protests and democratic movements in Hong Kong: “I don’t know what it is because nobody knows yet,” Trump, speaking to reporters as he left the White House on Thursday, said about the possible Chinese actions. “If it happens, we’ll address that issue very strongly.” He didn’t elaborate.

    Assuring that this will only get worse, much worse, a late Thursday tweet from Global Times editor in chief Hu Xijing said that “Hong Kong belongs to China, not the US. If senior officials in Washington are confused about this, President Trump’s granddaughter can tell them this common sense.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The climax came when late on Thursday, senators Chris Van Hollen (Democrat) and Pat Toomey (Republican) introduced legislation to punish Chinese entities involved in enforcing the proposed new security law in Hong Kong and penalize banks that do business with those entities. They acted in response to what they said was the Chinese Communist Party’s “brazen interference” in Hong Kong’s autonomy. Meanwhile, China has repeatedly stressed that the US should mind its own business and not mess in internal affairs, with Hong Kong considered one of them.

    Perhaps this is a good time to reread the latest Dalio blog post on why a war between the US and China is now inevitable.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

  • "Completely Bonkers" – US Bike Sales Boom In Pandemic As Americans Hit Parks
    “Completely Bonkers” – US Bike Sales Boom In Pandemic As Americans Hit Parks

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 21:45

    Bikes sales flourished during nationwide COVID-19 lockdowns, as people were confined to their homes and local communities for several months under government-enforced public health orders to flatten the pandemic curve.

    During this time, tens of millions of folks were laid off and filed for initial claims, and the lucky ones were able to work at home, which resulted in an unprecedented collapse in fuel consumption as automobiles were not needed. Employed or unemployed, millions flocked to local parks and trails, as they reconnected with nature as a stress reliever. 

    Walking and jogging wasn’t enough for some, many ordered outdoor and stationary bikes online, and depending on local government restrictions, they were able to purchase ones at local retail shops. 

    Google search trend “bike shop near me” erupted to new decade highs during lockdowns. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Research firm The NPD Group found that US bike sales in March soared 50% YoY. They said stationary exercise bikes also saw increased sales. Overall, bike sales saw a 31% YoY jump over 1Q20. 

    Bike shop owners reported a surge in sales over the last several months, Morgan Lommele, PeopleForBikes director of state and local policy, told NPR News

    “We’re seeing families, individuals riding bikes in droves, more than we’ve seen over the last 20 years,” said Lommele

    She said the best selling bikes were in a price range of $600 to $1,500. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Lommele said many bike shops experienced “record-level sales, record-level demand for service” in March and over the first quarter. With such an influx in demand, she said some shops experienced labor shortages as workers stayed home due to virus fears. 

    League of American Bicyclists said some state governments labeled bike shops as “essential” and were allowed to stay open during lockdowns. 

    With depleted supply, bike shops are now complaining about restocking, plus a massive cloud of uncertainty remains due to President Trump’s bicycle and bicycle parts 25% tariffs. 

    Lommele said tariffs “really harm our ability to provide a safe, low-cost product to Americans who want to ride bikes.”

    In Springfield, Missouri, A & B Cycle’s Assistant Sales Manager Bryant Johnson said sales continued to spike through spring. 

    “It’s been completely bonkers,” Johnson told KY3 News. “It’s kind of unprecedented to be this low on stock of bikes.”

    Johnson said people want to stay active during the stay-at-home-orders. 

    “People just sat around for so long, they’re getting bored,” he said.

    Johnson said the backlog is so severe, bikes ordered today won’t arrive in the shop until fall. 

    We noted in late April that Peloton sales are booming, and their at-home classes experienced a record number of riders. 

    It only a took a pandemic to get America fit again.

  • Watch: China Expert Warns Communist Regime Unlike Anything "Since The Third Reich"
    Watch: China Expert Warns Communist Regime Unlike Anything “Since The Third Reich”

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 21:25

    Authored by Cabot Phillips via Campus Reform,

    The FBI issued a PSA warning of the Chinese government’s intention to steal American medical research in its quest to find a cure for COVID-19.

    The May 13 announcement came as mounting evidence continues to expose Chinese efforts to infiltrate America’s college campuses with the goal of stealing research and spreading propaganda.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Gordon Chang, an expert on United States-China relations, and author of The Coming China Collapse, spoke with Campus Reform Editor-in-Chief Cabot Phillips to break down what it all means and what must be done in response.

    WATCH:

    Pointing first to China’s response to COVID-19, Chang called out the attempt to place blame on other nations, saying “What we are seeing with the coronavirus is an attempt by the Chinese Communist Party to change the narrative around the entire world… the virus has an origin in Wuhan. Beijing has tried to change that, at times suggesting it came from the United States.”

    “But also China has been trying to say they’ve had a near perfect response to the coronavirus and western countries have been failing… there’s an attempt to exert Chinese influence. One thing we’ve got to remember is Xi believes China is the world’s only sovereign state.”

    Chang went on to point out how China has an extensive operation in place to steal American research, noting that “estimates put the annual theft of American intellectual property at somewhere between $150-600 billion a year.”

    “Some of that actually takes place on American college campuses. China has bought a number of college professors, a number of them have been fingered by the FBI and they’re pending investigations, and Chinese students have been engaged in activities…for instance, downloading entire databases for China.” 

    Pointing out the danger in allowing the Chinese government a foothold on our campuses, Chang detailed how their Confucius Institutes “report in reality to the Communist Party’s United Front Work Department. That means these are attempts to subvert other countries. Why would China spend so much money on U.S. campuses? It’s not just because they want to teach the Chinese language. They want to put forth narratives and restrict what is said about China on American campuses.”

    Pointing out the lack of reciprocity, he noted, “The U.S. is not permitted to have institutes like this in China. You don’t have a Lincoln Center or Roosevelt Institute… we know that propaganda is absolutely critical to totalitarian regimes.” In closing, Chang noted the impact political correctness has had on the failure of American colleges and universities to call out China’s infiltration efforts.

    “What we’ve seen in the U.S. is political correctness gone wild in connection with coronavirus.. where any criticism of China is deemed to be xenophobic or creating racism against Chinese Americans. That’s absolutely wrong. You’ve got to remember that the Chinese regime is deeply racist with its Han nationalist ideology. This is something we haven’t quite seen since The Third Reich.

    To say criticism of a racist regime is racist is absolutely wrong. People have serious concerns about China and we have to have the right to have open discussions about it without the name calling.”

  • Washington State Loses "Hundreds Of Millions" To Nigerian Unemployment Claims Fraud Scheme
    Washington State Loses “Hundreds Of Millions” To Nigerian Unemployment Claims Fraud Scheme

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 21:22

    Just when you thought the world has reached a level of peak absurdity, the Nigerian scheme makes a grand reappearance.

    Washington state officials admitted losing “hundreds of millions of dollars” to an international fraud scheme, originating out of Nigeria, that robbed the state’s unemployment insurance system and could mean even longer delays for thousands of jobless workers still waiting for legitimate benefits.

    As the Seattle Times reported, Suzi LeVine, commissioner of the state Employment Security Department (ESD), disclosed the staggering losses during a news conference Thursday afternoon. LeVine declined to specify how much money was stolen during the scam, which she said appears to be orchestrated out of Nigeria but she conceded that the amount was “orders of magnitude above” the $1.6 million that ESD reported losing to fraudsters in April.

    While LeVine said state and law enforcement officials were working to recover as much of the stolen money as possible, she declined to say how much had been returned so far. She also said the ESD had taken “a number of steps” to prevent new fraudulent claims from being filed or paid but would not specify the steps to avoid alerting criminals.

    Thursday’s disclosure helped explain the unusual surge in the number of new jobless claims filed last week in Washington, which as we showed this morning was the state with the highest weekly increase in claims.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    On Wednesday, the state’s monthly employment report for April showed Washington with a seasonally adjusted unemployment rate of 15.4%, up from 5.1% in March. The national unemployment rate for April stood at 14.7%, seasonally adjusted.

    For the week ending May 16, the ESD received 138,733 initial claims for unemployment insurance, a 26.8% increase over the prior week and one of the biggest weekly surges since the coronavirus crisis began. That sharp increase came as the number of initial jobless claims nationwide fell 9.2%, to 2.4 million, according to data released earlier in the day by the Labor Department.

    Indeed, the surge in claims made Washington the state with the highest percentage of its civilian labor force filing unemployment claims – at 30.8%, according to an analysis by the Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan Washington, D.C., think tank. Nevada, the next-highest state, reported claims from 24.5% of its civilian workforce.

    It now appears that many of those claims were fictitious and emanated from some computer in Nigeria.

    The disclosure came as the state was already struggling to process an unprecedented wave of legitimate jobless claims amid one of the worst economic crises in U.S. history. Some additional delays in benefits payments to legitimate claimants are likely as the ESD subjects all claims to more scrutiny.

    “This makes me the most angry, and the most upset — that we need to delay payments to Washingtonians who need the benefits,” LeVine said adding that “we need to also build in more time for analysis. So going forward, we want to set expectations that we will add an additional one to two days to our processing time.”

    That delay follows a decision last Thursday to temporarily suspend benefit payments for two days. The delay came after the ESD disclosed that it had seen a surge in bogus claims reportedly filed by identity thieves who appeared to be targeting the extra-generous benefits available under federal pandemic relief legislation.

    That same day, the Secret Service issued an alert describing Washington as the top target so far of a Nigerian fraud ring “exploiting the COVID-19 crisis to commit large-scale fraud against state unemployment insurance programs.”

    It remains unclear how the fraudulent benefit payments made their way all the way to Nigeria.

  • "It Felt Like A Death": 20% Of Illinois Restaurants Will Go Out Of Business In Coming Months
    “It Felt Like A Death”: 20% Of Illinois Restaurants Will Go Out Of Business In Coming Months

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 21:05

    Last week we reported that as much as a quarter of US restaurants will go out of business due to the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a forecast by OpenTable, which reported that total restaurant reservations and walk-in customers have fallen 95% over the previous year ending May 13.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    For restaurant owners in Illinois this dismal forecast is already coming true. According to CBS, Illinois restaurants – reeling in the coronavirus crisis – are doing anything they can to survive, and while many are trying to reinvent themselves, for others time to close shop. CBS cites a “frightening” number from the Illinois Restaurant Association: In spite of all the take out and delivery services they now offer, restaurant sales are down 80%, and thousands of restaurants are in jeopardy of never opening again.

    “The restaurant industry, we’ve kind of alway been up against it anyways,” said Joe Frillman, owner of Daisies Restaurant. “The statistics are never in our favor to begin with.”

    Once known for its dine in homemade pastas, the kitchen at Daisies in Logan Square has pivoted to pay the bills: “It’s all to go now, so the whole business model has changed,” said Frillman who debuted a new concept last weekend. His dining space became a farmer’s market with fresh produce,- meal kits and specialty products.

    “We had over 150 people come out to support us,” he said. “I was kind of blown away. We didn’t really know what to expect.”

    But for every hopeful moment like these, there are thousands of others from restaurants on the brink of closing.  Jeanne Roeser, in business since 1996, was forced to close her two popular brunch destinations, Toast. Each sat only a handful of diners, and an eventual scaled back reopening didn’t add up.

    “It felt like a death,” said Roeser, owner of Toast Restaurant. “It felt like going through the grieving process, which I still am. Any time I thought about it, and I looked at the prospects, it just, in my gut, didn’t feel like it was something that would be workable”

    According to The Illinois Restaurant Association there were 25,851 restaurants operating in the state in March, and it estimates that 20%, or nearly 5,200 restaurants, will go out of business in the coming months because of COVID-19.

    “I think it’s an undercount,” said Roeser.

    “I think that’s generous,” said Frillman. “I think would be a best case scenario.”

    “Independent restaurants bring wealth to the city, culturally, economically,” said Roeser.

    For those whose livelihood is on the line, the push forward against the odds must go on: “It’s not whether or not you’re not going to make it,” said Frillman. “It’s you are always constantly doing whatever you can to make it.”

    Alas, there’s an even more important number to keep in mind: About 600,000 people work in Illinois’ restaurant industry and about half have been laid off.

    Restaurants find the prospect of resuming dine in service especially frustrating.  Stay-at-home orders are expected to ease on May 29, with much of the state moving from stage two to stage three of Gov. JB Pritzker’s plan to reopen the state. That allows salons and health clubs to reopen with restrictions, but not restaurants for dine in.  Owners argue theirs is a business accustomed to strict health protocols, and with social distancing and scaled back capacity they should be allowed to reopen at stage three.

  • Fed Balance Sheet Rises Above $7 Trillion; Bond ETF Holdings Hit $1.8 Billion
    Fed Balance Sheet Rises Above $7 Trillion; Bond ETF Holdings Hit $1.8 Billion

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 20:26

    After crossing back above the $4 trillion mark back in October 2019 in the aftermath of the JPMorgan repo bailout, also known as “No QE”, the Fed’s balance sheet is nearly double that amount a little over half a year later, with the Fed reporting in its latest H.4.1 report that as of May 20, 2020, its total assets rose above $7 trillion for the first time ever, an increase of $103 billion in the past week to $7,038 billion. Putting the increase in context, the Fed’s balance sheet hit $6 trillion on April 2.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The increase was mostly the result of a $79BN increase in settled MBS purchases as well as $32BN in Treasury purchases, while there was no change in the Fed’s holdings in its commercial paper facility.

    While the Fed’s balance sheet is broadly expected to hit $12 trillion in the next 12 months, the fact that the expansion has slowed down substantially is a problem, especially after the Fed tapered its daily QE to just $6 billion last week, and JPMorgan expects it to further shrink to just $5 billion per day when the new schedule is published tomorrow.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    This is a problem because the Treasury has some $3 trillion in debt issuance to go in the next 6 months, and one war or another, the Fed will have to aggressively ramp up its QE again, which as we discussed over the weekend, may mean another market crash “unexpectedly” happens in the coming weeks to provide cover to the Fed for the next massive QE expansion.

    There was one surprise in the latest amount of Fed corporate ETF holdings, which can be found in the “Net portfolio holdings of Commercial Paper Funding Facility II, LLC” line time.

    As a reminder, earlier today we laid out a BofA report according to which the Fed would disclose $2.5 billion in total bond ETF holdings, and which assumed that the Fed, which unveiled a total of $305MM in the one full day after the program was launched, would now have a $2.5 billion total in holdings. However, the actual number was notably lower at $1.8 billion, which means that in the past 5 work days, the Fed purchased $1.5 billion in ETFs, or $300MM per day, which appears to be the Fed’s now daily purchases of LQD (for those curious, the total assets of LQD are $48 billion).

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Incidentally, judging by the sharp jump in LQD pricing, $300MM is more than enough to push this critical – for all future buybacks, not to mention anchor pillar for the US bond market – ETF back to near all-time highs.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And since nobody even jokes anymore that the Fed can one day reverse or even stop these operations, the bigger question is what will the Fed’s balance sheet be when it’s all said and done, an exercise which Deutsche Bank did earlier this week when it calculated that the maximum potential size of the Fed’s balance sheet is $130 trillion and will be hit as soon as the Fed owns… well, everything.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

  • Insolvent Illinois May Tap Into Fed's Emergency Muni Facility
    Insolvent Illinois May Tap Into Fed’s Emergency Muni Facility

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 20:25

    Illinois is insolvent. So what’s new?

    Well, the state’s fiscal situation was deteriorating well before the coronavirus pandemic. Traditional lenders have severed ties with the state as local officials struggle in muni bond markets to fund budgets, which has forced them to request funding assistance via the Federal Reserve’s new $500 billion Municipal Liquid Facility (MLF), reported Bloomberg

    The Fed laid out the process last week of how state and local governments can tap into MLF, a tool announced in April that will provide state and local governments affected by virus-related shutdowns, with ample amounts of liquidity as tax revenue collapses.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Carol Knowles, a spokeswoman for Illinois’ budget office, said state officials are drafting a “notice of interest” that will shortly be submitted to the Fed, the first step towards gaining access to MLF. 

    The move comes after the state suspended a short-term debt auction worth $1.2 billion several weeks ago. The proposed one-year notes were expected to fund state operations as cash flows reach dangerously low levels thanks to the economic fallout. 

    Once the notice of interest form is submitted, the MLF program will begin to participate in the bidding of Illinois debt. According to the NY Fed, the state is eligible to borrow about $9.7 billion under the program.

    Kent Hiteshew, whom the Fed hired to supervise the MLF program, said the central bank is administering virtual meetings that would allow for the quick approval once states and local governments submit the forms.

    “We should begin purchasing notes in the very near future,” Hiteshew said. 

    Even before the outbreak, Illinois had a massive unfunded pension liability problem and soaring budget deficits. As tax revenue collapses and the local economy has ground to a halt, the state’s bonds, rated one notch above junk, are at risk of downgrades

    We recently noted, the state is paying 5.65% on its 10-year bonds is now five times higher than the 1.13% costs AAA-rated states to borrow. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Illinois’ pension shortfalls are continuing to worsen with a visual below mapping out where trouble lurks in the state. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Many of Illinois pension funds are less than 50% funded — we’re assuming that number now is much worse. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Take, for example, the shortfall between Chicago police pension assets and pension liabilities, the gap is absolutely astonishing… 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The state also has mounting unpaid bills, which currently stands around $7.5 billion. With recession deepening, don’t expect state officials to pay its bills anytime soon. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Steve Cortes, a conservative political commentator, recently told Fox News that Illinois politicians are using the virus crisis as a means to bailout decades of failed liberal policies. He said much of the instabilities in the state, such as unfunded pensions, existed well before the pandemic.

    https://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=6152146821001&w=466&h=263Watch the latest video at foxnews.com

     

    At this point, it appears the Fed via MLF will be giving the bankrupted state another lifeline, another can-kicking policy that will absolutely solve nothing but delay the recovery.

    Of course, what Illinois’ liberal leaders really want is a bailout… not a loan. Don’t hold your breath

  • Scientists Claim 'Medicinal Cannabis' Could Help Fight COVID-19
    Scientists Claim ‘Medicinal Cannabis’ Could Help Fight COVID-19

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 20:05

    Ever since scientists reportedly explored the deterrent effects of nicotine in preventing the coronavirus, potheads probably figured it was only a matter of time until somebody did the same for marijuana.

    Now, a team of researchers in Calgary told a local TV station that their research into local strains of marijuana shows “promise.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The husband-and-wife team say they’ve been researching potential medicinal properties of marijuana for more than five years, but started to ‘pivot’ their research once the coronavirus came on the scene.

    Olga and Igor Kovalchuk have been working with cannabis since 2015, using varieties from around the world to create new hybrids and develop extracts that demonstrate certain therapeutic properties.

    “There’s a lot of documented information about cannabis in cancer, cannabis in inflammation, anxiety, obesity and what not,” says Igor. “When COVID-19 started, Olga had the idea to revisit our data, and see if we can utilize it for COVID.

    “It was like a joker card, you know, coronavirus. It just mixes up everybody’s plans,” says Olga.

    She says they started to examine the special proteins, or receptors, that the virus hijacks to enter the body, and they’ve now submitted a research paper studying the effects of medical cannabis on COVID-19.

    “We were totally stunned at first, and then we were really happy,” says Olga.

    Specifically, the researchers at the University of Lethbridge suspect that certain anti-inflammatory high-CBD cannabis extracts can help modulate the levels of the receptors in the mouth, lungs and intestinal cells, areas that are among the most vulnerable for coronavirus infection. Previous research has shown that some of these strains can “modulate” the activity of a receptor known as “ACE2”, which other researchers have shown might be a critical gateway for the virus.

    One of the receptors, known as ACE2, has now been shown to be a key gateway, to how the COVID-19 virus enters the body.

    “The virus has the capacity to bind to it, and pull it into the cell, almost like a doorway,” Olga says.
    Other key receptors allow the virus to enter other cells more easily and multiply rapidly. But some cannabis extracts help to reduce inflammation and slow down the virus.

    “Imagine a cell being a large building,” says Igor. “Cannabinoids decrease the number of doors in the building by, say, 70 per cent, so it means the level of entry will be restricted. So, therefore, you have more chance to fight it.”
    The early discoveries indicate the cannabis extracts could be used in inhalers, mouthwash and throat gargle products for both clinical practice and at-home treatment.

    The Kovalchuks haven’t tested the effects of smoking cannabis and say you won’t find any of these extracts at your local weed store.

    “The key thing is not that any cannabis you would pick up at the store will do the trick,” says Olga.

    They have now submitted a paper explaining their data and proposing a clinical trial. Unfortunately for smokers, the extracts that the two have been studying are extremely peculiar: they have very high concentrations of CBD, and extremely low levels of THC – the active ingredient in marijuana that produces the “high” in the user.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 21st May 2020

  • WTO's Goods Trade Barometer Hits Record Low Amid COVID Disruptions 
    WTO’s Goods Trade Barometer Hits Record Low Amid COVID Disruptions 

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 02:35

    The World Trade Organization (WTO) published its Goods Trade Barometer on Wednesday morning, showing a steep decline in 1H20 as the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the global economy.

    “The index currently stands at 87.6, far below the baseline value of 100, suggesting a sharp contraction in world trade extending into the second quarter,” the new report showed. 

    “This is the lowest value on record since the indicator was launched in July 2016.” 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Most importantly, the WTO warned: “the current reading captures the initial phases of the COVID-19 outbreak, and shows no sign of the trade decline bottoming out yet.” 

    The current reading of the Goods Trade Barometer suggests world merchandise trade could plunge between 13% and 32% in 2020, which is all dependent on if there’s a second virus wave. 

    WTO trade data show the volume of world merchandise trade contracted by 0.1% in 2019, the first decline since the 2009 GFC. The downturn in the global economy started in late 2017, mostly because marginal productivity of debt was quickly depleted across major economies and a trade war between the US and China that quickly erupted.

    For more color on collapsing world trade, A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S, the world’s largest container line, warned last week that global trade would continue to falter with volumes declining by at least a quarter in 2Q20. The shipper dashed all hope that a V-shaped recovery will be seen in the back half of the year, instead suggesting a U-shaped recovery is more plausible. 

    Meanwhile, this week, BofA’s latest Fund Manager Survey, which polled 223 participants with $651BN in AUM, showed the vast majority of financial professionals remain incredibly bearish on the global economy. Respondents do not expect global manufacturing PMI to rise back above 50 until 4Q20. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    MSCI World has soared 32% in the last 41 trading sessions on V-shaped recovery and vaccine hopes. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    While world stocks are pushing the narrative that the end of the pandemic is near and it’s time to celebrate about economic revivals — that is far from the case, and the latest trade data from WTO suggest the bottom is not in. 

  • Vast Majority Of Aussies Believe China Covering Up True Scale Of COVID-19 Outbreak
    Vast Majority Of Aussies Believe China Covering Up True Scale Of COVID-19 Outbreak

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 02:00

    Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

    A poll conducted by Essential Research has found that a huge majority of Australians, 77% believe China is covering up the reality of the coronavirus outbreak.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The survey also found that 40% believe the outbreak came from a Chinese lab.

    Despite evidence strongly suggesting these are legitimate concerns, they were grouped under the category ‘conspiracy theories’.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The poll also found that over a quarter of Australians believe that to some extent the outbreak is being overhyped to scare people.

    Australia has led the charge to hold China accountable for the outbreak, successfully urging over 100 other countries to join a coalition to ensure a thorough independent investigation into the virus origins.

    In return, China has imposed tariffs of up to 80% on the country, in a bid to wreck its economy.

  • Japanese Military To Receive New Assault Rifles Amid Rising Tensions With China
    Japanese Military To Receive New Assault Rifles Amid Rising Tensions With China

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 01:00

    The very last time the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force (JGSDF) received new assault rifles, the Nikkei 225 stock index soared to nearly 40,000 in 1989, then crashed 50% nine months later.

    Jane’s Information Group reports JGSDF will receive a new 5.56 mm rifle and 9 mm handgun to defend the country’s southwestern islands from China. 

    The new rifle, designated as “Type 20,” is manufactured in Japan under the name “Howa5.56,” which was unveiled Monday at the Defense Ministry in Tokyo.

    Typ 20 assault rifle 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

     JGSDF displayed on 18 May its new 5.56 mm assault rifle, which it has given the designation Type 20. h/t Janes 

    JGSDF spokesperson told Janes 3,283 units were purchased, valued at JPY900 million ($8.36 million). The new weapon is water-resistant and designed for use in amphibious operations. It has “better firepower” than its predecessor, the Howa Type 89 5.56 mm assault rifle, the spokesperson added.

    Video of new weapons 

    Army units under the Ground Component Command, including the Amphibious Rapid Deployment Brigade based at Camp Ainoura in Sasebo, Nagasaki Prefecture, and Rapid Deployment Regiments across Japan, will receive the new assault rifle and pistol in 2021. 

    Disputed islands between Japan and China 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Disputed islands between Japan and China 

    Janes says the new pistol is the SFP9 9 mm handgun by German manufacturer Heckler & Koch. The spokesperson said the introduction of these new weapons will provide troops with better firepower. 

    SFP9 9 mm handgun

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

     JGSDF displayed its new pistol on 18 May: the SFP9 9 mm handgun by Heckler & Koch. h/t Janes 

    Garren Mulloy, a professor of international relations at Japan’s Daito Bunka University, told South China Morning Post (SCMP) that the new assault rifle has been tested for multiple battlefield scenarios, not just the in amphibious operations. 

    “The obvious assumption is that Japan is planning to carry out a lot more amphibious operations,” Mulloy said. “But if you talk to professional soldiers, you will see that dust or other contaminants in the mechanism of a weapon is a constant problem, and I think the Japanese have designed a weapon that will have better tolerances than its predecessor in all conditions.”

    “This weapon will have been proofed in the snow in Hokkaido, the humidity of Okinawa and they will have taken them to desert environments in the United States to make sure that they operate as they are meant to in any given situation,” he said.

    He said the purchase of the weapons comes at a time when Chinese maritime war drills have picked up around Taiwan, the East China Sea, and the South China Sea and increased further during the global pandemic

    “If we look back over the last six months or so, there have been a steady number of Chinese incursions into those waters and then during the coronavirus crisis, Beijing was otherwise occupied,” he said. “But as soon as the crisis passed its peak there, it was as if Beijing wanted to reassert its claims. It’s as if they said, ‘We were away, but now we’re back.'”

    On Wednesday, we noted cross-strait relations and Sino-US diplomatic relations continues to deteriorate  — Japan has gotten the message, restock its military with new assault rifles as conflict with China around disputed islands could be dead ahead. 

  • The 'Conman Elites' That Want To "Save Us" From COVID-19
    The ‘Conman Elites’ That Want To “Save Us” From COVID-19

    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 05/21/2020 – 00:05

    Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,

    Last week the Federal Reserve released a report predicting that the next print on GDP numbers will likely show a loss 34.9% in the second quarter. This is the biggest GDP plunge since the Great Depression; even the crash of 2008 doesn’t compare.  And when we take into account the fact that the Fed artificially boosts GDP calculations by adding in many non-productive government programs, we have to ask, what are the REAL losses above and beyond what the Fed admits to?

    With the supply chain in disarray, many companies (like Apple) are trying to shift their manufacturing base to dodge the pandemic. Of course, none of them want to bring factories back to the US; there’s simply no incentive to do so. And, the small business sector has been crushed by the shutdowns, with the vast majority of those seeking bailout loans still waiting for aid and over 20.5 million employees laid off in April alone.

    Needless to say, the economy has been severely affected. The problem is that many people are being led to believe that this event has been triggered by the virus outbreak alone. This is a lie. As I noted back in February in my article ‘Global Centralization Is The Cause Of The Crisis – Not The Cure’, the collapse of the Everything Bubble was well underway long before the pandemic. The crash was started by the Federal Reserve hiking rates into economic weakness at the end of 2018, puncturing the bubble and setting the liquidity crisis in motion.

    The pandemic is just the icing on the cake of a collapse that was going to happen anyway. It is also a convenient scapegoat, because now the banking elites are going to escape all the blame for the crash and the public is going to hyperfocus on the coronavirus as the culprit.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    As I also warned would happen over the past few months, the Chinese government has been caught in numerous lies surrounding their response to the outbreak, including hiding the true numbers of dead and infected and suppressing information to the rest of the world on the danger of human-to-human transmission. The problem that the public is still not being told about, however, is that the Chinese did not act alone, they had help.

    It takes two sides to do the pandemic tango – If air travel had been cut off from China immediately upon the confirmation of the virus spread until the danger could be assessed, the outbreak may have never carried beyond China’s borders. Yet this did not happen. Air travel remained open for weeks from China after the outbreak confirmation. Then, when the virus hit Italy hard, air travel continued from Europe to the US unabated. It was almost as if the establishment WANTED the virus to spread quickly…

    I remember some of the idiotic sentiments being passed around in web forums back in January and February. Some people argued that the virus “only infects Asians”. Some people said sarcastically “Oh no, whatever will we do without our new i-Phones…!”. And, yet others, including the Trump Administration, argued that the US economy would escape any real harm.

    Well, we are a few months into the outbreak and now the US has the largest number of infections in the world. US deaths are already almost triple that of the CDC’s yearly reported 30,000 deaths for the flu. The virus is no Black Plague, but it’s not something to be shrugged off either. If this virus behaves anything like the pandemics of the past, expect it to linger for a couple of years, not just a few months.  The lockdowns actually guarantee that this situation will drag on for quite some time.

    Apple i-Phone sales have crashed 77% in April, right along with almost every other sector of the economy. Clearly, the Trump Administration and Larry Kudlow were either lying to us in February, or they had no idea what they were talking about.

    Despite the current reopening hype, the situation is only going to get worse from here on out. Certainly in terms of the economy, but also in terms of the outbreak. The globalists have openly discussed their plans for this pandemic, including a minimum 18 month period of lockdowns and “reopenings”. The public seems to be oblivious to the fact that the plan is for a “1 month open, 2 months closed” cycle going into next year. That’s right, the lockdowns will return.

    Certain globalists have slithered out of the swamp to the forefront of media attention recently, and it is interesting to see how transparent the narrative has become. As I have predicted time and time again, during the collapse the very people that helped create the crisis are now suddenly being put on a pedestal by the media as our saviors and some are being presented as “rebels” on the side of conservatives. Here are just a few global elites that have been specifically prominent during this disaster.

    Bill Gates

    Wow, I’m getting incredibly sick of seeing Bill Gates presented in the media lately as some kind of virology guru. Why should we take the advice of a computer programmer on issues of biology and sociopolitical response? Why should we take the advice of an open globalist with an admitted agenda of population control?

    Bill Gates is notorious for letting his agendas slip in public forums such as his Ted Talks. In 2010 Gates called for carbon emissions to be reduced to zero (an impossibility without complete de-industrialization and the economic murder of billions of people). In the same talk, he hinted that methods to reduce the population could include “new vaccines and reproductive health services…” He did not elaborate at the time, except to claim that vaccines would lead to “social changes” that would reduce population.  Aren’t vaccines supposed to extend people’s lives, thus increasing the population?

    We do know that Bill Gates has funded numerous experimental vaccine trials through the World Health Organization, including Polio vaccination programs. It was these same programs that led to viral outbreaks of polio in various countries and hundreds of paralyzed children. In fact, the vaccines caused more cases of polio than the wild-type virus. This if VERIFIED FACT, admitted by the WHO, though numerous leftist media sources have tried to deny it.

    At most, the WHO and Gates can claim that the infections were “accidental”. But if this is the case, it would still suggest that vaccines developed by Gates Foundation programs and the WHO should not be trusted. Given Gates’ obsession with depopulation, I think it safer to not allow him to inject viruses (living or dead) into people.

    The Gates Foundation was also central in Event 201, a pandemic exercise which “simulated” a coronavirus outbreak and the government and UN response. This exercise took place only a couple of months before the real thing happened. What an incredible coincidence. It is also an incredible coincidence that almost every solution presented in the simulation is now being implemented or suggested around the world during the real pandemic, including the use of tracking apps and immunity passports that violate every level of personal freedom we know.

    Gates is not a hero, far from it. In fact, Gates and his ideology benefit greatly from the pandemic.

    Mohamed El-Erian

    A dedicated globalist, El-Erian has been everywhere in the economic media lately. As I examined in my Globalist Disinformation Spotlight article, El-Erian is an active promoter of a global currency under the control of the IMF though its Special Drawing Rights basket. He also argued last year that economic swings were “out of the control of central banks” and that they should not be blamed for any financial disruptions. At the same time, El-Erian claimed that the US economy was “strong” and that there was no chance of recession in 2020.

    El-Erian was consistently wrong about almost everything last year, but this year, suddenly, he has been the go-to guy for the economic media. Mohamed has shifted gears entirely in 2020, flip-flopping on his outlook and presenting, finally, a realistic analysis of the situation.  He is now being presented as the wise man on the mountain warning us of impending disaster.

    This is a classic case of the globalist “savior” narrative in play. They lie about the danger of collapse right up until the collapse becomes obvious to the public, and then they suddenly start warning of the collapse when it is too late for the public to do anything about it. That is to say, they keep the public unprepared and complacent for as long as possible, then act like they predicted the whole mess at the last minute.

    Elon Musk

    The great fake liberty billionaire.  A long time globalist, Musk seems like an enigma, but he is really rather simple. As a classic narcissist, Musk switches his persona to ride what he sees as the waves of public sentiment. He wants to be all things to all people and has bought into his own hype. A couple of years ago Musk was a globalist gatekeeper, a top guest of the Global Government Summit, a proponent of universal basic income, and argued in favor of transhumanism.

    Musk’s companies are lavished with praise in the media despite their minimal global market share.  Being one of the only carmakers in the US does mean Tesla is one of the “biggest” in the US, I suppose (but how often do you actually see a Tesla on the road outside of California?).  The problem is Musk survives predominantly by siphoning up billions in government funding and taxpayer dollars. Without such funding, Musk would have been out of business a long time ago.  This fact runs contrary to Musk’s new persona as a kind of libertarian, small government businessman.

    Also keep in mind that Musk’s business model relies on global warming propaganda flowing out of the same elitist circles he enjoys when he’s not “speaking out” about government tyranny.  If carbon controls are not enforced by governments (and if gas prices stay low), Musk’s high-priced electric cars have no market.

    While Musk’s companies live primarily on government welfare, the guy acts like he’s some kind of savant, and he has a lot of people fooled on this account on both sides of the political spectrum. It is truly astounding.  If he is a “genius” at anything, it is that he is an effective con man.

    For now, Musk is attempting to hook into the alternative media and the rise of the liberty movement with his anti-lockdown tweets and sudden opposition to globalism. Has Musk been “red pilled”?  I suspect he will flip-flop again in due course. If Musk wants to cut off all ties to his many friends in the globalist community then perhaps he has turned a new leaf, but I seriously doubt it.

    Dr. Anthony Fauci

    One of the people that helped create the coronvirus outbreak is the leading Trump Administration talking head on the coronavirus response. An avid defender of the WHO and, along with Trump, a defender of China’s rigged data back in January, Fauci is the guy who, in 2015, greenlit the millions of dollars in funding on coronavirus research at the Level 4 lab in Wuhan, China.  This is the same lab that is now under investigation for releasing the virus on the world, and Fauci’s funding went directly into research on coronavirus transmission from bats to other mammals.

    All I have to ask is, why has this man been at the forefront of the pandemic response for the US? Now in self isolation for possible infection, perhaps Fauci will fade into the background as he is further exposed as a participant in the creation of this pandemic.

    Greta Thunburg

    Thunburg is not so much a global elite as she is a useful idiot.  A puppet of her activist parents, Thunburg only parrots the same global warming arguments that have already been debunked year after year, yet she continues to be elevated in the mainstream media as a spokesgirl for environmentalism.  Why?  Because the “children are our future”, and leftists love the idea of brainwashed kid activists.  If Thunburg is any indication of the next generation, the future is bleak.

    While there is still zero concrete evidence that human carbon emissions lead directly to changes in the Earth’s climate, it is true that the climate does “change” over time.  Of course, shifts in activity on the gigantic nuclear fusion reactor in space known as THE SUN are probably more responsible for temperature changes on the Earth than the tiny 0.04% of carbon in the Earth’s atmosphere.  Don’t tell the political left this, though, or you might be labeled a “climate denier”…

    Thunburg and other climate activists have suddenly been pushed to the forefront recently to comment on the pandemic situation.  This might seem rather bizarre, but it makes sense when you realize how the pandemic is being exploited by the globalists to achieve certain goals.  Every agenda of the globalists from carbon emissions reductions to the suppression of industrial manufacturing to the destruction of large scale farming and even to the reduction of meat in people’s diets is being accomplished right now by the coronavirus and the government shutdowns.  Where climate activists failed, the virus is making headway.

    Beyond that, climate activists are now arguing that the restrictions put in place because of the pandemic should be KEPT IN PLACE because of global warming.  You see how that works?  One has nothing to do with the other, but the technocrats will force the public to see them as related if they can.  Just “listen to the scientists”, people!  Listen and obey the high priests of the technotronic era.  Stop demanding evidence, you aren’t “smart enough” to understand it anyway.  Only UN funded labs have the power to decipher the magical math behind global warming studies.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The pandemic will open the door to many lies and the flood of disinformation the alternative media has been working so hard to counter is going to explode beyond anything we’ve seen in the past.  The elites are at a crossroads.  They have to turn the public towards supporting collectivism and tyranny now, or they may find themselves facing the business end of a large number of torches and pitchforks.  At bottom, these elites should be in prison, not on TV dictating to the people about how they should behave and what freedoms they should give up during the crisis.

    *  *  *

    If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

  • New Zealand Uses Pandemic To Explore Four-Day Workweek
    New Zealand Uses Pandemic To Explore Four-Day Workweek

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 23:45

    As New Zealand’s economy adjusts to the COVID-19 pandemic, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has pitched a four-day workweek and other flexible working options, saying it will stimulate the economy, boost domestic tourism and encourage better work-life balance while the country’s borders remain closed to foreign nationals, according to The Guardian.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The pitch comes as the NZ economy is expected to contract up to 8% this year according to the IMF, while unemployment could hit 15% – 30%.

    Ardern was sharing suggestions during a Facebook live session while she was in the tourist city of Rotorua – adding that New Zealanders would travel more within the island nation if they had more flexibility, helping the country’s collapsed tourism sector.

    I hear lots of people suggesting we should have a four-day workweek. Ultimately that really sits between employers and employees. But as I’ve said there’s just so much we’ve learnt about Covid and that flexibility of people working from home, the productivity that can be driven out of that,” said Ardern.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    I’d really encourage people to think about that if you’re an employer and in a position to do so. To think about if that’s something that would work for your workplace because it certainly would help tourism all around the country.”

    Andrew Barnes is the founder of Perpetual Guardian, a business of more than 200 people that transitioned to a four-day workweek in 2018.

    Barnes found the shift made his employees happier and more productive and said the regime also had benefits for mental and physical health, the environment, family and social lives, and climate change.

    New Zealand could definitely go to a four-day week in the aftermath of Covid, and in fact it would be a strategy to rebuild the economy and particularly the hard-hit tourism market as it pivots to a domestic focus,” Barnes said.

    We need to retain all the productivity benefits working from home has brought, including cleaner air and a lack of gridlock lost productivity from commuting while helping businesses stay afloat. We have to be bold with our model. This is an opportunity for a massive reset.” –The Guardian

    According to Barnes, a four-day workweek could be modeled after the German system of kurzarbeit, or “short work,” which would theoretically allow people to remain in their jobs.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    “Finally, we have to factor in the need to address widespread mental health problems,” said Barnes. “The Kindness Institute reported a 25% uptick in use of its services during lockdown, so we must understand that there has to be a focus on mental health in order to resurge economically. The 4 Day Week is a tool to protect the health of workers in every respect, making this model all the more relevant to the new world we find ourselves in.

  • Scientists Discover Evidence Of Parallel Universe Where Time Flows Backward
    Scientists Discover Evidence Of Parallel Universe Where Time Flows Backward

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 23:25

    Authored by Jake Anderson via TheMindUnleashed.com,

    The existence of parallel universes sounds like science fiction, but over the years a number of prominent physicists have come to believe the idea is not only compatible with conventional physics but that it may explain some of the anomalies in quantum theory.

    A new discovery in Antarctica has caused a stir in scientific circles as possibly representing the first tangible physical evidence of a parallel universe.

    Scientists working for NASA’s Antarctic Impulsive Transient Antenna (ANITA) have been conducting a cosmic ray detection experiment. Antarctica is the ideal environment for such an endeavor because a persistent wind of high-energy particles rains down from outer space unperturbed by radio noise.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    ANITA Antarctic Hang Test/University of Hawai’i at Manoa

    ANITA is a stratospheric balloon that ferries complicated instruments high into the air over Antarctica, surveying over a million square kilometers. Its instruments search for heavier tau neutrinos trapped by solid-state matter. But while these high-energy particles do not pass through the Earth, like their lighter low-energy cousins, they should be originating from out in space and moving “down” toward us.

    However, ANITA scientists discovered something surprising: tau neutrino particles that seem to be arising “up” from the Earth, implying that they’re moving backward in time.

    Principal ANITA investigator Peter Gorham, an experimental particle physicist at the University of Hawaii, says he was surprised by this and checked for computational or equipment glitches to explain the finding.

    “What we saw is something that looked just like a cosmic ray, as seen in reflection off the ice sheet, but it wasn’t reflected,” said Gorham.

     “It was as if the cosmic ray had come out of the ice itself. A very strange thing. So we published a paper on that, we just suggested that this was in pretty strong tension with the standard model of physics.”

    Gorham says these “impossible events” are controversial but “could indicate that we’re actually seeing a new class of sub-atomic particle that’s very penetrating. Even more penetrating than a neutrino, which is pretty hard to do. This particle would be passing through almost the entire earth. So this could be an indication of some new type of physics, what we call beyond the standard model of physics.”

    Surprisingly enough, one of the simplest explanations for such a finding is that when the Big Bang occurred 13.8 billion years ago, it formed both our universe and a mirror universe where time flows in reverse. Inhabitants of that universe would likely not experience time going backward but would rather perceive us as the reverse universe.

    “Not everyone was comfortable with the hypothesis,” Gorham told New Scientist.

    Another possibility is that the Earth was inundated from cosmic rays from a supernova blast that penetrated our planet.

    Scientists have increasingly come to accept the possibility of multiple universes. A few years ago astronomers considered evidence of a “bruise” on our universe, an anomalous “cold spot” that could represent an ancient collision with another universe in the multiverse.

    Stephen Hawking’s final paper, released posthumously, proposed a theory for explaining alternate universes.

  • Futures Slide Back Under 2,950 After Trump Slams Xi In Angry Tweetstorm
    Futures Slide Back Under 2,950 After Trump Slams Xi In Angry Tweetstorm

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 23:11

    Update: the editor in chief of the Global Times, Hu Xijin, who is always on alert on twitter, was quick to respond to Trump with the following tweet, which also received permission from “the top”:

    Chinese netizens wish for your reelection because you can make America eccentric and thus hateful for the world. You help promote unity in China and you also make intl news as fun as comedy. Chinese netizens call you “Jianguo,” meaning “help to construct China”.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Of course, this feud between Trump and Xi makes for good theater, but it only takes one small error to push the wrong button by mistake.

    * * *

    And just like that, spoos are back under the critical 2,950 resistance level.

    Just when it seemed that Emini futures were about to break out from the narrow channel they had been boxed in for the past month, and where the 2,950 level was suddenly breached after repeated failed attempts…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    … Trump decided to drop some late night tweets, escalating what had been an already tense day for US-China relations, and accusing China’s Xi Jinping of being behind a “disinformation and propaganda attack on the United States and Europe” and that China could have “easily stopped the plague but they didn’t”

    “It all comes from the top,” Trump said accusing China’s president Xi in a trio of tweets on Wednesday night, in which he claimed that China was “desperate” to have Joe Biden win the presidential race (he is probably right on that).

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    What was new about Trump’s Wednesday night tweets, and why the market reacted like it did, is because While Trump has often blamed China for causing the coronavirus pandemic, he was careful to maintain that his relationship with Xi remains strong and never reference the Chinese president in one of his rants. Now that Xi has been dragged into the feud, the Chinese president needs to responds, or else risk looking weak before his country, and it is Xi’s response that markets are now dreading.

    Trump’s tweet came hours after the Senate passed a bill to clamp down on Chinese companies listed in the US, and shortly after the White House issued a broad critique of China’s economic and military policies in a report to Congress, in which it accused Beijing of intellectual property theft and economic protectionism, however without detailing what specific actions the U.S. will take in response. The report also faulted China for human rights abuses, including detaining ethnic and religious minorities such as the Uighurs, and for “engaging in provocative and coercive” military activities in areas including the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait.

    The administration also said that the decades-long policy toward China – based on the presumption that deepening engagement would help the country become a more economically and politically open society – was wrong.

    China “has chosen instead to exploit the free and open rules-based order and attempt to reshape the international system in its favor,” the report said. And China’s “expanding use of economic, political, and military power to compel acquiescence from nation states harms vital American interests and undermines the sovereignty and dignity of countries and individuals around the world.”

    In a reverse tit-for-tat, China’s foreign ministry earlier also fired back with similar charges, saying the Trump administration was looking to obscure the facts around the virus to deflect from its own shortcomings.

    Earlier on Wednesday, China’s foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said that Pompeo’s congratulations to Taiwan’s Tsai Ing-wen, in which he called her “Taiwan’s president” and boasted about the “partnership” between the US and Taiwan, are in “serious violation” of the “one-China” principle and the three China-US joint communiques which make up the Phase 1 trade deal between the two nations, and “constitute grave interference in China’s internal affairs.”

    “China deplores and condemns US interference and will take necessary measures in response to the US erroneous practices”, and the “consequences will be borne by the US side” Zhao warned.

    Shortly after, China’s Global Times tweeted that it urges the US, among other things, to sstop interfering in China’s internal affairs, and to stop undermining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait, as well as China-US bilateral relations.

    And so on, and on, and on, until eventually the next escalation will be one from which there is no quick and easy de-escalation.

    Perhaps in anticipation of that, following today’s sharp jump in stocks, risk ticked lower and after plunging on Wednesday, the dollar rose against its G-10 peers with AUD and NZD underperforming most in G10 on haven demand as U.S.-China tensions take center stage ahead of China’s National People’s Congress starting Friday. The Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index advanced 0.3%, its first rise in four days and as markets “suddenly” realize just how deep the conflict between the US and China has become.

    The Australian dollar – often a proxy for US-China sentiment- led declines against the greenback among G-10 currencies after surging to the highest in more than two months on Wednesday. The offshore yuan also weakened after two days of gains and following a weaker than expected fixing by the PBOC earlier in the session.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

  • San Diego's Legendary Burritos Now Have 'COVID-19 Surcharge'
    San Diego’s Legendary Burritos Now Have ‘COVID-19 Surcharge’

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 23:05

    One of the best things about San Diego is its legendary burrito scene. Known for being inexpensive and filling, meats such as carne asada (sliced skirt steak) and carnitas (pork) are marinated for days before being grilled to perfection for a California burrito or similar.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Now, thanks to soaring prices for meat and beef shortages which made headlines earlier this month, some San Diego taco shops are adding a COVID-19 surcharge due to the impact of the coronavirus pandemic, according to NBC 7 San Diego.

    Today, more than two months after the coronavirus pandemic reached San Diego County, locals have reported finding signs at their local taco shops that alert customers of a rise in the price of California Burritos, as well as Carne Asada Burritos, due to the impact of the COVID-19 crisis.

    For instance, last week a sign spotted at a Los Panchos Taco Shop on Waring Road near Zion Avenue in Allied Gardens read, in part: “The COVID-19 situation continues to bring unexpected beef and pork plant closures. This is creating a shortage of product into commerce and therefore protein prices are skyrocketing.”

    As a result, that taco shop – on that same sign – had to let customers know that a surcharge of $1.25 is now being charged to all carne asada items, including the California Burrito. –NBC 7

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    According to the San Diego City Attorney’s Office, restaurants are allowed to increase prices during a State of Emergency as long as the surcharge is clearly disclosed prior to purchase, and it’s directly linked to an increase in prices incurred by the establishment.

    “We understand the catastrophic impact that the pandemic has had on our local restaurants and that they are likely taking on new costs in order safely serve customers,” said the City Attorney’s office. “We’re hopeful that restaurants will continue to clearly disclose any necessary price increases to customers before they place their orders.”

  • Test Positive For COVID-19, End Up In A Police Database
    Test Positive For COVID-19, End Up In A Police Database

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 22:45

    Authored by Adam Dick via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

    So you are curious whether you have coronavirus? You could take a coronavirus test to find out. Well, not really find out, since the test results are not reliable. Nonetheless, you can take a test to obtain at least a Magic 8 Ball level answer of if you are or are not infected with coronavirus.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Here is some information likely unknown to many people when they are tested: The names and addresses of people who test positive are often handed over to police departments that can input or tag those names and addresses in police databases.

    Kimberlee Kruesi provides the details in a Tuesday Associated Press article. She starts off her article with the following revelation:

    More than 11 million people have been tested in the U.S. for COVID-19, all with the assurance that their private medical information would remain protected and undisclosed.

    Yet, public officials in at least two-thirds of states are sharing the addresses of people who tested positive with first responders — from police officers to firefighters to EMTs. An Associated Press review found that at least 10 of those states also share the patients’ names.

    Kinda makes those coronavirus tests that many government officials and people in the media have been promoting seem less warm and fuzzy, doesn’t it?

    Continue reading Kruesi’s article here

  • Bodybuilder Shares Shocking "Before And After" Photos After Nearly Dying Of COVID-19
    Bodybuilder Shares Shocking “Before And After” Photos After Nearly Dying Of COVID-19

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 22:25

    Mike Schultz is a healthy 43-year-old nurse from San Francisco. He’s gay, and a bodybuilder with no underlying health conditions, weighing in at a sprite-like 190 lbs despite his ripped physique. 

    Men like Schultz typically aren’t considered “high risk” coronavirus patients. But that didn’t stop him from contracting a particularly virulent infection, leading him to be hospitalized in mid-March, then moved to another hospital, where he was intubated for nearly five weeks.

    Remember, only roughly 1/5 patients who are intubated due to coronavirus die. Schultz shared his story on his instagram, long with some shocking before-and-after shots.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Schultz shared his story with Buzzfeed News.

    “I wanted to show it can happen to anyone. It doesn’t matter if you’re young or old, have pre-existing conditions or not. It can affect you,” Schultz told BuzzFeed.

    “I knew what I thought going in [about the coronavirus]. I didn’t think it was as serious as it was until after things started happening,” he said. “I thought I was young enough for it not to affect me, and I know a lot of people think that.”

    Schultz flew to Boston to visit his boyfriend Josh Hebblethwaite on March 14, just one week after the two had traveled to Miami for a music festival where dozens of others were diagnosed with the virus.

    “We knew it was out there,” Schultz said. “There were no real restrictions in place, though. No lockdowns. We just thought, ‘Well, we gotta wash our hands more and be wary of touching our face.”

    Shortly after arriving, Schultz began feeling very ill. When he arrived at a hospital, he had a temperature of 103 degrees and his lungs had filled with fluid.

    “They took him right in and didn’t let me stay to say goodbye,” Hebblethwaite said.

    Schultz was intubated, and four-and-a-half weeks later, was taken off the ventilator and came too, thinking only a week or so had passed. He was extremely disoriented at first, but after eating his first real meal in weeks – two McDonald’s burgers – he told Buzzfeed he was feeling much better.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Still, despite his miraculous story, Schultz said he and his boyfriend have received a torrent of online harassment from ‘stay at home, save lives’ diehards who have mocked him and claimed he “deserved” to get sick for attending the music festival in Fla.

    Still, “progressive” media org like Buzzfeed have become obsessed with the stories of seemingly healthy young people who struggled with life-threatening bouts of the virus. We suspect this is part of a campaign to scare young, healthy people into staying indoors for fear of the virus.

    All the ‘financially privileged’ hipsters who write for Buzzfeed probably wouldn’t understand, but many of the people venting their frustrations with the lockdown on social media are doing so because they’re afraid of losing their livelihood, not because the think the virus is some kind of hoax or “a little flu”, as Bolsonaro would call it.

    Then again, what else would you expect from a bunch of freelance writers who depend on their parents to help with the rent on their Brooklyn apartments? The pressure faced by people with real responsibilities, who will suffer very real and terrifying consequences if they can’t cover their nut – they can’t simply move back in with mom and dad if you get sick, or things go south financially – are entirely foreign to them.

  • Deaths Vs. Economic Pain: Cable News' Imbalanced Picture
    Deaths Vs. Economic Pain: Cable News’ Imbalanced Picture

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 22:15

    Submitted by Kalev Leetaru of RealClearPolitics

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Almost three months ago, COVID-19 became an inextricable part of American life. As the economy ground to a halt and unemployment soared, television news channels have focused the majority of their attention on the health impacts of the disease, while paying far less attention to the devastating economic harms, including historic job losses. A closer look at how channels are presenting the coronavirus crisis reveals stark differences, from CNN’s ever-present infections dashboard to Fox News’ periodic scrolling updates, offering clues to the increasingly partisan reaction to the pandemic.

    The timeline below shows the percentage of daily airtime on BBC News, CNN, MSNBC and Fox News mentioning “COVID-19” or “coronavirus” or “virus” since the start of this year, using data from the Internet Archive’s Television News Archive processed by the GDELT Project. (Click to enlarge, or view the live data here.)

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    All four channels started covering the pandemic on Jan. 18, but BBC has consistently devoted a greater portion of its airtime to it. CNN’s coverage volume has remained largely unchanged since early March, while BBC and MSNBC have both slightly decreased their mentions over the course of this month. Fox News is a notable outlier, steadily decreasing its coverage since April 26.

    In contrast, since March “unemployment” or “unemployed” or “jobless” or “job losses” have received just 10%-20% of the attention paid to “death” or “deaths” or “died” or “infection” or “infections.”

    Yet the visual nature of television news means that the channels aren’t limited to just periodic verbal mentions of these term and related statistics. In CNN’s case, every day since March 20, the channel has displayed an on-screen infographic with live COVID-19 infection and death counts for a total of eight hours a day, seven days a week, for nearly two months now.

    A typical version of CNN’s dashboard can be seen in the clip below.

    Since April 3, GDELT has also analyzed the on-screen text of MSNBC, Fox News and BBC, allowing for a similar search of their on-screen health counts. However, as the graph below shows, other than CNN, only MSNBC displays the text “Johns Hopkins” (the source of the data) daily on-screen for any length of time and it is shown only a fraction of the time CNN does.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    MSNBC has used several iterations of its COVID-19 dashboard, from this early version that looks very similar to CNN’s tracker.

    To this later more streamlined version.

    Fox News has occasionally run the CNN tracker by virtue of playing clips from CNN.

    And it has also displayed the native Johns Hopkins dashboard.

    However, Fox  has also developed its own dashboard, at least one version of which can be seen in the clip below, sourced to “WHO, CDC, ECDC, NHC, DXY,” relying on official government figures directly rather than Johns Hopkins’ compilation.

    So how are the other stations reporting COVID-19 infection and death counts if they aren’t relying on the eight-hours-a-day dashboard model adopted by CNN? The timeline below shows mentions of “death” or “deaths” in the on-screen text of the four channels over the same time period. While CNN has the most mentions, BBC News comes in second, with Fox News and MSNBC nearly equal in third/fourth place.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Rather than a dedicated dashboard, BBC appears to communicate death counts primarily through brief unsourced updates in its chyron text at the bottom of the screen, such as “The death toll in the UK is now at 34,636” or “Number of confirmed Covid-19 deaths in the UK rises by 494 to 33,186,” as seen below.

    Similarly, Fox News appears to primarily mention death counts in the scrolling text at the very bottom of the screen, as seen at the start of this clip.

    In contrast, the timeline below shows the total seconds of airtime each day on the four channels mentioning “unemployment” or “unemployed” or “job losses” over the same time period. In contrast to the three-to-10 hours a day each station spends displaying the latest health statistics, job losses are seen for just five-to-10 minutes on most days.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In the end, no matter what channel viewers tune into, they are confronted with many hours a day of live death counts compared to just minutes a day about lost livelihoods and ruined lives, perhaps explaining why many officials in Washington – and, to some extent, at the local level — seem in little rush to reverse the economic devastation that they and the white-collar class have largely been insulated from to date.

  • Globalization, Financialization Are Dead
    Globalization, Financialization Are Dead

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 22:05

    Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via The Daily Reckoning,

    A popular claim is that the 1918–19 flu pandemic killed millions but no biggie, the Roaring ’20s started the following year. It’s onward and upward, baby, once we toss the masks.

    Wrong. Completely, totally, dead wrong.

    The drivers of the past 75 years of growth — globalization and financialization — are dead, and so is everything that depended on them for “growth.”

    Here’s what’s poorly understood: Globalization and financialization die when they stop expanding.

    Just as a shark dies if it stops swimming forward, globalization and financialization die once they stop expanding, because their viability depends on expansion.

    Globalization and financialization have been losing momentum for years.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Globalization Has Strip-Mined Economies

    Under the guise of “opening markets,” globalization has strip-mined every economy that can’t print a reserve currency and hollowed out economies globally as only globally competitive sectors survive globalization.

    The net result is that once vibrant, diversified economies have been reduced to fragile monocultures completely dependent on global flows of capital and spending for their survival.

    Tourism is a prime example: Every region that has seen its local economy crushed by global corporations, leaving global tourism as its sole surviving sector, has been devastated by the drop in tourism, which was always contingent on disposable income and credit expanding forever.

    But credit can’t expand forever, as it eventually runs out of income to service additional debt.

    Financialization is not just the expansion of credit and leverage to marginal borrowers; it’s also legalized looting, as the true risks of soaring debt and leverage are hidden in obscure financial instruments and bogus claims of “safety” and “hedging.”

    Excesses of debt and leverage funneled into risky speculations inevitably end in default.

    Asset and Consumption Bubbles

    Financialization manifests as asset bubbles and hyperconsumption as people who never had credit spend up to the credit limits and beyond.

    Both asset and consumption bubbles pop, pushing the financial sector that feasted off the unsustainable expansion of credit into insolvency.

    In other words, neoliberal globalization and financialization — essentially one dynamic — are inherently destabilizing, as all the incentives are perverse.

    Just as asset and consumption bubbles are inevitable, so too is the bursting of those bubbles and the devastation of everything that had become dependent on the expansion of those bubbles.

    And that has real consequences.

    Food security, to take a basic example, is impossible once globalization has destroyed local agricultural production, and financialization has rewarded factory-farming since Big Ag can borrow capital at scales that only make sense in a world of globalized monoculture agriculture.

    1919 Is Not 2020

    Everyone touting 1919 as the model for 2020 is deeply ignorant of history and the destructive ontologies of globalization and financialization. There is virtually no overlap between the world of 1919 and the world of 2020 in terms of financial structures and excesses.

    That globalization and financialization are dead is revealed by what Federal Reserve bailouts and fiscal free-for-alls cannot do:

    1. They cannot create creditworthy borrowers out of thin air like the Fed creates dollars out of thin air.

    2. They cannot force lenders facing mass defaults to loan more money to uncreditworthy borrowers

    3. They cannot force creditworthy borrowers to borrow money.

    4. They cannot reflate asset and consumption bubbles that have popped.

    5. They cannot restore confidence in long, fragile supply chains.

    6. They cannot magically turn unprofitable enterprises into profitable enterprises.

    7. They cannot create income streams — revenues, profits, wages, etc. — with bailouts that continue the perverse incentives of moral hazard or “free money” designed to give debt-serfs enough cash to continue making their loan payments.

    8. They cannot forgive debt payments without destroying the wealth held as debt: Mortgages, student loans, auto loans, credit card debt, corporate junk bonds, etc., are assets that lose their value once borrowers default.

    9. The Fed can buy impaired debt, but that doesn’t change their abject powerlessness (points 1–7 above).

    Financialization was never sustainable, and neither was the destructive globalization it enabled.

    Any system that depended on the ever-expanding exploitation of new resources, debtors and markets could never be anything but fragile. The ferociousness of its rapacity masked its inherent weakness, a weakness that is now exposed as fatal.

    But let’s stick to the U.S. alone for now. The pandemic is having a dramatic long-term effect on Main Street local tax revenues.

    First- and Second-Order Effects

    To understand how, we need to consider first- and second-order effects.

    The immediate consequences of lockdowns and changes in consumer behavior are first-order effects: closures of Main Street, job losses, massive Federal Reserve bailouts of the top 0.1%, loan programs for small businesses, stimulus checks to households that earned less than $200,000 last year and so on.

    The second-order effects cannot be bailed out or controlled by central authorities. Second-order effects are the result of consequences having their own consequences.

    The first-order effects of the pandemic on Main Street are painfully obvious: Small businesses that have barely kept their heads above water as costs have soared have laid off employees as they’ve closed their doors.

    The second-order effects are still spooling out: How many businesses will close for good because the owners don’t want to risk losing everything by chancing reopening?

    How many will give it the old college try and close a few weeks later as they conclude they can’t survive on 60% of their previous revenues?

    How many enjoy a brief spurt of business as everyone rushes back, but then reality kicks in and business starts sliding after the initial burst wears off?

    How many will be unable to hire back everyone who was laid off?

    Falling off a Cliff

    As for local tax revenues based on local sales taxes, income taxes, business license fees and property taxes: The first three will fall off a cliff, and if cities and counties respond to the drop in tax revenues by jacking up property taxes, this will only hasten the collapse of businesses that were already hanging on by a thread before the pandemic.

    The federal government can bail out local governments this year, but what about next year, and every year after that?

    The hit to local tax revenues is permanent, as the economy became dependent on debt and financialization pushed costs up.

    Amazon and online sellers don’t pay local taxes except in the locales where their fulfillment centers are located.

    Yes, online sellers pay state and local sales taxes, but these sales are for goods; most of the small businesses that have supported local tax revenues are services: bars, cafes, restaurants, etc.

    As these close for good, the likelihood of new businesses taking on the same high costs (rent, fees, labor, overhead, etc.) is near zero, and anyone foolish enough to try will be bankrupted in short order.

    Now that working at home has been institutionalized, the private sector no longer needs millions of square feet of office space. As revenues drop and profits vanish, businesses will be seeking to cut costs, and vacating unused office space is the obvious first step.

    What’s the value of empty commercial space?

    Trying to Get Blood From a Stone

    If demand is near zero, the value is also near zero. Local governments will be desperate to raise tax revenues, and they will naturally look at bubble-era valuations on all real estate as a cash cow. But they will find that raising property taxes on money-losing properties will only accelerate the rate of property-owner insolvencies.

    At some point valuations will adjust down to reality and property taxes collected will adjust down accordingly. If municipalities think they can make up the losses by jacking up the taxes paid by the survivors, they will quickly find the ranks of the survivors thinned.

    This doesn’t exhaust the second-order effects: Once Main Street is half-empty, the attraction of the remaining businesses declines; there’s not enough to attract customers, and the virtuous circle of sales rising for everyone because the district is lively and attractive reverses: The survivors struggle and give up, further hollowing out the district.

    The core problem is the U.S. economy has been fully financialized, so costs are unaffordable.

    The commercial property owner overpaid for the buildings with cheap borrowed money, and now the owner must collect nosebleed-high rents or he can’t make the mortgage and property tax payments.

    Local governments spend every dime of tax revenues, as their costs are insanely high as well. They cannot survive a 10% decline in tax revenues, much less a 40% drop.

    The Lesson of Yellowstone

    The metaphor I’ve used to explain this in the past is the Yellowstone forest fire. The deadwood of bad debt, extreme leverage, zombie companies and all the other fallen branches of financialization pile up.

    But the central banks no longer allow any creative destruction of unpayable debt and misallocated capital; every brush fire is instantly suppressed with more stimulus, more liquidity and lower interest rates.

    As a result, the deadwood sapping the real economy of productivity and innovation is allowed to pile higher.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The only possible output of this suppression is an economy piled high with explosive risk.

    Eventually nature supplies a lightning strike, and the resulting conflagration consumes the entire economy.

  • South Korean Soccer Team Fined For Posing Sex Dolls In The Stands During Recent Match
    South Korean Soccer Team Fined For Posing Sex Dolls In The Stands During Recent Match

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 21:45

    A South Korean soccer club has been fined for posing sex dolls in the stands during a recent game, Yonhap reports.

    South Korean football club FC Seoul was slapped with a 100 million won (US$81,410) fine on Wednesday for posing the sex dolls in the stands with signs, creating an uncanny tableau that apparently offended some of the more priggish officials running South Korea’s premier soccer league.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The use of more than a dozen life-size dolls in place of spectators (since fans weren’t allowed at the match) took place during the club’s Sunday match against Gwangju FC at Seoul World Cup Stadium.

    In a statement, the league accused FC Seoul of “causing great damage to the image and the integrity of the K-League” and offending female fans.

    The fine is the largest the league has ever levied against a club, according to Yonhap.

    The team has said it will “humbly accept” the fine.

  • Japan Exports Worst Since Financial Crisis; Korea Early May Export Data Just As Dire
    Japan Exports Worst Since Financial Crisis; Korea Early May Export Data Just As Dire

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 21:43

    If any traders, or frankly anyone out there, still cares about fundamental economic data, there was little to celebrate this evening, when Japan reported another round of dismal trade numbers, with Imports plunging 7.2% in April, worse than the -5.0% drop in March but slightly better than expected. However, it was Japan’s exports – that key benchmark for the BOJ whose goal of keep the yen weaker is not only to support stocks but also to facilitate exports – that was the highlight, with the April number plunged by 21.9%, double the previous month’s -11.7% drop and the biggest plunge since the financial crisis.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    But if Japan’s number was dismal, at least it was expected. What was more concerning was the latest Korean export number for the first 20 days of May, which some had expected to see a solid rebound in light of the so-called reopening observed this month. Well, it did not happen, and while the May number wasn’t quite as bad as the near-record plunge in April when exports plunged by 26.9% in the first 20 days, the -20.3% Y/Y drop in May – off an already depressed 2019 number – showed that any hopes for a solid global recovery taking hold have been painfully premature.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    To be sure, there was a tiny silver lining, as semiconductor exports rose 13.4% in contrast to a 15% decline in the same period of April. According to Bloomberg “this supports optimism for an economic turnaround and equities’ rally” and is “likely to give investors fresh reasons to look at the tech sector in Korea and abroad” although we disagree.

    As noted in recent weeks, just like during the trade war in much of 2019, the reason for a sharp pick up in semiconductor trade has been fear that China’s tech sector will soon be locked out of US supply chains – as the recent Huawei news confirmed – and as such any jump in S.Korean semi exports is simply frontloading of demand now ahead of more crackdowns on the Chinese tech space in the future, when Huawei et al may find themselves completely locked out from US suppliers, which in turn explains why as Bloomberg reported earlier, China is planning to invest $1 trillion in its semiconductor industry to if not overtake the US in technology, at least become self-sufficient and not rely on US semi production.

  • Kyle Bass: All Eyes Should Be On Hong Kong
    Kyle Bass: All Eyes Should Be On Hong Kong

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 21:25

    Authored by Kyle Bass, op-ed via NewsWeek.com,

    In international politics, few things are certain during these uncertain times. But I can predict one: the relationship between America and Hong Kong is in the throes of major change.

    On May 22, China’s leaders will convene for their annual People’s Congress, during which they will discuss the status of Hong Kong and whether to push forward with their rebuffed attempts to impose upon that special jurisdiction the laws and circumscribed rights of mainland China. If they do so, America and Britain will push back—with lasting consequence.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Hong Kong has become ground zero for the ideological clash between democracy and heavy-handed Chinese communism. This tug-of-war was on global display last summer, when over two million Hong Kongers—26 percent of the entire population—peacefully took to the streets of Hong Kong, in sweltering 100-degree heat, to protest Beijing’s overreach with a proposed extradition bill that would impose China’s laws on Hong Kong. The people of Hong Kong have completely lost faith in their embattled leader, Carrie Lam, and their police force. Peaceful protestors have been brutalized, pro-democracy figures have been illegally arrested and the Hong Kong Legislative Council’s day-to-day operations have been tampered with by the Chinese government. During the most recent attempt to conduct a Legislative Council meeting in Hong Kong, in a scene that is reminiscent of an event that might take place in a failed state, fist fights broke out between the pro-China members and the pro-democracy members.

    Unfortunately, the rapt global attention and support that greeted Hong Kongers last year at the start of their protests has been sidetracked by other news. But this week, the world should again pay attention to Hong Kong.

    At the People’s Congress, the Chinese Communist Party is likely to push forward with having Hong Kong implement a full set of laws with “Chinese characteristics” that give Beijing the right to essentially do whatever it pleases. This will shatter the Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1984, in which China agreed to allow Hong Kong to continue to operate “autonomously” until 2047. After 156 years of Hong Kongers experiencing British rule and all the freedoms and rights that accompanied it, expect larger and more dynamic protests and (hopefully) more global action from politicians. Recently, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has said that he would not renew Hong Kong’s special trade status until he had seen the outcome of the People’s Congress.

    But absent a complete about-face on that, it is unclear how Pompeo could possibly validate Hong Kong’s continued “autonomy” after the blood-letting the world has witnessed firsthand. In late 2019, Amnesty International titled a piece, “Hong Kong: Arbitrary arrests, brutal beatings and torture in police detention revealed.” Suffice it to say this is not something any responsible autonomous nation would do to peaceful protestors.

    Unfortunately for citizens, at the same time that Hong Kong is experiencing the worst political destabilization since the Opium Wars, the special jurisdiction is already in the throes of the worst economic depression it has ever faced: GDP is down 24 percent quarter-over-quarter annualized. I have been studying the Chinese banking system and Hong Kong closely for the last decade, and I think that Hong Kong is living on borrowed time. (In full disclosure, I run global investment funds investing in this macroeconomic outcome.)

    What happens in Hong Kong will not stay in Hong Kong. The battle between an expansionist, increasingly repressive Chinese communist government, on the one hand, and a Western rule of law-based democracy, on the other, will spill over into Taiwan. Already, the battle in Hong Kong has affected Taiwanese politics: watching China’s Communist Party try to assert control in Hong Kong is the primary reason that a historic number of Taiwanese voters took to the polls to rebuke the pro-Beijing candidate and elect a president, Tsai Ing-wen, who campaigned with the promise of protecting Taiwan’s democracy and sovereignty. Taiwanese voters will continue to be enthralled by every development in Hong Kong, because they know that an aggressive and emboldened Chinese Communist Party is bad news for them, too.

    The world should focus on Hong Kong. This is not just about the fate of millions of peaceful protesters, but about democracy, reneged promises and a global order that is shifting as the Chinese Communist Party continues to change its terms of engagement.

  • Gamblers Flock To Reopened Casinos In South To Find Them Drastically Altered
    Gamblers Flock To Reopened Casinos In South To Find Them Drastically Altered

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 21:05

    Gambling and social distancing? Not quite yet in Las Vegas, which at this point is only gearing up for ‘pre-opening’ procedures, including mass COVID-19 testing of gaming employees as they prepare to get called back to work. The Las Vegas strip began shuttering in mid-March (similar to East coast spots), a devastating blow nearly unprecedented in history, and at a total cost of hundreds of millions per week in revenue lost. 

    However, as the WSJ details, casinos in Louisiana and Mississippi are opening for the first time since ‘stay at home’ orders were issued. All eyes are on gambling in the south — and what greatly altered ‘COVID-safe’ casinos and social distancing protocols will look like in this context — and as a marker for what’s expected later in larger gaming Meccas like Atlantic City, which has seen hotels only begin taking reservations for mid-June.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Image source: World Poker Tour

    Lockdown-weary gamblers are ready for the good times to roll, already driving hours to wait in long lines for newly opened – as of Monday – casinos in Louisiana. Neighboring Mississippi will open its casinos on Thursday.

    After two months of closure, “Initial openings will clearly spur people to come out of their homes,” comments Michael Pollock, managing director of consulting firm Spectrum Gaming Group. “How much they will spend and how frequently they will visit are tied to larger economic trends.”

    Just how many will flock to the newly-reopened venues long-term remains to be seen, given the experience could be very ‘different’ – complete with new inconveniences like temperature checks, sanitizing stations in the center of casino floors, contactless procedures utilizing iPhone apps, masks, cycling through new decks more frequently, and limited capacity (such as 25-50% entry limitations, depending on the state).

    One local report details the greatly altered and perhaps bizarre regimen in place at Hollywood Casino in Baton Rouge:

    The dealer sprays the dice with a bottle of disinfectant and a masked gambler leans into the craps table, his cheekbones raised in a grin.

    “Leave ’em wet,” he tells the dealer. “They won’t roll as much.”

    The dealer looks back sharply, her hands reaching for a nearby roll of paper towels…

    The dealer must wipe the dice.

    That’s the only way these three men can alter the portions of chips that each rest in one of the table’s six wooden placeholders, every other one sealed shut with black masking tape.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Regardless, by current indicators eager people are flocking, even driving hours, especially out of major cities in Texas:

    Shirley Martinez, 45 years old, drove two hours from her home in Houston to Lake Charles, La., with her sister and 85-year-old mother for the casinos’ reopening on Monday. Her mother was ready to play slots after being on lockdown—with hand sanitizer and masks in tow. “She said, ‘It’s open, let’s go,’” Ms. Martinez said.

    “It’s going to take time,” American Gaming Association chief executive Bill Miller told WSJ. “The experience is going to be different for some period of time, appropriately, but I think that the industry will get its swagger back.”

    Meanwhile other states are eagerly awaiting the go-ahead to open back up, but determinant on state gaming boards and health authorities reviewing the new stringent social distancing protocols. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Needless to say the state lockdowns have been devastating for the gaming industry given casinos pretty much never close in more normal times. 

    For March and April revenues for Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware – as an example – dropped more than 75% to $264 million from $1.1 billion, according to the consulting firm Spectrum Gaming Group.

  • US Banks On Hook For $150 Billion In "Frozen Loans" As Millions Of Americans Skip Credit Card And Car Payments
    US Banks On Hook For $150 Billion In “Frozen Loans” As Millions Of Americans Skip Credit Card And Car Payments

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 20:55

    One month ago, after the banks reported Q1 earnings, we showed that the major US money center banks saw their loan loss provisions surge by roughly 4x from year ago levels in response to expected deterioration in their loan books, with JPMorgan jumping the most, or just over 5x, hinting the other banks are likely underprovisioned for the storm that is coming.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    With banks set to be hit with tens of billions in charge offs – for which they are trying their best to reserve even if they have no idea just how bad the hit will be – we next looked at what the banks did in the aftermath of the financial crisis. What we found is that most banks reserved total losses anywhere between 4 and 6% of total loans. This time around? So far it is less than 2%, as shown in the chart below.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Putting it in context, so far the Big 4 banks have reserved an additional $24BN in Q1 for future loses. But if the GFC is any indication of the defaults that are about to be unleashed, the real amount of losses, discharges and delinquencies will increase 3x-4x compared to the current baseline, meaning that over the next several quarters, banks will have to take another $75-$100BN in reserves on loans that go bad, wiping out years of profits, which were used not for a rainy day fund but to pay for – drumroll – buybacks.

    As we concluded, “this to put it mildly, is a major problem for banks which until now were seen as generously overcapitalized, because if the US banking sector is facing $100BN (or more) in loan losses, then the Fed will have no choice but to once again step in and bail out the US financial sector.”

    Of course, merely delinquent debt does not mean it is automatically in default, a state that usually follows several months of non-payment. However, the longer consumers ignore, or are simply unable to make a scheduled payment, the higher the odds that a delinquent loan will eventually end up in default, resulting in a loan loss for the issuer bank. Ultimately, the total amount of loan losses will dictate if banks are over or under-reserved.

    The question, then, is whether our worst-case $100 billion estimate was in the ballpark?

    Well, it now appears that this estimate may be optimistic, because as Bloomberg writes today, millions of Americans who have so far been getting breaks on roughly $150 billion loans in are about to hear from their banks. The reason: banks are starting to take a closer look at consumers who have arranged to delay payments, “potentially pushing some out of the programs, as the industry tries to get a clearer picture of how many customers are truly unable to keep up during the coronavirus pandemic.”

    It all started with the shock from the enforced shutdowns in March, when as coronavirus cases surged in the U.S. and businesses shut down, millions of people told their lenders they wouldn’t be able to pay their bills. In response lenders allowed borrowers to miss payments for as long as several months on credit cards, auto loans and personal loans.

    And while millions of Americans have been ignoring their monthly credit card and auto loan statements, perhaps hoping that banks will simply forget about their obligations, the forbearance programs from March are nearing expiration dates, when many banks are set to decide whether to continue letting people put off roughly $150 billion of debt including credit cards balances, personal loans and car payments. And in interviews with Bloomberg, executives said they’re concerned that at least some borrowers sought relief unnecessarily and that they should be coaxed into paying. And in what is set to be the next major firestorm, a number of firms aim to whittle out such participants, or charge interest to continue.

    “I would imagine we may have to go beyond 90 days” of forbearance, Southern Bancorp Inc. Chief Executive Officer Darrin Williams said in an interview, referring to the expiration date for many programs. “I feel pretty strongly that many of the folks who took advantage of the consumer payment holiday we provided probably didn’t have to. But if it’s offered, why not, right?”

    To be sure, the rapid rollout of forbearance programs in March averted financial ruin for millions of households, giving Congress time to unleash trillions in fiscal stimulus including unemployment benefits and offer emergency aid to businesses, not to mention give the Fed time to prop up the market, to which roughly 70% of total US household assets are linked. The goal was to avoid a tidal wave of defaults by borrowers who began losing income when states locked down commerce to slow infections. More than 30 million people have since filed jobless claims.

    In an attempt to avoid shocking the US economy into a depression, many banks offered to postpone bills with no proof of hardship, and many borrowers kept working. Some signed up for the programs as a precaution, taking a break from payments to shore up their savings. That, according to Bloomberg, made it impossible for banks to gauge the degree to which their loan portfolios are at risk of going bad.

    Now, two months later, the dust from the initial shock has settled and banks are starting to assess just how much exposure they have to tens of millions of unemployed Americans who collectively owe over $100 billion in debt.

    The numbers are staggering: according to a report from Janney Montgomery Scott analysts last week, some mid-sized banks placed more than 15% of their loan books into forbearance by the end of March.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Needless to say, that number of orders of magnitude greater than what most banks have reserved for total loan losses. In regions like the U.S. Southeast, relatively high rates of borrower relief contrasted with low infection rates at the time. Since then, many programs have remained open, continuing to take on borrowers who have fallen on hard times. As a result, the erosion in bank loan books has only accelerated in the past month; meanwhile of those who voluntarily accepted the forbearance option, there has been virtually no “return to normal”, as most are unable to, or simply resume to restart their debt payments.

    Quantifying the forbearance shortfall, credit-reporting firm Transunion reported that lenders in April had nearly 15 million credit cards in “financial hardship” programs, such as the abovementioned deferral programs that let borrowers temporarily stop making payments. That accounts for about 3% of the credit-card accounts the company tracks, Transunion said Wednesday. Separately, nearly three million auto loans were in these hardship programs, accounting for about 3.5% of those tracked. The numbers have surged from a year ago, when 0.03% of credit cards and about 0.5% of auto loans were in financial-hardship programs.

    Keep in mind, these numbers only represent accounts in forbearance, they do not reflect those loans which are still current yet which may soon be impaired after the debtor stops making a payment in the coming months. To make matters worse, Americans were tapping credit cards and auto loans at record levels even before the pandemic to deal with rising costs and stagnant incomes, although in a sharp reverse from this trend, March saw a record repayment on credit card  debt as those who could, paid down as much of their statement as possible, to clean up their balance sheet.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    It is all those who were unable to do so, or were forced to take on even more debt, that are a challenge to the banks.

    In addition, about 840,000 personal loans were in deferment or another type of financial hardship in April, accounting for 3.6% of those tracked. TransUnion’s estimates include accounts where the borrowers are pausing their payments with permission, as well as accounts that have been frozen.

    * * *

    What happens next? Well, as the WSJ notes, the stakes are high for borrowers and lenders alike. Consumers who can’t pay could be sent to collections. Their credit scores could also drop significantly, making it harder for them to access affordable credit in the future.

    Lenders could face a reckoning, too. Allowing borrowers to pause their payments lets lenders avoid a big spike in delinquencies and charge-offs, at least for the short term. Credit cards in deferment, for example, aren’t factored into the delinquency rates that many lenders report. And yet, while in this carefully choreographed dance of mutual assured destruction lenders hope that being flexible with borrowers will buy time for the economy to recover and for consumers to get back on track with payments, borrowers may simply have no choice but to default. Furthermore, lenders can only shoulder the unpaid loans for so long, and many are bracing for a mountain of defaults that they’ll eventually write off as a loss.

    The question is how much?

    Going back to the report from Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, on average, banks had about 5% of their consumer loan portfolios on ice as of mid- to late-April. Based on Federal Reserve data, that would equate to roughly $150 billion in loans, although that amount is surely far greater now as millions more have lost their jobs in recent weeks.

    Also keep in mind that those figures don’t include U.S. mortgage forbearance programs that let borrowers with government-backed loans postpone payments for as long as 12 months while dealing with the pandemic; that’s hundreds of billions more than are currently in forebearance and may go straight to default once the extension period ends.

    * * *

    These millions of consumer-loan deferrals have left banks, shareholders and even regulators in the dark on how many people are truly in distress and what the ultimate cost to lenders may be. While executives expect to get a clearer view of the situation in the second half of the year, for now regulators are letting banks put off that reckoning. In March, a bevy of watchdogs made it easier for lenders to modify terms, such as by lowering interest rates or letting borrowers skip payments. The moves wouldn’t necessarily require banks to label those situations as “troubled debt restructurings,” which require more capital.

    The bottom line is that the confusion will likely persist for another quarter, at which point shareholders and regulators will start demanding answers.

    “My belief is losses aren’t coming until third quarter for banks,” Ira Robbins, CEO of Valley National Bancorp, said in an interview. Because banks granted deferrals to pretty much everyone who asked for it, “we have no idea, outside of hypothesis, as to what’s going to happen from a credit perspective.”

    In advance of what is shaping up as a D-day for the bank, they are now starting to examine millions of account holders to determine who is taking advantage of the programs and who genuinely needs forbearance. The efforts include trying to figure out which customers still have jobs by checking databases operated by major credit reporting firms, according to Bloomberg.

    Moving ahead, some banks are considering letting customers continue skipping payments but reinstating interest on loans, a move that could make forbearance less enticing for those who don’t absolutely need it. Others might require customers to show additional proof they’ve been impacted by the virus.

    “The banks want to genuinely help,” said Scott Barton, managing partner at 2nd Order Solutions, which advises lenders on collections and forbearance processes. But they “would like to start to differentiate and not give away money to people that don’t really need it right now.”

    It’s not that they “want to genuinely help” – it’s that they know that once they accelerate a default, they will have to show it on their books as deferred payments don’t impact delinquent amounts. Meanwhile, the banks also know that in all the chaos, millions of Americans are taking advantage of the forbearance program, but if they did too hard, they will have to disclose the full severity of just how big the hit to their balance sheet will be.

    Which, for once, gives US consumers all the leverage in the neverending battle between man and bank.

    Forbearance deadlines vary by bank and customer. Citigroup Inc. was one of the first banks to offer forbearance, initially granting a 30-day reprieve that it since extended twice until May 31. Which means that in less than two weeks, millions of Americans will have to start paying down their debt.

    Will they?

    That’s the $64 trillion question, one which nobody really wants answered. According to Bloomberg, the nation’s largest banks JPMorgan, Bank of America and Wells Fargo – have generally said they will at least check in with borrowers in coming weeks as they assess how to continue programs and whether to encourage people to use other options. Those can include modifying loans or restarting some payments for credit cards or car loans.

    The good news is that so far, the programs seem to be easing financial strains during the pandemic. Fewer households were late on their cards, car loans, personal loans and mortgages in April than in March, according to TransUnion data released Wednesday, but here too it’s not clear if the banks are in fact motivated to disclose the full severity of the delinquency rate to data collectors. That upended expectations that consumers would fall behind on their debts as a result of widespread joblessness and the forced shutdown of the U.S. economy. Of course, a big reason for why the default surge has not hit yet is that government stimulus checks continue to plug the income gap for millions of households. But those, too, will soon run out.

    Matt Komos, TransUnion’s vice president of research and consulting, said households may be postponing payments to keep an extra cash cushion just in case the economy worsens. Indeed, many consumers who deferred loans sent payments anyway, sometimes far more than the monthly minimums to reduce their overall debt loads, TransUnion data show.

    “A lot of the banks are in the dark a little bit in terms of how to treat customers,” said Alan McIntyre, senior managing director for Accenture Plc’s banking practice. “The measures they focus on to manage credit quality, and those dials aren’t moving. And those dials aren’t going to move until the fall.”

    That’s when the real shock from the second great depression will finally be revealed.

  • "Nothing Like This Has Happened Before": China To Invest $1 Trillion In New Plan To Overtake US In Tech
    “Nothing Like This Has Happened Before”: China To Invest $1 Trillion In New Plan To Overtake US In Tech

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 20:51

    As we have been writing since late 2018, when it comes to the technological arms race between the US and China, one place where China has been badly lagging the US, is in the production of semiconductors, which is also China’s biggest weakness in its ongoing scramble to catch up with the US technologically.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    China’s media agrees: over the weekend, we quoted from a Global Times op-ed according to which “although the US had experienced a large-scale deindustrialization in the second half of the 20th century, it still maintains advantages in the semiconductor sector with companies such as Intel, which could complete the whole process of the chip design to producing. The country has held on to cutting-edge semiconductor manufacturing techniques over the past decade.”

    And now that the cold war between the US and China is about as formal as it can get, China has decided it can no longer rely on the US for being its primary source of high-end technology, and according to Bloomberg, Beijing is accelerating its bid for global leadership in key technologies, and will pump more than a trillion dollars into the economy “through the rollout of everything from wireless networks to artificial intelligence.”

    Purposefully invoking the spirit of “Made in China 2025”, a plan that has in the past infuriated the White House, China’s strategic “masterplan” is backed by President Xi Jinping himself, and will see China invest an estimated $1.4 trillion over six years to 2025, “calling on urban governments and private tech giants like Huawei Technologies to lay fifth generation wireless networks, install cameras and sensors, and develop AI software that will underpin autonomous driving to automated factories and mass surveillance.”

    This also means that while pursuing China’s plans to reinvent its technological base and to restructure its entire semiconductor supply chain, Beijing will also create the supreme police state dystopia, one which is even more powerful than the current iteration.

    Predictably, the new infrastructure initiative is expected to rely on local giants from Alibaba and Huawei to SenseTime Group while shunning U.S. companies. And as Bloomberg adds, “as tech nationalism mounts, the investment drive will reduce China’s dependence on foreign technology, echoing objectives set forth previously in the Made in China 2025 program. Such initiatives have already drawn fierce criticism from the Trump administration, resulting in moves to block the rise of Chinese tech companies such as Huawei.”

    “Nothing like this has happened before, this is China’s gambit to win the global tech race,” said Digital China Holdings Chief Operating Officer Maria Kwok, as she sat in a Hong Kong office surrounded by facial recognition cameras and sensors.

    “Starting this year, we are really beginning to see the money flow through.”

    Maria Kwok’s company is a government-backed systems integration provider, among many that are jumping at the chance. In the southern city of Guangzhou, Digital China is bringing half a million units of project housing online, including a complex three quarters the size of Central Park. To find a home, a user just has to log on to an app, scan their face and verify their identity. Leases can be signed digitally via smartphone and the renting authority is automatically flagged if a tenant’s payment is late.

    The tech investment push is part of a broader fiscal package waiting to be signed off by China’s legislature, which convenes this week. The government is expected to announce infrastructure funding of as much as $563 billion this year, against the backdrop of the country’s worst economic performance since the Mao era. It will also include an expansion in the PLA’s budget to contain the “growing threat of US conflict“, as we discussed last night.

    As Vital Knowledge points out in a note on Wednesday afternoon, “depending on how Beijing frames its tech ambitions around the NPC, this $1T+ blueprint could draw the ire of the White House and spur further measures aimed at inhibiting Chinese IT firms (recall the White House pushed hard for China to drop its prior “Made in China 2025” tech plan).”

  • GOP Senators Issue Subpoena In Biden-Burisma Probe
    GOP Senators Issue Subpoena In Biden-Burisma Probe

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 20:45

    The GOP-controlled Senate Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday voted to issue a subpoena to a Democratic consulting firm, Blue Star Strategies, which Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings paid $60,000 in November 2015 in connection with efforts to help end a long-running investigation in Ukraine. Burisma notoriously employed Hunter Biden to sit on its board – paying him upwards of $50,000 per month.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The vote to subpoena Blue Star was passed 8-6 along party lines.

    Blue Star responded to the subpoena Wednesday in a letter to Johnson, writing that they don’t understand the need for a subpoena, as they have cooperated – or intend to cooperate – with the committee “at every opportunity” in what Democrats are calling a politically motivated probe.

    Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan, the top Democrat on the Committee, said the committee should be focusing on the pandemic instead of Hunter Biden.

    “We’re in the midst of a pandemic with over 90,000 people who have lost their lives, we’ve got an unprecedented amount of unemployment that’s sweeping across the country,” Peter told reporters. “We need to be focused on the crisis.

    But Johnson says that he’s moving forward with the investigation because people “need to know the truth.”NBC News

    In March, Johnson said he wanted to specifically address matters involving Andrii Telizhenko – a former Blue Star consultant who hid behind a nondisclosure agreement.

    “Because Mr. Telizhenko’s records and information would be responsive to the committee’s requests, and Blue Star has refused to provide them, a subpoena to Mr. Telizhenko for these records is appropriate at this time,” read a March letter Johnson sent to members of his committee. “Accordingly, I will be scheduling a vote in the near future to approve issuing the enclosed subpoena.”

    “Blocking the receipt of relevant records, as any committee member voting against this subpoena would be doing, only heightens the risk of ‘disinformation’ because Congress would not have access to all pertinent information,” he added.

    Hunter Biden was paid upwards of $50,000 per month to sit on Burisma’s board while his father was Vice President, and Obama’s point-man on Ukraine policy – where he notoriously forced the country’s prior administration to fire a prosecutor investigating the energy giant.

    Meanwhile, Hunter and his colleagues had multiple contacts with the Obama State Department during the 2016 election cycle – just one month before Joe Biden forced Ukraine to fire the prosecutor investigating Burisma for corruption, according to investigative journalist John Solomon.

    Via John Solomon Reports:

    During that February 2016 contact, a U.S. representative for Burisma Holdings sought a meeting with Undersecretary of State Catherine A. Novelli to discuss ending the corruption allegations against the Ukrainian firm where Hunter Biden worked as a board member, according to memos obtained under a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. (I filed that suit this summer with the help of the public interest law firm the Southeastern Legal Foundation.)

    Just three weeks before Burisma’s overture to State, Ukrainian authorities raided the home of the oligarch who owned the gas firm and employed Hunter Biden, a signal the long-running corruption probe was escalating in the middle of the U.S. presidential election.

    Hunter Biden’s name, in fact, was specifically invoked by the Burisma representative as a reason the State Department should help, according to a series of email exchanges among U.S. officials trying to arrange the meeting. The subject line for the email exchanges read simply “Burisma.”

    “Per our conversation, Karen Tramontano of Blue Star Strategies requested a meeting to discuss with U/S Novelli USG remarks alleging Burisma (Ukrainian energy company) of corruption,” a Feb. 24, 2016, email between State officials read. “She noted that two high profile U.S. citizens are affiliated with the company (including Hunter Biden as a board member).

    “Tramontano would like to talk with U/S Novelli about getting a better understanding of how the U.S. came to the determination that the company is corrupt,” the email added. “According to Tramontano there is no evidence of corruption, has been no hearing or process, and evidence to the contrary has not been considered.”

    At the time, Novelli was the most senior official overseeing international energy issues for State. The undersecretary position, of which there are several, is the third-highest-ranking job at State, behind the secretary and deputy secretary. And Tramontano was a lawyer working for Blue Star Strategies, a Washington firm that was hired by Burisma to help end a long-running corruption investigation against the gas firm in Ukraine.

    Tramontano and another Blue Star official, Sally Painter, both alumni of Bill Clinton’s administration, worked with New York-based criminal defense attorney John Buretta to settle the Ukraine cases in late 2016 and 2017. I wrote about their efforts previously here

    Burisma Holdings records obtained by Ukrainian prosecutors state the gas firm made a $60,000 payment to Blue Star in November 2015.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 20th May 2020

  • Africa's COVID-19 Cases Soar Past 88,000 As 'Coronavirus Apocalypse' Fears Loom
    Africa’s COVID-19 Cases Soar Past 88,000 As ‘Coronavirus Apocalypse’ Fears Loom

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 02:45

    By the first week of April, coronavirus cases in African topped 10,000. Now over a month later that number stands at 88,172 according to the CDC Africa dashboard.

    This after a past 24-hour rise in cases by 2,538 according to the World Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for Africa on Tuesday. Across the continent at least 2,834 people have died from COVID-19.

    The outbreak first appeared in Egypt in mid-February via what’s believed sourced to foreign travelers, and has since spread to all 54 countries on the continent

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Image via Reuters

    Last month the WHO’s regional director for Africa, Dr. Matshidiso Moeti, sounded the alarm in saying the pandemic in African looks to be potentially devastating: “COVID-19 has the potential not only to cause thousands of deaths, but to also unleash economic and social devastation,” Moeti said.

    The biggest clusters appear concentrated in those regions considered the busiest hubs of international and foreign travel, such as Egypt and Morocco in the north, and South Africa at the southern tip. 

    However, the African continent is still nowhere near the ‘coronavirus apocalypse’ that many predicted (considering a total population of over 1.3 billion people), including for example Bill and Melinda Gates

    In an April 10 interview with CNN, American philanthropist Melinda Gates expressed her belief that the coronavirus pandemic will have the worst impact in the developing world. She said she foresees bodies lying around in the street of African countries.

    A day later, it was announced that the United States, where Gates is from, had surpassed Italy in terms of the number of dead from COVID-19.

    …Clearly, despite the massive crisis the West is experiencing, some Western thought leaders continue to insist that a whole continent of 54 countries will collectively and inevitably experience apocalypse as a result of a virus outbreak. Indeed, the white gaze knows no rest, even amid a pandemic that has struck the West.

    There exists a considerable difference between an informed fear and an uninformed assumption. Much of the conversation surrounding the potential impact of COVID-19 on Africa so far seems to have stemmed from the latter.

    Gates is not the only one to be predicting total doom in Africa. A report released by the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) in April stated: “Anywhere between 300,000 and 3.3 million African people could lose their lives as a direct result of COVID-19.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Here’s a breakdown of where the disease is concentrated on the continent based on WHO numbers reported early Tuesday:

    • South Africa has the highest number of coronavirus cases (16,433) and a death toll of 286.
    • Egypt, where 12,229 people have been infected, accounts for the majority of deaths (630).
    • Algeria has reported 7,201 cases and 555 deaths 
    • Morocco has identified 6,930 coronavirus patients and recorded 192 deaths 
    • Sudan has so far confirmed 2,591 cases and 105 fatalities.
    • In the sub-Saharan region, Nigeria has reported 6,175 cases and 191 deaths.
    • The country is followed by Ghana (5,735 cases and 29 deaths) 
    • Cameroon (3,529 cases and 140 deaths) 
    • Guinea (2,796 cases and 16 deaths) 
    • Senegal (2,544 cases and 26 deaths)  
    • Ivory Coast (2,119 cases and 28 fatalities)
    • DRC has seen 1,455 cases recorded and 61 deaths

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Like in other parts of the world, there’s likely a huge discrepancy between confirmed numbers based on testing availability and the reality on the ground. 

    * * * 

    Africa CDC dashboard for May 18:

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

  • India: Standing Up To China In The Post-COVID World
    India: Standing Up To China In The Post-COVID World

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 02:00

    Authored by Vijeta Uniyal via The Gatestone Institute,

    As coronavirus leaves behind a trail of human suffering and economic devastation, nations across the world have begun asking critical questions about the global pandemic. Countries are enquiring into Communist China’s handling of the pandemic, which first appeared late last year in the central Chinese city of Wuhan.

    As early as January 14, China had used the World Health Organization (WHO), a United Nations agency, to spread disinformation about the human-to-human transmissibility of Covid-19, a remark that led US National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien later to call the WHO a “tool of Chinese propaganda.”

    While U.S. President Donald J. Trump faced mostly undeserved, politicized criticism for questioning China’s culpability in the spread of the worldwide pandemic and his calls for an international probe into it, more and more capitals across the Western world are making similar demands.

    On March 20, The Washington Post attacked President Trump for even mentioning China in context of the pandemic. “Trump has no qualms about calling coronavirus the ‘Chinese Virus.’ That’s a dangerous attitude, experts say.”

    As late as the end of March, CNN was still claiming that President Trump was targeting China for “political reasons… using entrenched stereotypes and fear of the other to cast off any blame that might fall on him from this crisis.”

    On May 1, however, the New York Post reported that “[m]ore US allies and other countries are joining the Trump administration’s call for an investigation into China, the World Health Organization and the origins of the deadly coronavirus pandemic.”

    In the Asia-Pacific region, Australia has taken lead in asking for an international investigation into Beijing’s culpability in the spread of the pandemic. “Now, it would seem entirely reasonable and sensible that the world would want to have an independent assessment of how this all occurred, so we can learn the lessons and prevent it from happening again,” Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison said on April 29. Australia’s demand was supported by New Zealand.

    By way of response, China’s Ambassador to Australia, Cheng Jingye, threatened a boycott of Australian goods if Prime Minister Morrison’s government continued to insist on an independent investigation into the outbreak.

    In Europe, Sweden took a similar stance, asking the European Union to start a probe into “the origin and spread” of the coronavirus. “When the global situation of Covid-19 is under control, it is both reasonable and important that an international, independent investigation be conducted to gain knowledge about the origin and spread of the coronavirus,” Sweden’s health minister Lena Hallengren told the nation’s parliament in a written statement on April 20.

    Under threats of cutting Europe’s medical supplies, China forced the EU to water down a report exposing Beijing’s global disinformation campaign. “The European Union toned down part of a report about Chinese state-backed disinformation because it feared Beijing would retaliate by withholding medical supplies,” the Hong Kong-based newspaper South China Morning Post, citing diplomatic sources, disclosed on April 25.

    China, which first covered up the outbreak of the contagion in city of Wuhan, is now running a global disinformation and intimidation campaign, trying to blame the United States or Italy for the coronavirus. So far, apparently too many countries are now aware of China’s intentions. As Mathias Döpfner, CEO of Germany’s largest publishing house, Axel Springer, argued recently in Die Welt:

    “Economic relations with China might seem harmless to many Europeans today, but they could soon lead to political dependence and ultimately to the end of a free and liberal Europe… Should we make a pact with an authoritarian regime or should we work to strengthen a community of free, constitutionally governed market economies with liberal societies?… If current European and, above all, German policy on China continues, this will lead to a gradual decoupling from America and a step-by-step infiltration and subjugation by China. Economic dependence will only be the first step. Political influence will follow.”

    At the moment, it is unclear if China’s charm offensive, if one could call it that, is working.

    Most recently, on May 4, Sharri Markson reported on a leaked 15-page research document, obtained by Australia’s Saturday Telegraph, written by the “Five Eyes” — the intelligence services of the US, the UK, Canada Australia and New Zealand.

    “It states that to the ‘endangerment of other countries’ the Chinese government covered-up news of the virus by silencing or “disappearing” doctors who spoke out, destroying evidence of it in laboratories and refusing to provide live samples to international scientists who were working on a vaccine.”

    In true Orwellian fashion, top Chinese diplomats are still demanding that foreign governments rewrite the history of the coronavirus outbreak. Under President Xi Jinping’s instructions, Chinese diplomats are running a global campaign of intimidation to divert world’s attention from Beijing’s culpability in the spread of the coronavirus. Dubbed “Wolf Warrior” diplomacy, referring to a popular Chinese movie series of the same name, the strategy aims at silencing and intimidate Western governments, critical media outlets, and think tanks. The good news is that the world is finally getting a good look at the true face of China.

    Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi telephoned his Indian counterpart, S. Jaishankar, on March 24, and suggested that India not use “China virus” to describe the Covid-19 contagion

    “It’s not acceptable and detrimental to international cooperation to label the virus and stigmatise China,” Beijing’s envoy to New Delhi, Sun Weidong, said following the call.

    Apparently unwilling to risk creating a problem, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government has so far refrained from confronting China for its handling of the outbreak. To India’s credit, it did play a constructive role in combatting the global pandemic. India came to the aid of its allies by shipping large consignments of the drug hydroxychloroquine and other medical supplies to 55 countries, including the U.S., Britain, France and Israel.

    While India had shown restraint, Communist China has shown little. The Chinese air force has continued its incursions into Taiwanese air space. China has also tightened its grip on artificial islands it created in the South China Sea by setting up fictitious local governments on them. These weaponized islands, fielding military facilities such as naval ports and military airfields, trample on the sovereignty of many of its maritime neighbors, including the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, and Taiwan.

    The United States and rest of the Western world would do well to see the pandemic as a wake-up call and decouple their crucial and strategic sectors from dependence on China in any way. As US General Jack Keane has repeatedly warned the US, China a not a friend; “it is a predator economically, geopolitically and militarily.”

    Beijing has used its status as world’s biggest manufacturer, intellectual property thief, and debt-trap lender to force governments across the world into silence over its culpability for the deadly and devastating pandemic.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In the coming post-coronavirus world order, India is well placed to challenge China’s stranglehold over global and regional supply chains. Prime Minister Modi’s “Make in India” initiative, originally envisaged to create jobs in manufacturing sector, could also position the country as an alternative destination for rerouting global supply chain needs, especially in critical sectors such pharmaceuticals, industrial manufacturing, telecommunications and information technology.

    To take advantage of a post-coronavirus realignment, India would do well to upgrade its infrastructure and seriously cut its bureaucratic red tape.

    Modi came to power in 2014 on promises of streamlining the bureaucracy to foster a free economy. Since he took office, India has eased the government’s red tape and opened up the country to foreign companies and investment. During his tenure, the country advanced 79 places on the global “Ease of Doing Business” survey released by the World Bank annually, from 142nd to 63rd place. The country still trails China, which, until its pandemic, ranked 31. India, however, plans to invest $1.39 trillion on a series of critical infrastructure projects, including roads, railways, digital connectivity and power sectors.

    The world is eagerly looking to India and its Asia-Pacific allies, in a strong alliance with the West, to take a stand, face China’s increasing military, geopolitical and economic intimidation, and take up its historic mantle of leadership.

  • Are European Countries Still 'Flattening The Curve'?
    Are European Countries Still ‘Flattening The Curve’?

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 01:00

    Over the weekend, Russia has become the country with the second-most cumulative confirmed cases in the world after the U.S.

    The country overtook Spain’s case numbers on Sunday. The global coronavirus pandemic is being contained in Western European countries, as Statista’s Katharina Buchholz shows in the infographic below, while Russia and Brazil have now confirmed more cases than many of the earlier European hot spots. Countries like Turkey or India are also on tract to produce larger outbreaks than, for example, Europe has seen.

    Infographic: Russia Now Country With the Second-Most COVID-19 Cases | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    European countries are mostly a good way into flattening the curve of COVID-19 infections. According to numbers by Johns Hopkins collected by the website Worldometers, flattening is now very visible in Germany and France, where a total of around 176,000-180,000 cases had been recorded each, as well as in Italy (225,000 cases).

    The development in the UK is, on the other hand, more worrisome. Infections have not yet shown major signs of slowing down, now making the UK the country the fifth most confirmed coronavirus cases worldwide and the second-most deaths. The U.S. is currently the country with most known infections as well as deaths and has a curve of infections which is also still pointing mostly upwards. Infections have passed 1.5 million stateside.

    The countries’ collective aim is to “flatten the curve” of infections. While South Korea was able to (more or less) stabilize its outbreak at around 10,000 cases – due to widespread free testing (including the now infamous drive-thru testing), quarantine measures and the harnessing of mobile technology for public information – China has stabilized theirs at around 83,000 cases. South Korea hit 100 cases on February 20 and managed to leave the steep upward trajectory around 14 days later. In the case of China, more than 100 cases were first recorded on January 20, and quarantine and testing measure succeeded in breaking the upwards trajectory by February 12 – around three and a half weeks later. Germany began leveling its curve around six weeks into the outbreak, while France started seeing results at around seven weeks.

  • The COVID-19 "Dark Winter" PsyOp: Question Everything…
    The COVID-19 “Dark Winter” PsyOp: Question Everything…

    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 05/20/2020 – 00:05

    Authored by Gary Barnett via LewRockwell.com,

    “If you would be a real seeker of truth, it is necessary that at least once in your life you doubt, as far as possible, all things” 

    René Descartes – Principles of Philosophy

    The only real defense that is valid during this exercise in mass tyranny is total refusal to comply with any and all government mandates. We are in the midst of the largest psychological operation (PSYOP) in the history of mankind. By questioning everything concerning this manufactured “virus pandemic,” the resulting attitude cannot leave anything other than extreme doubt, and doubt is what can bring the masses out of the dark and into the light. The newest term being targeted toward the masses is the coming of the “Dark Winter,” which is nothing more than propaganda based lies meant to prepare the sheep for a planned continuation and escalation of this fake pandemic in order to bring about world domination.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Operation Dark Winter was the code name for a senior-level bio-terrorist attack simulation conducted from June 22–23, 2001, which was designed to carry out a mock version of a covert bio-weapon’s attack on the United States. The players involved in this were the Johns Hopkins Center for Civilian Biodefense Strategies (CCBS) and Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), and the project designers were Randy Larsen and Mark DeMier of Analytic Services. It is very interesting that the same Johns Hopkins along with the evil Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation conducted Event 201, a coronavirus “simulation” just this past October, on the verge of this so-called pandemic. The same players, same objectives, but now it is real.

    Rick Bright, the former director of the Department of Health and Human Services’ Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, and claimed whistleblower, has been all over the mainstream news as of late projecting the “darkest winter in modern history.”

    Using this term was no accident, and in fact was meant as propaganda to frighten and alarm the already cowardly and pathetic public. It was also meant to instill a mindset of a killing plague soon to come. This was completely staged in my opinion, but it will nonetheless be accepted by a society steeped in fear due to this “crisis.”

    I would expect the term “dark winter” to become a new buzzword, as this new term the second time around, is strictly tied to the original scenario, but applied to today’s panic. None of this is coincidence, none of it is accidental, but it is sinister. If things continue as they have been, and this lockdown remains in place, whether fully or partially, the anticipation of this “dark winter” will be on the minds of most all American sheep, especially if it is continually used as the threat of things to come.

    With that in the minds of the people, they will be expecting the worst, and will probably get exactly what they expect; another planned pandemic.

    The current government plan, regardless of what is partially opened this summer, is to continue to mandate social distancing and masks as some sort of faux protection against this non-existent threat, to continue to shame those dissenters that refuse to comply with government orders, and to use more force to stop any dissent. In addition, testing as many people as possible with flawed tests will continue, and more demands to test will be forthcoming. While that is happening, the contact tracing of individuals will become more and more evident as tracking technology is advanced and implemented nationwide. All of this is leading to this current crisis stage’s ultimate goal, which is forced mass vaccination.

    As I wrote a few days ago, “the government has announced that a contract for $138 million has been issued to fund production of 500 million pre-filled Covid-19 vaccine “injection devices,” this before any vaccine is available or tested.” As any should be able to see, this is a complex, but easily identifiable plot that is coming to fruition very quickly and with little resistance. It is planned down to the last detail, just as were all the practice runs that were acted out in the past. I have always thought that bad people will expose what they are up to if only people would listen. Well, this time, they have told the public over and over again what was coming, but few listened.

    The “injection devices” are already available, and now Trump is mobilizing the entire military to make war against the American people, by sending armed soldiers into the streets to vaccinate by force everyone in the country. Without mass resistance, this next phase will be successful, and then the following phase of population control would have already been implemented due to the poisoning, sterilizing, and possibly chipping of all those vaccinated. These plans are being accomplished out in the open, and with the consent, implied or not, of the people in this country.

    Multiple agendas are being advanced, and the destruction of the economy and the resulting dependence of the population on government are going forward and being accepted. Pending legislation to print more money and dole it out to those out of work is already in process, as $3 trillion will most likely be distributed in small part to appease those not working, but most of that newly printed money will be used to continue the transfer of wealth to the few at the top. As debt, poverty, and bankruptcy continues to decimate the general population, the top of the heap will continue to buy up assets at depressed prices with taxpayer money, so in essence, those now starving are helping to enrich the perpetrators of this fraudulent virus scam.

    We are definitely facing a horrible pandemic, but it is not due to any virus. The real pandemic is that the United States government and the enforcers for the controlling ruling class, are waging war on American citizens, and will not relent until the people themselves stop it. This totalitarian takeover will never cease by using the political system, as that corrupt system is why we are in this mess in the first place. A belief in nation instead of self led to nationalistic pride where none was deserved, and has brought complacency, weakness, and dependence on government, and left the people without the will to self rule. The result is obvious, but more than that, it is now fatally dangerous. As I said earlier this year here:

    “No vibrant society can exist in a state of obedience. While many great minds have discussed the natural desire of man to obey authority, including Sigmund Freud, this trait in man does not allow the capability to seek or claim freedom. The obedient are bound to a life of rule, as that is their nature.”

    Freedom and independence can only be achieved and held by non-obedient, non-conforming individuals. Therefore, we must in order to defeat this criminal government force, become a nation of dissenters by not complying with any government order concerning this government created fake crisis.

  • US Cities Will Lose $360 Billion From The COVID-19 Lockdown
    US Cities Will Lose $360 Billion From The COVID-19 Lockdown

    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 05/19/2020 – 23:45

    The coronavirus lockdown in the U.S. is going to cost cities an astounding $360 billion in revenue through 2022, according to estimates from the National League of Cities. 

    Pennsylvania is going to be hit the hardest, according to Bloomberg. The state is at risk of losing 40% of its total revenue this year. Not far behind are Kentucky, Hawaii, Michigan and Nevada. The projections take into account the expected rise in unemployment and assume that every 1% of unemployment will cause tax revenues to drop about 3%. 

    The analysis was performed by looking at how unemployment would affect specific state and city revenue streams. It combined those changes with each respective state or city’s tax structure to estimate the impact. 

    Bloomberg’s piece says that the states need help “from the Federal Government” to avoid drastic budget cuts, but the truth of the matter is that they need help from the Fed. The Federal Government, nobody seems to notice, is broke.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The analysis comes a day after the Fed said it may need to implement more stimulus than the $3 trillion it has already enacted. Democrats are currently proposing $1 trillion bailouts for state and local governments. 

    Clarence Anthony, the league’s chief executive officer, said: “If America’s cities are not provided the funds from the federal government, we won’t be a part of the economic solution. This survey, and the findings, puts a face on the impact of the pandemic and the need for city leaders to get direct funding to respond quicker than at the state level, where most of the funding has gone in the past.”

    He continued: “If any communities are facing a big challenge in America, it’s the small cities that may be wiped out, not only by the pandemic and the lack of access to health care. They’re being wiped out because of the loss of jobs to the small businesses, the loss of industry, and loss of hope.”

    The numbers are starting to pile up for major cities: San Francisco is expecting budget shortfalls of $3.6 billion over the next four years and Houston is facing a $169 million shortfall, causing it to furlough 3,000 workers. Houston will have to use its rainy day fund to balance its budge. 

    Good, that’s what a rainy day fund is for. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner said:

    “It’s the toughest budget we’ve had to put together since I’ve been mayor.” 

    Philadelphia has had to scale back its 2021 fiscal budget proposal due to a $650 million deficit that is five times larger than the deficit the city faced after the Great Recession. California announced last week it is facing a $54 billion shortfall and New Jersey said it is facing a $10.1 billion deficit. 

    In sum, U.S. cities will lose $134 billion in 2020, $117 billion in 2021 and $110 billion in 2022. 

    “This is an unprecedented time and it’s going to take unprecedented strategies,” Anthony concluded. Yeah, like blowing up the U.S. dollar on a global scale.

    It’s a bold strategy, Cotton. Let’s see if it pays off for him. 

  • McGovern: Turn Out The Lights, Russiagate Is Over
    McGovern: Turn Out The Lights, Russiagate Is Over

    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 05/19/2020 – 23:25

    Authored by Ray McGovern via ConsortiumNews.com,

    Seldom mentioned among the motives behind the persistent drumming on alleged Russian interference was an over-arching need to help the Security State hide their tracks.

    The need for a scapegoat to blame for Hillary Clinton’s snatching defeat out of the jaws victory also played a role; as did the need for the Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-Media-Academia-Think-Tank complex (MICIMATT) to keep front and center in the minds of Americans the alleged multifaceted threat coming from an “aggressive” Russia. (Recall that John McCain called the, now disproven, “Russian hacking” of the DNC emails an “act of war.”)

    But that was then. This is now.

    Though the corporate media is trying to bury it, the Russiagate narrative has in the past few weeks finally collapsed with the revelation that CrowdStrike had no evidence Russia took anything from the DNC servers and that the FBI set a perjury trap for Gen. Michael Flynn. There was already the previous government finding that there was no collusion between Trump and Russia and the indictment of a Russian troll farm that supposedly was destroying American democracy with $100,000 in Facebook ads was dropped after the St. Petersburg defendants sought discovery.

    All that’s left is to discover how this all happened.

    Attorney General William Barr, and U.S. Attorney John Durham, whom Barr commissioned to investigate this whole sordid mess seem intent on getting to the bottom of it. The possibility that Trump will not chicken out this time, and rather will challenge the Security State looms large since he felt personally under attack.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    President Donald Trump and Attorney General William Barr, 2019. (Wikimedia Commons)

    Writing on the Wall

    Given the diffident attitude the Security State plotters adopted regarding hiding their tracks, Durham’s challenge, with subpoena power, is not as formidable as were he, for example, investigating a Mafia family.

    Plus, former NSA Director Adm. Michael S. Rogers reportedly is cooperating. The handwriting is on the wall. It remains to be seen what kind of role in the scandal Barack Obama may have played.

    But former directors James Comey, James Clapper, and John Brennan, captains of Obama’s Security State, can take little solace from Barr’s remarks Monday to a reporter who asked about Trump’s recent claims that top officials of the Obama administration, including the former president had committed crimes. Barr replied:

    “As to President Obama and Vice President Biden, whatever their level of involvement, based on the information I have today, I don’t expect Mr. Durham’s work will lead to a criminal investigation of either man. Our concerns over potential criminality is focused on others.”

    In a more ominous vein, Barr gratuitously added that law enforcement and intelligence officials were involved in “a false and utterly baseless Russian collusion narrative against the president. It was a grave injustice, and it was unprecedented in American history.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    FBI lawyer Lisa Page.

    Meanwhile, the corporate media have all been singing from the same sheet since Trump had the audacity a week ago to coin yet another “-gate” — this time “Obamagate.”  Leading the apoplectic reaction in corporate media, Saturday’s Washington Post offered a pot-calling-the-kettle-black pronouncement by its editorial board entitled “The absurd cynicism of ‘Obamagate”?

    The outrage voiced by the Post called to mind disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok’s indignant response to criticism of the FBI by candidate Trump, in a Oct. 20, 2016 text exchange with FBI attorney Lisa Page:

    Strzok: I am riled up. Trump is a f***ing idiot, is unable to provide a coherent answer.

    Strzok – I CAN’T PULL AWAY, WHAT THE F**K HAPPENED TO OUR COUNTRY …

    Page– I don’t know. But we’ll get it back. We’re America. We rock.

    Strzok– Donald just said “bad hombres”

    Strzok– Trump just said what the FBI did is disgraceful.

    Less vitriolic, but incisive commentary came from widely respected author and lawyer Glenn Greenwald on May 14, four days after Trump coined “Obamagate”: ( See “System Update with Glenn Greenwald – The Sham Prosecution of Michael Flynn”).

    For a shorter, equally instructive video of Greenwald on the broader issue of Russia-gate, see this clip from a March 2019 Democracy Now!-sponsored debate he had with David Cay Johnston titled, “As Mueller Finds No Collusion, Did Press Overhype Russiagate? Glenn Greenwald vs. David Cay Johnston”:

    (The entire debate is worth listening to). I found one of the comments below the Democracy Now! video as big as a bummer as the commentator did:

    “I think this is one of the most depressing parts about the whole situation. In their dogmatic pushing for this false narrative, the Russiagaters might have guaranteed Trump a second term. They have done more damage to our democracy than Russia ever has done and will do.” (From “Clamity2007”)

    In any case, Johnston, undaunted by his embarrassment at the hands of Greenwald, is still at it, and so is the avuncular Frank Rich — both of them some 20 years older than Greenwald and set in their evidence-impoverished, media-indoctrinated ways.

    Deranged by Trump

    Sadly, as is apparently the case with Covid:19, older people seem particularly susceptible to what has been called Trump Derangement Syndrome—the notion that Trump is uniquely evil, while, for instance, George W. Bush, who illegally invaded Iraq—what Nuremberg termed the worst war crime, the crime of aggression—was not.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Johnston now has his own website: DCReport.org. A piece dated May 8, bears the title “How Barr Is Advancing Trump’s Quest to Become President For Life.”

    Adducing “evidence” of this purported effort by Barr, Johnston indicates that he does not like what Barr’s Justice Department did in moving to drop the charges against Gen. Michael Flynn. He does not like it, not one bit! Here are some additional gems from Johnston’s latest:

    “— Flynn and his company were on Putin’s payroll

    — Flynn made himself susceptible to blackmail by taking Russian money and lying about it.”

    Johnston drivels on:

    “Trump denies the Russians helped him become president. But America’s intelligence agencies, the bi-partisan chairs of the Senate Intelligence Committee, the 418-page Mueller report and emails from none other than Donald Trump Jr. all make clear the Kremlin helped Trump defeat Hillary Clinton. The only issue on which the facts are not complete was whether Trump was a passive beneficiary or he knowingly worked with the Kremlin, whether obliquely or hand-in-glove.

    Just weeks after assuming office Trump held an unannounced meeting in the Oval Office with Russia’s foreign minister and Russian ambassador and a “photographer” for the Kremlin-owned Tass news agency. The Russians revealed the meeting. They also disclosed that Trump gave them “sources and methods” intelligence, which is closely guarded to protect human and technological assets.

    This latest abuse of power to protect a criminal crony who was on Vladimir Putin’s payroll and a secret foreign agent is more than an impeachable offense. Trump, Barr and Shea also sent a clear message: Team Trump harbors no regard for the rule of law, the foundation of our liberties and democratic freedoms.”

    Frank Rich Not Immune

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Rich. (Wikipedia)

    David Cay Johnston enjoys the company of other erstwhile respected pundits, notably Frank Rich. In younger days, both wrote for The New York Times, where, sadly, writers of all ages are showing acute susceptibility to the syndrome.

    In a New York magazine article by Frank Rich performsing what he passes off as analysis of the recent statement of President Donald Trump about Obamagate. Read it and lament over what has become of yet another formerly respectable journalist.

    “‘Obamagate’, in Trump’s brilliant coinage, is a conspiracy so vast, a crime so dastardly, that it should guarantee his reelection as soon as he figures out how to tell voters exactly what it is. As best as I can glean from his spokespeople on the Rupert Murdoch payroll — at Fox News, the New York Post, and the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal — it was a coup that involved both installing Trump in the White House so that he could preside over the most corrupt and incompetent administration in American history and propelling a beloved national hero, the Kremlin sycophant and former Obama official Michael Flynn, to prison. For a moment, it seemed that at least that second goal might be thwarted by Bill Barr’s effort to hand Flynn a Get Out of Jail Free card. But thanks to the deep-state intervention of a U.S. district judge in Washington this week, Flynn may end up behind bars after all. Obamagate Accomplished!”

    Has Rich lost it? Is this dismissive gibberish meant to be facetious, sarcastic? Is it a pedantic attempt at reductio ad absurdum? — like Saturday’s Washington Post editorial board pronouncement of “ The absurd cynicism of ‘Obamagate’”.

    Does Rich keep up with the news, or is he now filing from Joe Biden’s basement? Is Consortium News included in his diet of reading? Quick. Someone tell Rich that “Russia-Trump collusion” and the far-fetched charges that the Russian Internet Research Agency helped Trump become president — as well as the tall tale that Russia “hacked” the DNC emails — have all collapsed.

    ‘Statutory Senility’

    My father, for many years a professor at Fordham Law School, used to speak jocularly of another all-too-familiar syndrome he nonetheless took seriously: he called it “the age of statutory senility.” As Chancellor of the Board of Regents, he resigned well before he reached that age, offering his own example to superannuated Board colleagues (to no avail).

    These days, I think he would probably consider 70 the age of “statutory senility”, especially were he able to read the blather of once respected journalists — like Frank Rich, whose work he used to enjoy. Let’s make sure someone is working on a vaccine for the Trump Syndrome.

  • "Thousands Are Starving" – Protesters Demanding Food Clash With Police In Santiago
    “Thousands Are Starving” – Protesters Demanding Food Clash With Police In Santiago

    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 05/19/2020 – 23:05

    The coronavirus hit Chile at a particularly delicate time. Back in October, the Chilean military deployed tanks and troops onto the streets of Santiago – the Chilean capital – and President Sebastian Pinera declaring a state of emergency to quell a violent uprising triggered by – of all things – a hike in metro fares (can you imagine that happening in NYC?).

    Now, some of the nation’s poorest are rising up against the government again in a violent protest movement over the lack of government assistance. Specifically, food shortages have left thousands of Chileans with nothing to eat, and the mandatory closures have made it impossible for them to work or buy food.

    Video of the crowds of demonstrators and clashes with police were shared by reporters on social media.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    In a televised address last night, President Piñera pledged to get food to those in need, according to the Santiago Times, the capital’s largest English language newspaper.

    Chile has more than 46,000 cases of the virus, along with 478 deaths, but a recent spike in cases and deaths prompted Piñera go impose a lockdown in and around the capital. The strict measures, which were heavily enforced, went into effect this weekend.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>
    As the unrest swelled, dozens of Chilean lawmakers went into “preventative isolation” after being “exposed” to the virus. Meanwhile, local officials cautioned that they were caught in a “very complex situation” because of “hunger and lack of work”. In a statement, local officials said they had distributed about 2,000 aid packages but warned the central government that this fell far short of meeting demand. Piñera later pledged his government would provide 2.5 million baskets of food and other essentials over the next week or so.

    “We will prioritize the most vulnerable families,” he said, describing the plan as “historic”.

    Following the announcement, Santiago Mayor Felipe Guevara tweeted in Spanish and asked residents to follow the rules.

    “I understand the deep anguish of millions of Chileans, thousands are starving,” he wrote.

    The unrest seen yesterday isn’t unique to Chile. Across the region, Latin American governments are confronting how to stop the virus and enforce lockdowns without the financial resources to provide for workers during the lockdown. In Brazil, hundreds of people from Sao Paulo’s largest favela marched to the state governor’s palace demanding more support last week and in Colombia, citizens have been hanging red cloths outside their homes to signify hunger. Finally, in El Salvador, people have been banging pots to protest against the lockdown.

    Although Santiago is one of the most prosperous cities in Latin America, a stark rich-poor divide and a growing sense of economic inequality have prompted mass protests in late 2019. Many of the demands lodged by protesters last year, from increased pensions to higher pay, remain unresolved.

    Imagine what will follow when these governments confront the cost of these lockdowns and are forced to cut services even further while raising taxes?

  • "This Is Despotism, Plain & Simple" – Of Power-Drunk Politicians & Sociopathic Oligarchs
    “This Is Despotism, Plain & Simple” – Of Power-Drunk Politicians & Sociopathic Oligarchs

    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 05/19/2020 – 22:45

    Authored by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

    It’s Time To Step Into The Arena

    There’s a passage in Teddy Roosevelt’s famous 1910 “Citizenship in a Republic” speech I want to share with you today:

    If a man’s efficiency is not guided and regulated by a moral sense, then the more efficient he is the worse he is, the more dangerous to the body politic. Courage, intellect, all the masterful qualities, serve but to make a man more evil if they are merely used for that man’s own advancement, with brutal indifference to the rights of others. It speaks ill for the community if the community worships those qualities and treats their possessors as heroes regardless of whether the qualities are used rightly or wrongly. It makes no difference as to the precise way in which this sinister efficiency is shown. It makes no difference whether such a man’s force and ability betray themselves in a career of money-maker or politician, soldier or orator, journalist or popular leader. If the man works for evil, then the more successful he is the more he should be despised and condemned by all upright and far-seeing men. To judge a man merely by success is an abhorrent wrong; and if the people at large habitually so judge men, if they grow to condone wickedness because the wicked man triumphs, they show their inability to understand that in the last analysis free institutions rest upon the character of citizenship, and that by such admiration of evil they prove themselves unfit for liberty.

    The above words strike me as a perfect description of the deep hole we find ourselves in presently throughout these United States of America. It takes a whole nation to screw things up as badly as we have, and boy have we ever.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Yes it took parasites, sociopathic oligarchs and a power drunk national security state to bring us to our current state of affairs, but it also took the rest of us. For far too long we as a people have been apathetic, hoodwinked spectators to the life unfolding around us. Voting for “the lesser of two evils” for decade upon decade thinking it might be different this time. Putting up with the economic game that’s been put in front of us, despite the fact that it demonstrably and systematically rewards and incentivizes predatory and destructive behavior. As a people, we have been superficial, indifferent and gleefully ignorant of reality. It’s time to change all that.

    You can consider today’s post a rallying cry to step into the arena. Stepping into the arena is often portrayed as becoming involved in national politics or some other large platform action, but I see it differently. If you think the only way to have a real impact is by voting or running for Congress, you’re likely to give up and remain passive. The truth is your entire life can be repurposed to be an expression of increased kindness, wisdom and strength. It’s the most impactful long-term action most of us can have on this earth, and anyone can do it.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    I think what keeps a lot of people on the sidelines of a conscious life is an inability to intimately process the above. Many people discount the little things, the countless actions of daily existence that impact those around you and cumulatively make you who you are.

    I think one reason mass media puts so much emphasis on voting at the national level is the owners of these propaganda channels know voting will change absolutely nothing. The oligarchy and national security state are fully in charge, and they’re not going to allow the pesky rabble to get in the way of such a lucrative racket by voting. Getting those who are politically inclined to spend all their time and energy on a rigged and completely corrupt phantom democracy in D.C. is a great way to keep them busy with nonsense. It’s also a perfect way to demoralize that portion of the population which understands it’s just theater. If you can be convinced that voting at the national level is the only way to change things, you’re much more likely to recede into apathy and become intentionally disengaged. This happens to a lot of people, but it’s a big mistake.

    When I look back at my life thus far, it was during my decade on Wall Street when I was the most ignorant and superficial . So focused on stroking my ego, making a bunch of money and career advancement, I lost a lot of who I am at my core during that time. I often wonder if that’s the case for a lot of people who achieve conventional success within the current paradigm. It’s fortunate I removed myself from that situation and began thinking more deeply about who I am and what really matters.

    Stepping up and getting into the arena will mean something different for each of us, but the one word that keeps popping into my head is resilience. There are several clear ways to become more resilient. There’s mental and emotional resiliency, there’s financial resiliency and there’s physical resiliency (where and how you live). I see all three as fundamentally important and functioning best when working together. Resiliency starts at the most basic level because if you and your family aren’t resilient, then you won’t be much use to anyone else. If the people of a community or nation lack resiliency it provides the perfect space for authoritarianism and evil to manifest and flourish.

    Case in point, see the following comments by Alan Dershowitz during a recent interview.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    This is despotism plain and simple, and it’s being expressed by a guy who still has considerable influence despite his many Jeffrey Epstein related controversies. It’s going to take a resilient, courageous and ethical public to stand up to scoundrels like this and just say NO. No, you will not grab me, drag me off somewhere and inject something into my body without my consent. We’ve been passive spectators in the destruction of our society for far too long. It’s time to both say no and to create something better.

    When I walked away from New York City and Wall Street ten years ago it was clear what sort of trajectory the country was on, and it’s only gotten worse since. We’re now in the crucial period spanning 2020-2025 that will decide what the next several decades look like. The big battle for the future is here. Right now. If there’s ever been a time in your life to step up, this is it.

    *  *  *

    Liberty Blitzkrieg is an ad-free website. If you enjoyed this post and my work in general, visit the Support Page where you can donate and contribute to my efforts.

  • China’s Military Seeks Bigger Budget Amid "Growing Threat Of US Conflict"
    China’s Military Seeks Bigger Budget Amid “Growing Threat Of US Conflict”

    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 05/19/2020 – 22:29

    With Sino-US diplomatic relations plumbing the lowest levels in modern history, China’s military leaders are pushing for a substantial increase in their budget to be announced at the National People’s Congress that starts on Friday, arguing that the world’s largest standing army needs more resources to cope with volatile challenges at home and overseas. And at the top of the list, according to the South China Morning Post, is the growing confrontation with the US.

    With China-US relations sinking amid a trade war, spats over civil liberties and Taiwan, and conflicts over Beijing’s territorial claims in the South China Sea, recent months have added accusations between Washington and Beijing about the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic. From Beijing’s viewpoint, the military threats are surfacing on its doorstep with US bombers running about 40 flights over contested areas of the South China and East China seas so far this year, or more than three times the number in the same period of 2019. US Navy warships have sailed four “freedom of navigation operations” in the area in the same period, compared with eight in all of last year.

    “Beijing feels security threats posed by the US and other foreign countries are increasing, so the People’s Liberation Army wants a budget increase to support its military modernization and combat-ready training,” said Song Zhongping, a Hong Kong-based military commentator and former officer in the PLA, quoted by the SCMP.

    Although the actual size of China’s defense budgets are a matter of dispute, military insiders say the PLA will want to match or exceed last year’s 7.5% growth rate, with one estimating a 9% jump, as tensions escalate on several fronts, including the perennial Taiwan friction.

    While those increases may not seem outlandish, and pale in comparison to the total US military budget, they would be against a backdrop of a domestic economy severely hammered by the Covid-19 outbreak and the threat of a global recession. In late March, investment bank China International Capital Corporation slashed its real GDP growth forecast for China in 2020 to 2.6% from 6.1% in January.

    One year ago at the NPC in March 2019, China announced defense spending of 1.18 trillion yuan (US$176 billion) which is the world’s second largest. But the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates China’s defense spending at US$261 billion, which is a little over a third that of the US$732 billion of the US.

    Lu Li-shih, a former instructor at the naval academy in Taiwan, said the suspicion between Beijing and Washington was the worst since the resumption of diplomatic relations in the 1970s, but he rated the chance of a military conflict as low (for now). Collin Koh, a research fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University, meanwhile, said the PLA and US military counterparts had communication channels.

    “Bilateral military ties … might not be always efficacious, but at least do serve as existing ‘pressure valves’ to forestall and potentially mitigate the risks that arise from growing tensions between Beijing and Washington,” Koh said.

    Still, as the SCMP reports, President Xi Jinping, who chairs the all-powerful Central Military Commission, ordered the PLA on January 2 to boost its combat capacity as relations worsened with Washington. That was a repeat of Xi’s “be ready to win wars” order when he laid out his military expansion plan to the Communist Party’s national congress in 2017. The message has not changed.

    Neither has the focus of attention: Taiwan. In last July’s defence white paper, the PLA said two of its most challenging threats were from pro-independence forces in Taiwan and separatists in Tibet and Xinjiang, saying the army “will defend national unification at all costs”.

    Ni Lexiong, a specialist in China’s naval strategy and former professor at the Shanghai University of Political Science and Law, said under President Donald Trump, US arms sales to Taiwan – including 66 F-16 Viper fighter jets – gave the PLA additional bargaining chips in asking for more money.

    Beijing considers Taiwan a part of China’s territory that must be returned to the mainland fold, by force if necessary. The PLA has planned for such an event since 1949, when the Nationalist Party was defeated in the Chinese Civil War by the Communist Party of China and fled to the island.

    Tensions over Taiwan have ratcheted up since Tsai Ing-wen became president in 2016. She was re-elected in a landslide in January on a platform of standing up to Beijing and defending Taiwan as a liberal democracy. She will be inaugurated for a second four-year term on Wednesday, just two days before the NPC opens.

    In response, the FT reports that Taiwan is fearful that Beijing will step up direct military pressure this year in the wake of the coronavirus epidemic, with increasingly frequent incursions into airspace traditionally respected as a safety buffer zone. Such operations are below the threshold of war but would expand the area China dominates militarily, mirroring the approach Beijing has taken to establish virtual control over the disputed South China Sea.

    “Once the pandemic recedes, the Chinese communists will fly across the Taiwan Strait median line more and more often, until the line disappears,” said a recently retired Taiwanese senior military official. “They will create a new status quo under which they will regularly operate much closer to our airspace, and move around there at will.”

    The median line was drawn by the US in 1954. While the line does not have international legal force, both Taiwan and China have long had a tacit understanding not to cross it to avoid unintended clashes. But in March 2019, Chinese military aircraft crossed the line for the first time in 20 years and have done so on at least two more occasions.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Taiwan’s concerns follow veiled warnings from China and come as President Tsai Ing-wen starts her second term on Wednesday, with her country’s international reputation and her own popularity boosted by Taipei’s containment of the coronavirus pandemic.

    Last week, Japanese news agency Kyodo reported that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) was planning an exercise for August that would simulate the seizure of Pratas, a Taiwan-held atoll at the northern entrance of the South China Sea. At the same time, the Chinese government announced two month-long live-fire drills near the port of Tangshan, interpreted by some military experts as an exercise for an attack on Taiwan.

    A senior Taiwanese government official said these signals and the PLA’s probing of the median line had heightened concerns that anger over Taipei’s handling of Covid-19 was driving Beijing to take a more provocative course. Taiwan prevented a local outbreak and has seen only 440 confirmed cases and seven deaths, after cutting travel from China early. This success attracted global attention and support for the diplomatically isolated country’s attempts to participate in the World Health Organization.

    “Because of this, cross-Strait relations have become very tense right now,” the senior official said.

    * * *

    Alexander Huang Chieh-cheng, a professor of international affairs and strategic studies at Tamkang University in Taipei, said that while a military conflict between the mainland and Taiwan would be unlikely in the coming two years, as Beijing needed to concentrate its efforts on economic recovery after the Covid-19 pandemic, the risk of conflict had increased.

    “Beijing is expected to continue its sabre-rattling against Taipei, staging more war games to try to intimidate the Tsai government in her next four years in office as long as she rejects the 1992 consensus,” Huang said, referring to a decade-old agreement between Beijing and Taipei to define cross-strait relations. Huang was a former vice-chairman of Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council which oversees the island’s policies towards the mainland.

    China has been running increasing numbers of military flights into Taiwan’s airspace, and in recent media articles some retired Chinese military officials have suggested that the US was not in a position to defend Taiwan because all four of its aircraft carriers in the Indo-Pacific had been hit by Covid-19 outbreaks. Later comments in an influential party journal, the Study Times , suggested a military venture was not part of Beijing’s immediate plans.

    “The Covid-19 pandemic has exacerbated suspicions and mistrust between Beijing and Washington, and likewise between Beijing and Taipei,” Ni said. “China is facing a new round of containment posed by the US-led Western countries similar to the Cold War.”

    Meanwhile, Xi’s national “rejuvenation” strategy for China includes reshaping the PLA into a top-ranked fighting force by 2050, which includes launching at least four aircraft carrier strike groups by 2035, cutting-edge weapons research and development, and revamping the whole military command structure.

    China now has two aircraft carriers; the Liaoning is a refitted vessel bought from Ukraine, while the Shandong is the first domestically built. The Shandong is still undergoing sea trials to meet what is known as initial operating capability, or IOC, for warships.

    The navy has scheduled sea trials for two newly launched Type 075 helicopter docks, a type of amphibious vessel, with 40,000 tonnes of displacement. It also has plans for eight Type 055 guided-missile destroyers, its most powerful warship and among the most advanced in Asia. The first was commissioned in January and three others are being fitted out.

    The PLA modernisation of both traditional and non-traditional military operations would not slow, said Song in Hong Kong. The PLA is also arguing for more funds, citing other complicated and non-traditional security challenges at home, from separatism to terrorism and religious extremism.

    China’s military also found itself at the forefront of a different battle this year as tens of thousands of personnel were drafted into the fight against the Covid-19 disease outbreak in the initial epicentre, Wuhan, in January. The PLA provided doctors to treat patients, as well as soldiers and logistics for quarantine lockdowns, all additional expenditures that affect short- and long-term planning.

    Beside fighting pandemics, the military is also expected to do its part in providing jobs for the rising ranks of unemployed as businesses struggle to recover from the economic damage done by the disease. More than 8.7 million students will graduate this summer and the PLA has been asked to absorb more of them, another reason to request more funding.

    So… the Chinese army is about to grow by millions? Whatever you do, don’t call it a draft or you will be banned by Twitter.

    A military insider said the Covid-19 pandemic added a large, unexpected financial burden on the PLA (not to mention a source of new “volunteer” recruits). “Military leadership is still fighting with the decision makers of the NPC for a budget increase up to 9 per cent for the coming year, even though the global and domestic economic situations are worrying,” said the person, who requested anonymity due to the sensitivity of the talks.

    The PLA deployed more than 4,500 military medical personnel to worst-hit Hubei province and its capital Wuhan, as well as other logistic support elsewhere in the province from February.

    “President Xi also ordered scientists from the Academy of Military Medical Sciences to join the global race to find a vaccine for Covid-19, which is a long-term and costly investment,” the person said. “It’s very difficult to predict the military cost from the Covid-19 pandemic, because we don’t know how long it will last.”

    And speaking of the army’s involvement in the coronavirus pandemic, recall that a Chinese military virologist and bioweapons expert Major General Chen Wei went to the Wuhan Institute of Virology with military scientists in January to “study” the new virus. But aside from that, there is absolutely no connection between the Chinese army and the coronavirus outbreak. None at all.

  • "Masks On, Clothes Off" – First Strip Club In America Reopens 
    “Masks On, Clothes Off” – First Strip Club In America Reopens 

    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 05/19/2020 – 22:25

    Dozens of states are already in the process of reopening their crashed economies. Now the first strip club in the country, located in Wyoming, has resumed pole dancing operations and threw a grand reopening party last Friday called “masks on, clothes off.” 

    “When they [state officials] reopened the restaurants and bars in Wyoming, we were super excited because it’s been very difficult for us,” Kim Chavez, the owner of “The Den,” told FOX31.

    “It’s been horrible to go almost three months without any kind of income,” Chavez’s husband, Greg Chavez, said.

    Wyoming has had one of the lowest confirmed cases and deaths of COVID-19 in the US. As of Tuesday morning, confirmed cases stood at 577 and deaths at 10. Such a low count prompted state officials to reopen bars and restaurants last Friday, which included The Den. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    “It was pretty busy,” Greg said, referring to the reopening party. “People had money to spend, and people were out. I think they were excited to be feeling normal again.”

    FOX31 said The Den is the first strip club in America to reopen in the post-corona world. People from surrounding states piled into the strip club for the reopening party. 

     “Last night was crazy. We had people from Omaha and Utah, Nebraska, South Dakota. They made the trip,” Kim said.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Strippers at The Den. h/t Travor Hughes/USA Today

    While normal pole dancing operations have resumed, the reopening has ushered in new health protocols to keep staff and patrons safe as the risk of transmission is still elevated with the threat of a second coronavirus wave that could materialize later this year. Things inside the club looked different: 

    “We just need to practice social distancing. We need to make sure that our customers feel safe when they’re here. We need to protect our staff. And just make sure that we’re doing our best to keep everybody protected and safe,” Kim said.

    All dancers and employees are required to wear masks inside the facility and regularly wash and sanitize hands. Strict social distancing guidelines have been set that includes no contact between dancer and patron. 

    “We can do the dances on stage, but no lap dances,” Greg said.

    Patrons are not required to wear masks but are asked to sanitize hands before entering the club. Sanitizing stations have been placed around the facility for staff and patrons to use. Dancers are required to sanitizer the pole before performing a show. 

    USA Today interviewed several dancers who were glad just to be back at work: 

    “Twenty-two dollars,” dancer Cleo said. “Not too bad!” adding that it’s her first income she’s earned in quite some time. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Cleo stripping at The Den. h/t Trevor Hughes/USA Today

    “I’m super-excited. I’m a little nervous because the virus is still out there, but I’m glad to be able to go to work because a lot of people can’t yet,” said dancer Doris Craig. “The stimulus money was nice, but that’s going to run out, and I don’t like to feel like I’m dependent on the government.”

    Another dancer by the name Breauna Grover, said she’s not too worried about the virus — adding that it poses little danger.

    Read how a Nevada Brothel is trying to reopen its doors: ‘Not If You’re Too Hot’ – Nevada Brothels Unveil Temp-Taking, Mask-Wearing Plans To Re-Open

    Dancers in a post-corona world appear to have added one more accessory to their mix of bikinis, g-strings, and fancy lingerie, which is now a mask. 

  • Snyder: Fear Of COVID-19 Has Absolutely Destroyed America's Future
    Snyder: Fear Of COVID-19 Has Absolutely Destroyed America’s Future

    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 05/19/2020 – 22:05

    Authored by Michael Snyder via The End of The American Dream blog,

    Very few people are talking about it, and even fewer are bothering to object, but by borrowing and spending so much money our politicians are essentially feeding America’s financial future into a wood chipper. 

    It took from the founding of our country all the way to 1981 before the U.S. national debt reached one trillion dollars.  Incredibly, we just added more than a trillion dollars to our national debt in less than a month.  On April 5th, we were 23.9 trillion dollars in debt, and by May 4th we were 25 trillion dollars in debt.  Fear of the coronavirus has caused nearly all of our politicians to suddenly become socialists, and we are being told that trillions more in spending may be coming.  This is complete and utter lunacy, and we are leaving future generations of Americans with a mountain of debt that would absolutely crush them. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    But of course our society may not even last too much longer at the rate we are going.  For years I have been loudly warning that our absurd national debt is an existential threat to America’s future, but at this point both major political parties have completely abandoned any sense of fiscal responsibility.  Now our national debt is rapidly speeding toward the 26 trillion dollar mark, and the House of Representatives just passed a bill that would borrow and spend an additional 3 trillion dollars that we do not currently have…

    Last week, House Democrats unveiled their latest pandemic-relief package. The bill combines aid for families, a bailout for struggling cities and states, and additional funds for testing, tracing, and hospitals. The price tag is about $3 trillion—and it comes just weeks after the president signed an economic-relief package worth about $2 trillion.

    Since we are destroying the nation anyway, why don’t we make the grand total a nice round 10 trillion dollars like the progressives at the Atlantic are suggesting?

    After all, we added close to 10 trillion dollars to the national debt during the Obama years and hardly anyone seemed to mind.

    Of course Trump is trying to outdo Obama.  We have already added more than 5 trillion dollars to the national debt while he has been in office, and it looks like more “coronavirus relief bills” could be on the way.

    Yes, borrowing and spending money that we do not have gives us an economic boost in the present.

    But it is also money that we are stealing from future generations, and we are systematically destroying the bright future that they were supposed to have.

    Since Barack Obama’s first day in the White House, we have been stealing an average of more than 100 million dollars from our children and our grandchildren every single hour of every single day.

    And under Trump, that pace has actually increased.

    I know that figure is difficult to believe, but run the numbers yourself and you will see that I am correct.

    What we are doing to future generations is beyond criminal, and it should make every American deeply angry.

    But instead, many Americans are convinced that we aren’t spending enough.

    In fact, Mark Cuban believes that the government should be issuing $1,000 checks to each household every two weeks

    The federal government has already sent a one-time check of up to $1,200 to millions of American families, but according to Mark Cuban, the stimulus is not enough to offset the economic pain of the coronavirus pandemic.

    The billionaire entrepreneur proposed the government issue $1,000 checks to every American household every two weeks for the next two months, with the caveat that the money must be spent within 10 days of receipt or it expires. It would cost about $500 billion, Cuban estimated.

    Everybody knows that you should never go full Weimar Republic, but since we are essentially doing that already, why not make it $10,000 for every household every two weeks?

    After all, $1,000 doesn’t go as far as it once did.  These days, you can blow $1,000 in a single trip to the grocery store.

    Of course I am being facetious.  We are literally watching our leaders destroy everything that all previous generations of Americans fought so hard to build, and it is absolutely infuriating.

    At this point even the ultra-liberal Washington Post is admitting that “the national debt is out of control”, but of course the Post also keeps on promoting ultra-liberal spending policies.

    We are like a morbidly obese guy that can’t even fit in his own bathtub anymore because he is so addicted to food.  Our addiction is debt, and no matter how loud the warnings get we are just going to keep going back for more.

    Ultimately, the only way that the U.S. is going to be able to service this exploding debt is to wildly devalue the currency.  This is the road that the Weimar Republic, Venezuela and so many others have gone down, and it always ends in utter disaster.

    Only this time the biggest economy on the entire planet is doing it, and the currency that we are devaluing is the reserve currency of the world.

    Sadly, there is no turning back now.  Both political parties are completely committed to this course, and the mainstream media is fully behind them.  In fact, CNN insists that “now is not the time to cut back on the borrowing”.

    So when will be the time to cut back on borrowing?

    If we need to add trillions to the national debt to deal with a relatively minor crisis like this coronavirus pandemic, what in the world are we going to do when really bad stuff starts happening?

    Last November, I was absolutely horrified when our national debt hit the 23 trillion dollar mark.  But by the time this November rolls around, we might be at the 27 or 28 trillion dollar mark.

    Unfortunately, we throw the word “trillion” around so much these days that most Americans don’t even realize how much money a trillion dollars actually is.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    If you would have been spending a million dollars every single day since Jesus was born, you still would not have spent a trillion dollars by now.

    We are talking about an amount of money that is absolutely unimaginable, and we just added that much money to the national debt in less than a month.

    Thanks to our free spending politicians and everyone that is supporting them, there is now no future for this country.

    We are literally committing national suicide in front of the whole world, but we are so utterly consumed by our addiction that we don’t even realize that we should be deeply ashamed of ourselves.

  • Robocall Rage: Poll Finds More Americans Losing Tempers Amid Spike In Lockdown Calls
    Robocall Rage: Poll Finds More Americans Losing Tempers Amid Spike In Lockdown Calls

    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 05/19/2020 – 21:45

    With much of the nation indoors over the past couple months amid state-ordered ‘stay at home’ measures and the broader economic pause, Americans have faced a new “threat” — not dangerous to health, but nonetheless deeply annoying to the point of rage. 

    Robocalling was already out of control even before the pandemic, but robocalling fraudsters are now capitalizing on people staying at home, according to new data produced by the retirement community company Provision Living. A whopping 91% say the calls have become more common after the coronavirus crisis.

    A survey of 4,000 people found that about 20% have received an unsolicited call or text related to COVID-19 believed to be scams seeking to exploit the pandemic, after Americans have already lost over $13.4 million in virus-related fraud, according to the Federal Trade Commission figures.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Image via Shutterstock/Digital Trends

    And another 15% indicated they were called by unknown entities regarding their stimulus check — as more broadly Washington’s trillions in stimulus has unleashed a torrent of cons and scam opportunities. This includes from people at times even claiming to be the IRS.

    A summary of the new poll results are as follows, according to Newsmax

    • 65% of adults polled say they receive at least one robocall per day.
    • 91% of respondents say robocalls are becoming more common.
    • 20% of adults surveyed say they have received a robocall or text about coronavirus.
    • 23% of people polled say they have seen an increase in robocalls since the COVID-19 outbreak. 

    Here’s a classic line from one report on the poll’s findings:

    More than a third of respondents said they’ve lost their temper and swore or yelled at a robocaller.

    In prior decades such literal cold calling was once the domain of sophisticated telemarketers who at least perhaps had a local product or something remotely useful to sell. 

    But now it’s a domain wholly taken over by cyber fraud, international telemarketing, and an apparently growing phenomenon of random unknown services that seem to ‘dial’ numbers with no reason, bizarrely enough, often to the great frustration of people trying to catch an occasional afternoon nap. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Above: Provision Living data on most common types of robocalls, based on respondents.

    Robocalling scams in general have been on the rise even unrelated to the pandemic, increasingly bombarding random households ranging from fake IRS and social security claims, to sham debt collectors, to the ever-pervasive “car extended warranty” and “Google add listing” people (no, they are actually almost never with Google, the company assures).

  • New Zealand Gun-Crime Rates Soar Following Gun-Bans
    New Zealand Gun-Crime Rates Soar Following Gun-Bans

    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 05/19/2020 – 21:25

    Authored by Tom Knighton via BearingArms.com,

    American gun control activists looked at New Zealand’s response to the Christchurch massacre with a high degree of awe. They desperately want the United States to follow that lead after the next mass shooting. They would love for our government to swoop in after such an event and snatch away all our guns, but particularly those nasty so-called “assault weapons” that they don’t think we have any business owning.

    They applauded Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern for her quick response, but what really happened was more of a knee-jerk reaction. She responded with liberal reflexes rather than taking the time to look at the situation rationally, and she’s been applauded by gun grabbers for it.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    However, one thing we on the pro-gun side said would happen in response seems to have come to pass.

    New figures obtained by RNZ show last year had the highest rates of gun crime and deaths involving firearms for nearly 10 years.

    But despite that rise, there has not been a corresponding increase in officers taking out or using their guns.

    The figures, obtained from police under the Official Information Act, show the rates of gun crime went up in both 2018 and 2019.

    Last year, there were 3540 occasions where an offender was found with a gun.

    And in both of the last two years, the rate of deadly incidents involving a firearm was the highest it had been since 2009.

    The number of guns seized by police is also on the rise, up almost 50 percent on five years earlier at 1263 last year.

    You mean banning guns doesn’t actually reduce gun crime?

    I’m shocked.

    I’m completely and totally shocked.

    No, really.

    What’s shocking, though, isn’t that this happened. It’s that this happened yet again and anti-gunners are still able to delude themselves into believing that gun control reduces gun crime. It doesn’t. While some of our gun controlled states have low crime, it has a low crime in spite of those laws, not because of them.

    It seems like a universal truth that in the immediate aftermath of enacting tough gun control laws, gun crime goes up. That doesn’t make a lot of sense unless you realize that the very people not complying with the law include a large number of criminals who aren’t going to comply with any law. Now, though, they know that their potential targets are less likely to be able to defend themselves. For them, it’s time to step up and get busy because no one can stop them.

    Note how the police aren’t using their guns any more than normal? That’s not surprising. After all, the police show up just in time to draw a chalk outline around the body. They don’t prevent crimes so much as respond to them and the criminals know this. They do what they’re going to do and leave before the police show up.

    In fact, expect to see still more increases in so-called “gun crime” in New Zealand, at least until some degree of sanity returns and the government there goes back to respecting the right of the people to keep and bear arms. It’s only too bad that we’re pretty much the only nation with that right preserved in our Constitution. New Zealanders could probably use that right about now.

  • German Economist Warns Italy Faces Eurozone Exit As Coronavirus Crisis Deepens
    German Economist Warns Italy Faces Eurozone Exit As Coronavirus Crisis Deepens

    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 05/19/2020 – 21:23

    Italy, whose already week economy has been crippled by the coronavirus pandemic, should seek help from its own wealthy citizens, rather than relying on Germany and other EU countries, to bail it out as it struggles to bounce back from the coronavirus pandemic, former German MEP and economist, Hans-Olaf Henkel, has warned.

    According to The Express, the German suggested that the best solution would be for Italy to leave the eurozone and go back to their own currency, which he dubbed the “new lira”. Henkel was speaking against the backdrop of widening splits between the north and the south of the bloc, and particularly Germany and Italy, on how best to mitigate the economic and societal impacts of the virus.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Hans-Olaf Henkel.

    He wasn’t alone: at a time when the European periphery has been hoping to get loans, or better yet, grants from Europe, Manfred Weber, leader of the European People’s Party in the European Parliament, became the latest figure to speak out, calling for “strict controls” to prevent Italy and Spain embarking on massive public spending sprees using EU cash.

    Henkel was also responding to comments by liberal billionaire and europhile George Soros, who last week suggested the EU had a duty to help Italy, which has been hit harder by the disease than anywhere else in the bloc, by spreading the cost of rebuilding the country’s economy among members of the eurozone. The former MEP explained: “I share Soros’ views on Italy but do not believe that there is any justification to show ‘financial solidarity with Italy because of the corona crisis’.

    “What have Germans to do with the decisions taken by Italian politicians on their health system or the (very late) decisions on the lockdown in Lombardy”

    He also noted that “on average the per capita wealth of Italians is way above the wealth of for instance Germans” and added that “before Italian politicians like Salvini or Conte or anybody claims money from citizens of other countries to mitigate the financial results of their decisions they should ask their own wealthy people to show solidarity with their own people.”

    “Rather than letting Italian politicians borrow money from and at the risk of other countries, Germany should make a generous gift in exchange for Italy leaving the eurozone and go back to their own currency (New Lira)! This way Italy’s Central Bank could devalue their currency to become competitive again, get the economy back on its (own) feet and prosper like Italy did before the euro” Henkel said.

    The German economist, who stressed his respect for a “globalized, liberal and democratic world”, added: “I know Soros from a meeting some years ago when we discussed the first euro crisis.”

    “At that time I advocated the euro to be split into a ‘Northern Euro’ and a ‘Euro for the South’, in each case the currency to reflect the different economic realities prevailing in, for example, Greece, Italy and France on one hand and, for instance, in Austria, The Netherlands and Germany on the other.”

    Addressing a proposed solution, namely “perpetual bonds”, or loans which would never have to be repaid, he added: “Soros’ idea of eternal European loans may work on a national basis like they did in the UK and in the US in World War 1, but they would not work on a European level.

    “Not only would we be confronted with the same moral hazard such as in the case of euro- or coronabonds, they would also be limited to the eurozone hence create a new border within Europe.”

    “On one side are those with solidarity for Italy like Germany. On the other are those without like Denmark or Sweden or Poland, none of them being in the eurozone.”

    And that’s why Europe is doomed – the same reason European nations and people have been doomed to waging war with each other for millennia – because when one strips away the profit motive and the distraction that is the pursuit of wealth, everyone hates everyone, and once the money runs out and the shared prosperity ends and is replaced by the shared pain of bailing out one’s neighbor, at that point it’s just a matter of time before the time of death is declared.

  • The Higher Stocks Rise, The More Fragile The Market Becomes: BofA
    The Higher Stocks Rise, The More Fragile The Market Becomes: BofA

    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 05/19/2020 – 21:05

    In the past two months, BofA equity derivatives group led by Benjamin Bowler, has been far more bearish than either the “House” view, which is for general consumption and is more or less constitutionally mandated to always be cautiously optimistic, or BofA CIO Michael Hartnett who in recent weeks has been expecting a continued melt up reflecting both the pain trade (higher) and the flood of new central bank liquidity.

    We covered two recent examples of Bowler’s persistent pessimism recently, first in “Fade The Rip”: BofA Warns “Bear Market Far From Over Unless We Escape A Recession” and again in Here Is The One Indicator That Convinced BofA Another Market Crash Is Coming, and yet despite his reasoned arguments, the market has continued to trend sideways, failing to break out materially, but also refusing to slide below 2,800.

    Which brings us to today’s, latest take from BofA’s global equity volatility insights note, in which an increasingly exasperated Bowler writes that “while history suggests markets won’t escape economic reality, they have become skilled at suspending disbelief post GFC” and yet “ignoring reality comes at the risk of fragility, as investors lacking conviction are quick to exit when the trend turns.

    He is, of course, right. It was his team, after all, that made the sacrilegious at the time (in Dec 2017) observation that “In Every Market Shock Since 2013 Central Banks Have Stepped In To Protect Markets.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    It’s not just him, however: by now every investors, especially Wall Street professionals, realize that stocks are where they are only thanks to central banks, so left to their own devices a crash is inevitable. It’s also why before the QE nuke launched by the Fed in late March, the S&P was set to plunge below 2,000. The flipside is that the higher the market goes, the more prone it is to flash crashes and “breaking” as investor confidence that central banks will prop up stocks at or near all time highs, especially with lack of fundamental support, fades away.

    That’s why, picking up on one of his favorite topics, Bowler and team writes that “in recent years markets have become increasingly fragile, recording a 4-fold increase in the frequency of tantrums and flash-crashes post-GFC vs the 80 years prior.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    According to Bowler there have been two key drivers of higher fragility in our view:

    1. failing trading liquidity due to high frequency traders shutting down machines as stress rises, something this website has correctly covered since the start in 2009, warning that HFTs would eventually resulted in an extremely illiquid, unstable and, yes, fragile market as far back as April 2009, and
    2. asset bubbles created by an investor base starved of alpha and forced to chase trends against their better judgement in a world addicted to the central bank put.

    Caught in a vice of HFTs momentum chasing algos on one hand, and central banks dictating overall market direction simply by injecting trillions in liquidity, the BofA strategist notes that “closing your eyes and chasing the trend was impossible to avoid for most, but this also turned into a massive log-jam for liquidity when the tide turned, as investors with little fundamental conviction simultaneously rushed for a fast-narrowing exit door.”

    Which brings us to today: with most institutional investors believing this is a bear-rally, something the latest BofA Fund Manager Survey confirmed earlier today

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    … but at-risk of being forced to chase the trend if it continues (having been conditioned as such in the last 10 years), the risk is of bigger bubbles leading to larger shocks, leading to even bigger bubbles, leading to even larger shocks, and so on. In a dismal assessment of how far the rally has already gone without any fundamental justification, Bowler writes that “there will be plenty of opportunity (and time) for negative surprises to arise, given the sheer size of this economic crisis, even with a vaccine on fast-track.

    We most certainly agree, as does more than two-thirds of Wall Street, which is why it is hardly a secret that the higher the S&P rises, the more prone it will be to sudden, “unexplained” crashes.

    And while it would be difficult to see a strong convexity event at these levels of vol, it would likely result in a larger upside surprise to volatility than in past bear-rallies, as for example both the VIX and V2X have fallen at near their fastest pace recorded.

    “But the FAAMGs will keep the market elevated”, all the bulls will scream in unison, to which Bowler has a simple answer:

    With many believing that the seemingly ‘defensive’ Tech can continue to hold up the S&P 500, here we highlight where the index could fall if the second leg of the covid-19 selloff unfolds even with the FAAMG not receding from here (as a reminder, they make up 21% of the S&P 500).

    Chart 14 shows that holding FAAMG at their current levels, a retest of March lows from the remainder of names in the S&P would bring the S&P down to 2390, only less than 7% above its 23-Mar lows (in comparison, the S&P closed 32% above its March lows as of 15-May). If any of the FAAMG names capitulates in an extreme scenario where most of the stocks snap back to their lows, the S&P could trade even lower.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Indeed, while these big tech names and some bio/pharma names (Healthcare accounts for 15% of the S&P 500) may do particularly well in the Covid-19 economy, some investors may be overestimating the extent to which big-cap tech can prevent the entire market from falling simply due to its large weight. Furthermore, we still believe that markets may be underestimating the cyclicality of large tech as a whole when faced with the reality of the ensuing recession.

    In conclusion, Bowler – who now appears to have a vendetta with the central banks, the HFTs and Robin Hood retail traders who just keep buying this market even as he doubles, triples and quadruples down on his bearish stance – warns that “history suggests markets won’t escape economic reality, and that this bear market will be similar in length to that of the ensuing recession, but there is a risk is of wider overshoots, which reconcile more violently in a world still prone to fragility.”

  • "Cyclone In The Time Of COVID-19" – India Prepares For Perfect Storm Of Chaos
    “Cyclone In The Time Of COVID-19” – India Prepares For Perfect Storm Of Chaos

    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 05/19/2020 – 20:45

    Though downgraded to Category 3 from its previous Category 5 strength, Tropical Cyclone Amphan is expected to make landfall near India and Bangladesh border on Wednesday as a major storm, with catastrophic storm surge, high winds, and torrential rains. This super cyclonic storm is happening at the same time India’s COVID-19 infections crossed the 100,000 mark and are increasing at the fastest pace in Asia. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The India Meteorological Department (IMD) released a statement on Tuesday that said the “very intense cyclone” is churning over the Bay of Bengal and headed for coastal regions bordering Bangladesh and India. A storm surge of 13 to 16 feet could be seen in some areas, especially around mangrove forests of the Sundarbans in far eastern India and Bangladesh. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Amphan has diminished intensity over the last day but remains one of the strongest cyclones to traverse the Bay of Bengal in decades. 

    IMD warned: “This cyclone has extensive damaging potential. It will cause extensive large scale damage. (i) Damage expected over West Bengal (East Medinipur, south & north 24 Parganas, Howrah, Hoogli, Kolkata districts) and action suggested.” 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Weather firm Joint Cyclone Center says the storm is still packing 115 mph winds. “Center of #Amphan getting closer to the #WestBengal associated with thunderstorms, gusty winds, flash flooding and rainbands spreading into #Bangladesh and #Burma overnight…” 

    IMD has issued an alert for Wednesday of damaging winds and flooding rainfall from Amphan in eastern India and Bangladesh. Most torrential rainfall and strong winds will be centered around West Bengal, which includes Kolkata.

    “We are facing a dual challenge of ‘cyclone in the time of COVID-19,’ ” Satya Narayan Pradhan, chief of India’s National Disaster Response Force, stated at a press briefing Tuesday. “We are taking action according to the enormity of this challenge.”

    Needs Assessment Working Group (NAWG) Bangladesh estimates that up to “14.2 million people in coastal districts are likely to be affected, with nearly 1.4 million displaced and up to 600,000 houses damaged. Evacuation from high-risk areas is to begin today and is already underway in high-risk areas in India.” 

    The life-threatening cyclone is arriving at a bad time for both countries as COVID-19 confirmed cases and deaths surge. India has reported more than 100,000 confirmed cases, while Bangladesh has said about 25,000, as of Tuesday, according to data from Johns Hopkins University. 

    India has seen a 28% increase in cases since last week  

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The challenge to flatten the curve after the cyclone has passed could result in further spreading of the virus in the weeks ahead. The storm is expected to displace hundreds of thousands of folks. All of this suggests officials in both countries will be dealing with two disasters at once.

  • Chicago Chicken Shop Charges 26% "COVID-19 Fee", Claiming Rapid Food Inflation
    Chicago Chicken Shop Charges 26% “COVID-19 Fee”, Claiming Rapid Food Inflation

    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 05/19/2020 – 20:25

    Harold’s Chicken on Broadway in Chicago unleashed a wave of public backlash on social media last weekend after it slapped customers with a COVID-19 surcharge of 26%. 

    Restaurant manager Jacquelyn Santana told CBS Chicago that food suppliers raised wholesale chicken prices by 26% on Saturday “due to the COVID pandemic.” She said a case of chicken wings that generally cost $60, jumped overnight to $90, forcing the wing shop to pass on the costs.

    “We’re trying to keep other employees employed, including myself. We are just opening up so we really need to be able to makes ends meet,” Santana said.

    She said the surcharge was dropped on Sunday after people bashed her store on social media for raising prices.

    “We’re actually trying to figure out how else we can make up for those losses that we’ve had so far,” said Santana.

    She said workers have already seen their hours reduced to keep the lights on during the quarantine. It appears cost-cutting measures are limited for the store manager at this time. 

    A receipt from Harold’s shows a “Chicago City Tax 10.25%” and “Covid 19 26%” tax — add that all up, and one customer was taxed 36.25% for a box of wings. People on Facebook were furious, and they said: “shame on you!!!!,” “Unbelievable,” and “crooks.” 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In Santana’s defense, she needs to familiarize herself with the evolving situation at meat processing plants that have resulted in soaring food inflation to justify better why she passed the costs.

    For example, spot beef prices quoted via USDA show an exponential rise during the pandemic.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The public must also be informed about the crisis is processing and how some restaurants or corner shops might not be able to eat the costs. To jog everyone’s memory, more than a dozen top meat processing plants closed in the last several months due to workers contracting the virus, and other plants significantly reduced output as labor shortages developed.

    US poultry production slumps as processors are hit with labor shortages. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Read: American Farms Cull Millions Of Chickens Amid Virus-Related Staff Shortages At Processing Plants

    A plunging in processing sparked soaring meat prices, with restaurants already battered by lockdowns, it seems, in at least one case, a jump in wholesale prices cannot be absorbed but instead passed along to consumers

  • "End Of An Era": US Oil Rig Count & Saudi Weapons Spending Plunge To Record Lows
    “End Of An Era”: US Oil Rig Count & Saudi Weapons Spending Plunge To Record Lows

    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 05/19/2020 – 20:05

    Via Southfront.org,

    The reduction in global fuel demand has led to the fact that the number of oil rigs in the US has dropped to a historic low, Reuters reported, citing data from Baker Hughes. According to data on the week ending on May 17th, the number of rigs decreased by 35, to 339.

    This is the lowest figure since 1940, when Baker Hughes began to publish relevant statistics. The reduction in the number of towers affected West Texas and the eastern part of the state of New Mexico, where the main oil and gas production in the USA is conducted. There, their number decreased to 175, which is the lowest number since 2016.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Since the beginning of the year, the number of operating rigs in the United States has declined by 52%. More than 400 installations stopped working.

    The suspension of activity began in mid-March, when oil prices fell sharply after disruption of the OPEC + deal.

    Analysts suggest that this process will continue in the near future. Simmons Energy suggests that 215 drilling rigs will remain in the country next year and their recovery will be very slow. For comparison: in 2019, 943 units worked in the USA.

    It is expected that global consumption will drop from a record 100 million barrels per day up to 92.6 million barrels. On May 18th, the cost of a barrel of North Sea Brent was $34.51, Texas WTI – $32.13.

    At the same time, this drop in crude oil prices, Saudi Arabia may be forced to reduce how much money it spends on weapons. This is significant since, Riyadh’s weapon purchases are a way to increase its influence around the world.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    According to experts, Saudi Arabia may have to abandon new arms contracts and postpone already agreed arms purchases, as the kingdom is plunging into a financial crisis.

    The expected delay in the conclusion of new arms deals can have long-term political consequences for a country under the rule of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is waging a war against the Houthis in Yemen, and is losing, even with full investment.

    “I have no doubt: this is the end of an era. The era when the Persian Gulf had all this money is over,” said Bruce Ridel, a CIA veteran and senior researcher at the Brookings Institution.

    Last year, Riyadh spent about $62 billion on weapons, ranking fifth in the world in military spending.

    Although this figure was lower than in 2018, it still amounted to about 8% of Saudi Arabia’s GDP. Thus, the country spent on weapons an impressive share of its wealth – more than the United States (3.4%), China (1.9%), Russia (3.9%) or India (2.4%), based on Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) data.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    For decades, military spending has strengthened Riyadh’s political influence in the world:

    “If Saudi Arabia were not one of the largest buyers of weapons, then probably it would be impossible to count on support devoid of criticism from the powerful Western powers. One of the outcomes of arms purchases is that you buy relationships,” said Andrew Feinstein, an expert on corruption and the global arms trade.

    This economic crisis Saudi Arabia is in is characterized by three blows that it suffered:

    1. The first of them was inflicted by an unprecedented drop in oil demand on world markets, which, in turn, led to a drop in commodity prices and a reduction in the country’s income from oil.
    2. The second blow is those extraordinary measures that the state should have taken to combat the epidemic of coronavirus and which actually led to the complete cessation of trade and economic activity within the country, which ultimately led to the actual cessation of “non-oil” exports and, again, the cessation of economic growth.
    3. The third blow to the economy of Saudi Arabia is the unplanned expenses of the country, associated again with the epidemic of coronavirus, and those measures that were supposed to strengthen public confidence in the health sector.

    Essentially, it would appear that the Saudi-initiated crude oil price war backfired heavily, and the two parties suffering the most from the rapid drop in prices and the on-going crisis are Washington and Riyadh.

  • "They Don't Want To Come Back To Work" – Restaurant Blames CARES Act For Labor Shortage
    “They Don’t Want To Come Back To Work” – Restaurant Blames CARES Act For Labor Shortage

    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 05/19/2020 – 19:45

    One of the great tragedies in America today is that of the CARES Act, which included a $1,200 stimulus check and an additional $600 weekly payment for the unemployed, has given millions of Americans their first real taste of socialism, that is the sweet taste of the forbidden fruit of free of money.

    The Trump administration has unleashed helicopter money directed at households that will have severe consequences. Not too long ago, we noted how government intervention, cushioning households from an economic depression, will prolong the recovery in the labor market as people get paid more to sit at home than work and be productive in society:

    “So don’t expect the unemployment rate to bounce back very much once this pandemic begins to subside.  Congress has decided to make it very financially rewarding not to work, and millions upon millions of Americans are going to be more than happy to take advantage of that opportunity for as long as it lasts.” 

      As Arizona’s economy reopens, one restaurant owner has blamed the CARES Act for labor shortages, even though she says the national unemployment rate is very high. 

      “With an unemployment rate at almost 20%, you’d think we’d have a lot of applicants coming in, but we’re not,” said Times Square Italian Restaurant owner Paullette Cano, who recently spoke with AZFamily.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Cano said the CARES Act and unemployment checks have resulted in many of her furloughed employees staying home. They collectively told her their pay from the government is much better than working at her restaurant. 

      “They don’t want to come back to work,” said Cano. “It’s the unemployment. They’re receiving about $840 a week, which puts them about $22 an hour.”

      At the moment, there are 30 job openings at the restaurant with dozens of furloughed employees sitting at home collecting welfare. She said rehiring is challenging because people are demanding +$20 per hour, or around the hourly rate, they’re receiving from unemployment and federal dollars.

      “They’re asking for $20 an hour, which makes it difficult because we operate under slim margins,” said Cano.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Times Square Italian Restaurant owner Paullette Cano

      If Cano develops a labor shortage with an influx of demand at her restaurant due to reopening, she might have to resort to expensive labor that would result in fewer hirings. 

      It’s not just in Arizona, workers in many other states can make more money staying at home than being employed. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      We recently pennedWhen Work Is Punished: Did The ‘Generous’ CARES Act Just Guarantee High Unemployment Is Here To Stay? — where it was noted the CARES Act has the potential to create an entirely new generation of welfare serfs, subsisting on significant welfare benefits with no incentive to ‘get back to work’, even after the lockdowns are lifted. This will lead to a labor market that won’t recover anytime soon, thwarting any hopes of a V-shaped recovery this year. 

      The virus, to its credit, has triggered a dangerous policy response by the government of helicopter money that will effectively delay the recovery. Recently, Powell on CBS’s 60 Minutes thinks a recovery could be seen in late 2021 — what’s to say the recovery might not be seen until 2022-2024? 

    Digest powered by RSS Digest

    Today’s News 19th May 2020

    • Many Volkswagen EVs Are Already Sold Out For The Second Half Of 2020
      Many Volkswagen EVs Are Already Sold Out For The Second Half Of 2020

      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/19/2020 – 02:45

      While the auto market has been falling apart, Volkswagen has been crushing it in the EV market.

      The automaker’s CEO said on a podcast on Monday morning that many of its EVs are already “sold out far into the second half of the year,” according to Bloomberg. 

      The company’s market share for EVs more than doubled to almost 4% and could rise as high as 5% or 6% by the end of 2020 with help from incentives and tax breaks, CEO Herbert Diess said. The company has a longer-term target of EVs accounting for about 40% of deliveries by 2030.

      And the target for VW is clear: the company is “very confident” that it “won’t lose sight of Tesla,” Deiss said.

      He continued, saying that the company’s “ability to boost technology skills and software operations quickly is more important to compete than leveraging industrial scale.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Diess expects “very strong” competition from Chinese firms in the future and reiterated his call for economic stimulus in Germany to help the country steer clear of a prolonged recession. 

      This targeted move, taking aim at Tesla, shouldn’t be a surprise to Zero Hedge readers, as we recently predicted that Volkswagen would become a major player in the EV market, posing a threat to Tesla. 

      Recall, just days ago, we wrote about the Volkswagen ID3, which, with a price point of $33,000 possibly represents the biggest challenge to Tesla’s dominant EV status yet. The vehicle goes on sale in Europe and the UK this summer, despite the coronavirus and offers the same amount of range and storage space as a Tesla Model 3.

      The ID3 is going to offer three different battery choices and two power outputs. It has a claimed range of 260 miles.

      Volkswagen has been taking pre-orders for the car and more than 35,000 people have placed deposits so far, according to Autocar. Those who placed deposits will be able to buy their cars starting June 17 in Europe. The UK will follow in mid-July due to the time it takes to get approval for right hand drive models.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Volkswagen sales boss Jürgen Stackmann said at the time deliveries are on track and that the ID3 is the company’s sole focus right now: “The focus of the company now is on ID 3. We’re almost ready, and we just need a few more weeks to get the software to where we need it to be. The entire team are working on this topic, and we want to deliver a great quality product on time – and that time is this summer.”

      Volkswagen is aiming to build 100,000 ID3s this year and prices in the will start from around £27,500 before the government grant for the entry-level 45kWh version.

      The storage capabilities of the ID3 make it a formidable competitor to the Model Y. The ID3 also features two digital dashboard displays and, as Business Insider says “…seems to offer a bit more familiarity” than the Tesla Model 3. 

      It also offers adaptive cruise control and lane assist, similar to Tesla’s autopilot. And again, the price point could be the car’s best selling point. Its $33,000 (USD) tag compares to about $48,000 for the Model 3 and $52,990 for the Model Y. 

      A video comparison of the ID3 and the Model 3 can be seen here

    • United Nations Claims It's Politically-Incorrect To Say "Husband" Or "Wife"
      United Nations Claims It’s Politically-Incorrect To Say “Husband” Or “Wife”

      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/19/2020 – 02:00

      Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

      The United Nations has put out a tweet asserting that people shouldn’t use politically incorrect terms like “boyfriend,” “girlfriend,” “husband” and “wife” in order to “help create a more equal world.”

       

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>“What you say matters. Help create a more equal world by using gender-neutral language if you’re unsure about someone’s gender or are referring to a group,” states the tweet.

      It then lists a number of terms alongside their politically correct alternative.

      These include mankind, chairman, congressman, policeman, landlord, boyfriend/girlfriend, manpower, maiden name, fireman and husband/wife.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      A faceless globalist bureaucracy telling people what sounds are allowed to come out of their mouths surprisingly didn’t go down too well.

      “Stop trying to control people’s language. It’s creepy and unnecessary,” said Lucy Harris.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      “Are we allowed to say son or daughter or will my spouse and I get a visit from a police officer?” asked another.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      “Are we still allowed to say manhole cover?” joked another.

      *  *  *

      My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me. Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

    • The Coming Nuclear Menace: Hypersonic Missiles
      The Coming Nuclear Menace: Hypersonic Missiles

      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/19/2020 – 00:05

      Authored by Karl Grossman via Counterpunch.org,

      The United States is seeking to acquire “volumes of hundreds or even thousands” of nuclear-capable hypersonic missiles that are “stealthy” and can fly undetected at 3,600 miles per hour, five times faster than the speed of sound.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Why so many?

      A Pentagon official is quoted in the current issue of Aviation Week & Space Technology as saying “we have to be careful we’re not building boutique weapons. If we build boutique weapons, we won’t—we’ll be very reluctant to—use them.”

      The article in the aerospace industry trade journal is headlined: “Hypersonic Mass Production.” A subhead reads: “Pentagon Forms Hypersonic Industry ‘War Room.’”

      On March 19, 2020, the U.S. conducted its first hypersonic missile test from its Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai, Hawaii.

      Fast and Furiously Accurate is the title of an article about hypersonic missiles written by a U.S. Navy officer which appeared last year on a U.S. Naval Institute website.

      The piece declares that by “specifically integrating hypersonic weapons with U.S. Navy submarines, the United States may gain an edge in developing the fastest, most precise weapons the world has ever seen.”

      “Hypersonic weapons,” explains the article by U.S. Navy Lieutenant Andrea Howard, “travel faster than Mach 5—at least five times the speed of sound, around 3,600 mph, or one mile per second….They are similar to but faster than existing missiles, such as the subsonic U.S. Tomahawk missile, which maxes out around 550 mph.”

      “While hypersonic weapons can carry conventional or nuclear warheads, they differ from existing technologies in three critical ways,” writes Howard. “First…a one-kilogram object delivered precisely and traveling multiples of the speed of sound can be more destructive than one kilogram of TNT. Second, the low-altitude path helps mask HCMs [Hypersonic Cruise Missiles] when coupled with the curvature of the Earth” and so “they are mostly invisible to early warning radars. And third…they can maneuver during flight; in contrast with the predictable ballistic-missile descend, they are more difficult to intercept, if even detected.”

      “By offering the precision of near-zero-miss weapons, the speed of ballistic missiles, and the maneuverability of cruise missiles, hypersonic weapons are a disruptive technology capable of striking anywhere on the globe in less than an hour,” declares the Navy officer.

      The article also notes that Russian “President Vladimir Putin unveiled six new” what he called “invincible” hypersonic missiles as part of a March 2018 “state of the nation” speech. “Russia has successfully tested the air-to-ground hypersonic missile” named Kinzhal for dagger, “multiple times using the MIG-31 fighter.” It’s “mounting the Kinzhal on its Tu-22M3 strategic bomber.” The article also says “China, too, is working on hypersonic technologies.”

      The piece concludes:

      “As the tradition of arms control weakens with the breakdown of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) agreement, it would be naïve to anticipate anything other than full-fledged weapon development by Russia and China in the coming decades….The bottom line is that hypersonic weapons will determine who precisely is ‘prompt’ enough in 21st century conflict.”

      The U.S. under President Trump withdrew last year from the INF treaty, a landmark agreement which had banned all land-based ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of from 310 to 3,420 miles. It had been signed in 1987 by President Reagan and Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev. The treaty “marked the first time the superpowers had agreed to reduce their nuclear arsenals, eliminate an entire category of nuclear weapons, and employ extensive on-site inspections for verification,” notes the Arms Control Association.

      Hypersonic missiles may be unstoppable. Is society ready? was the headline of an article in March in The Christian Science Monitor. This piece notes: “Hypersonic missiles are not just very fast, they are maneuverable and stealthy. This combination of speed and furtiveness means they can surprise an adversary in ways that conventional missiles cannot, while also evading radar detection. And they have injected an additional level of risk and ambiguity into what was already an accelerating arms race between nuclear-armed rivals.”

      The article raises the issue of the speed of hypersonic missiles miring military decisions. “For an incoming conventional missile, military commanders may have 30 minutes to detect and respond; a hypersonic missile could arrive at that same destination in 10 minutes.” Thus “artificial intelligence” or “AI” would be utilized.

      The Christian Science Monitor article quotes Patrick Lin, a professor of philosophy at California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo, as noting:

      “Technology will always fail. That is the nature of technology.”

      And, says the article: “Dr. Lin argues that the benefits of hypersonic weapons compared to the risk they create are ‘widely unclear,’ as well as the benefits of the AI systems that inform them.”

      It quotes Dr. Lin as saying, wisely:

      “I think it’s important to remember that diplomacy works and policy solutions work…I think another tool in our toolbox isn’t just to invest in more weapons, but it’s also to invest in diplomacy to develop community.”

      The Aviation Week & Space Technology article begins: “As the U.S. hypersonic weapons strategy tilts toward valuing a quantity approach, the new focus for top defense planners—even as a four-year battery of flight testing begins—is to create an industrial base that can produce missiles affordably enough that the high-speed weapons can be purchased in volumes of hundreds or even thousands.”

      It continues: “To pave the way for an affordable production strategy, the Pentagon’s Research and Engineering division has teamed up with the Acquisition and Sustainment branch to create a ‘war room’ for the hypersonic industrial base, says Mark Lewis, director of research and engineering the modernization.”

      The piece then quotes Lewis as saying:

      “At the end of the day, we have to be careful we’re not building boutique weapons. If we build boutique weapons, we won’t—we’ll be very reluctant to—use them. And that again factors into our plans for delivering hypersonics at scale.”

      The article says that “Air Force and defense officials have been promoting concepts for operating air-launched hypersonic missiles in swarm attacks. The B-1B [bomber], for example, will be modified to carry” six hypersonic missiles.

      “I think it’s a poorly posed question to ask about affordability per unit,” the piece quoted Lewis as saying.

      “We have to think of it in terms of the affordability of the capability that we’re providing. By that I mean: If I’ve got a hypersonic system that costs twice as much as its subsonic counterpart but is five times more effective, well, clearly, that’s an advantageous cost scenario.”

      The hypersonic missiles will indeed likely be “invincible.” And they would be at the ready because of the withdrawal by the Trump administration of the INF treaty and other international arms control agreements, one after another.

      With the vast numbers of hypersonic nuclear-capable missiles being sought, the world will have fully returned to the madness in the depths the Cold War—as presented in the 1964 film Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb.

      Apocalypse will be highly likely. Artificial intelligence is not going to save us. These weapons need to be outlawed, not produced and purchased en masse. And we must, indeed, “invest in diplomacy to develop community”—a global community at peace, not a world of horrific and unstoppable war.

    • Watch: 'City Of 400 Foreign Ships' Illegally Fishing Off Argentina Comes To Life Each Night
      Watch: ‘City Of 400 Foreign Ships’ Illegally Fishing Off Argentina Comes To Life Each Night

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 23:45

      The Argentine newspaper Clarín has published footage highlighting a growing problem for the government and the country’s unique surrounding ecology — illegal fishing. 

      Each night multiple hundreds of international fishing vessels descend on an area of ocean not far off Argentina’s coast, often crossing into the country’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and thus illegally, in order to take advantage of waters seemingly endlessly full of squid and other fish.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Stillframe from newspaper Clarín newspaper footage.

      New footage shows what the publication dubs “a city of foreign ships” after reporters boarded a recent Argentine military flight to do surveillance on the illegal fishing below.

      The video shows ships with bright lights piercing the pitch dark ocean surface for as far as the eye can see, as if one is looking down on mysterious planet from space. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      They fish often using bottom trawlers, and most are after the abundance of squid in these far southern waters, popular especially in East Asia. 

      Clarín describes that:

      In the 200 miles there is a real city of foreign ships, estimated at between 350 and 400. They come to stay in these remote sectors of the sea for up to two years. They are generally of oriental origin. There are Chinese and Korean ships. But also Russians, Spanish, English and South Africans. They are tangoneros (those that fish only squid) and trawlers (fishing with a net).

      ‘City of foreign ships’ within 200 miles off Argentina’s coast lit up at night:

      “These are factory ships. They freeze and process on board. Then they transfer the product to another that takes them to the ports of their countries or disembarks them in Uruguay,” the report reads.

      And separate coverage, showing the ‘city of ships’ from the water’s surface:

      “They are true floating freezers. And they are preying on the whole area that is a true sanctuary. Because trawlers don’t make any selections,” an environmental activist was quoted in the Spanish language report as saying.

      “In this biological corridor there are orcas, whales, elephants and sea lions and dolphins. They all fall into the nets,” the spokesman added.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Satellite image of a “city” of boats fishing illegally in the Argentine Sea, via Clarín.

      The vessels are commonly estimated capable of catching up to a whopping 50 tons a night, especially some of the more massive boats measuring at up to 70 meters.

      “The streets are emptied by the coronavirus, but the sea fills with ships, some without a flag to prey on our resources,” a Greenpeace spokesman said ironically.

      Prior satellite photo showing the clusters of foreign vessels look like cities from space:

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The problem has been ongoing for years, with one publication previously featuring satellite imagery of the fishing boat clusters.

      “These ships emit more light into space than almost all Argentine cities, including urban centers such as Córdoba or Rosario,” the publication said.

    • Big Tech Is Turning Hospitals Into Real-Time Surveillance Centers
      Big Tech Is Turning Hospitals Into Real-Time Surveillance Centers

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 23:25

      via Mass Private I blog,

      Recent events have come to light about hospital surveillance that should concern everyone.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Big Tech is using the pandemic as an excuse to turn hospitals into mirror images of law enforcement’s real-time crime centers.

      When Google announced that they were donating 10,000 Nest cameras to hospitals, my jaw dropped.

      “With these Nest Cams, nurses and doctors will be able to check in on patients, supplementing in-person checks. This means there will be a reduction of physical contact, and therefore less of a need for personal protection equipment (PPE), which has fast become a scare resource.”

      What makes Google’s donation so jaw dropping is how Big Tech companies are using the pandemic to make them appear magnanimous.

      “With both contact tracing and the Nest Cam solution, however, Google needs to rebuild a reputation as a privacy concerned company due to the sensitive nature of both projects. It’s not going to be an easy task, but one that should remain at the forefront of all such efforts.”

      Because nothing says reputation builder, like putting real-time surveillance cameras in patients rooms. Not only will hospitals record patients but they will record, nurses, doctors, hospital staff and anyone else who enters a patients’ room. That also includes minors, so no one will be safe from Big Brother’s prying eyes.

      As The Guardian discovered, it also sends that information to Google servers.

      “However, Nest admits that when connected to Google’s “Works with Nest integration” system, which allows other devices such as ceiling fans, washing machines and car sensors to integrate with Nest’s products, it does share personal information with Google.”

      Why would Google donate 10,000 Nest cameras to 6,146 hospitals? Because they are hoping that the staff and patients will grow accustomed to being surveilled 24/7, and they hope hospitals will eventually purchase a Nest Aware subscription.

      Nest cameras also record audio, making them the perfect hospital surveillance tool for law enforcement. Although a Google search of ‘total hospital police departments in the U.S.’ turned up nothing, we know that there are more than 6,000 hospitals and there are more than 17,000 law enforcement agencies in the U.S.

      So if we were to make a conservative guess and say that at least half of America’s hospitals have police departments, that puts the number at roughly 3,075.  Does anyone really think that 3,075 hospital police departments will return Google’s Nest cameras after the pandemic?

      A recent Wall Street Journal article warned that hospitals are also using thermal imaging to scan everyone entering hospitals.

      It is reprehensible to see how the mass media portrays Big tech in such a positive light as they slowly turn our hospitals into real-time surveillance centers.

      A recent news release by Care.ai revealed that the largest hospital association in the country, the Texas Hospital Association (THA) is using Artificial Intelligence (AI) to monitor patients in real-time.

      “Through this new partnership with care.ai, Texas hospitals will have the opportunity to experience the use of AI in a hands-on local lab environment. They will get to see in real time the value that autonomous monitoring can bring to their facilities. We’re proud to connect our members to cutting-edge technologies that have a transformative impact on healthcare delivery in Texas,” Fernando Martinez, Ph.D., president and CEO of the Texas Hospital Association Foundation said.

      As THA’s “history” page notes, they are easily the largest health care association in the country.

      “Today, THA is one of the largest, most respected health care associations in the country, and the only association that represents the entire Texas hospital industry. The Texas Hospital Association serves as the political and educational advocate for more than 430 hospitals and health systems statewide.”

      If the “most respected health care association in the country” thinks it is OK to use AI to monitor patients in real-time then America’s hospitals have truly become real-time surveillance centers.

      Care ai’s business model is not built on helping patients recover from the coronavirus: it is built on monitoring patients in real-time.

      “Continuous monitoring that can locate and identify individuals and their behaviors in real time, minimizing risks before they happen.”

      According to Care ai they are continuously monitoring everyone in every Texas hospital room. Care ai calls it a “the self aware room”, I call it the real-time surveillance room.

      Care ai has taken smart devices and perverted them into three real-time surveillance devices.

      The AMS-M1, AMS-M2 and AMS-M2R smart devices are packed with cameras and deep learning sensors.

      Question, if Google is donating 10,000 Nest Cameras and Care ai is using multiple smart devices equipped with cameras at what point do we ask, how many surveillance devices are too many?

      There is no word if Google plans to “donate” Nest Hub Max’s to hospitals but if they do, they would turn America’s hospitals into real-time facial recognition centers.

      Do we really want to live in a future where hospitals mirror police department real-time crime centers?  Once hospitals acquire surveillance technology, mission creep dictates that it will grow and grow until there is no turning back.

    • Veterans Affairs Police Buy Riot Gear, Citing COVID-19 Pandemic 
      Veterans Affairs Police Buy Riot Gear, Citing COVID-19 Pandemic 

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 23:05

      The federal government is ramping up new purchases of riot gear, citing the virus pandemic, comes at a time when the economy has plunged into recession, and high unemployment has led to increased anxieties across the country. 

      The Intercept says a recent order made by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) shows “disposable cuffs, gas masks, ballistic helmets, and riot gloves, along with law enforcement protective equipment” were bought for federal police assigned to guard VA facilities. The order was quickly fulfilled under a special authorization “in response to the Covid-19 outbreak.” 

      The VA department operates 1,243 health care facilities, including 170 VA Medical Centers and 1,063 outpatient sites of care in the US, which serves millions of veterans. 

      Redcon Solutions Group is the supplier of the latest contract. The Intercept says the firm received $1.6 in contracts to supply equipment for “Covid-19 screening security guard services.” Other security firms have been awarded similar contracts, providing defensive equipment for federal police who guard VA buildings in San Francisco, Des Moines, and Fayetteville. 

      The purchase order can be explained by the latest Inspector General (IG) report that said a shortage of VA workers and VA police created additional strain on the agency during lockdowns. The IG report said some VA facilities became the site of “COVID-19-related screenings,” which meant the VA needed to beef up security. 

      The Intercept notes federal police at VA facilities were not armed until after 2011, which was around the time the Pentagon started militarizing police forces across the country. 

      “Between 2005 and 2014, VA police departments acquired millions of dollars’ worth of body armor, chemical agents, night vision equipment, and other weapons and tactical gear,” The Intercept said.

      Within the $2.2 trillion CARES Act, there was $850 million for the Coronavirus Emergency Supplemental Funding program, which is a federal grant program that injects new capital into the nation’s police forces. It has been used to cover overtime, increase personal protective equipment, and cover additional expenses related to the virus. 

      The militarization of America’s police forces shown below: 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      President Trump signed an executive order in 2017 allowing police forces to receive military weapons. More recently, President Trump signed an executive order that allows activating up to one million troops. 

      As to why the VA police would need riot gear is beyond anyone’s guess. However, the rapid militarization of police forces over the last decade shows the federal government could be preparing for social unrest. 

    • Can Debt Be Inflated Away?
      Can Debt Be Inflated Away?

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 22:45

      By Paul Donovan, Chief Economist at UBS Global Wealth Management

      • Government debt to GDP ratios rarely fall in periods of high inflation. Since the 1970s, debt reduction has almost always taken place with low inflation.

      • Government spending is strongly linked to inflation. This can be formal (as with the US social security budget) or just because the government is a consumer in the market place and must pay the higher price.

      • If bond investors are hit with unexpected, high inflation they are unlikely to be happy. When this has happened in the past, investors have demanded an insurance against future inflation shocks. This risk premium raises the real cost of borrowing for a government, making it difficult to lower debt ratios over time.

      • Financial repression—a form of taxation where savers are forced to hold bonds—can be combined with inflation to reduce debt ratios. However, this hurts companies and threatens growth. Financial repression without inflation is a more effective solution. Governments are likely to use this method in the future.

      Inflation is a complex topic. Entire books can be written about it. One of the myths that exist about inflation is that governments can easily inflate away their debt levels. In the modern world, government debt-to-GDP ratios rarely fall significantly in periods of high inflation. Since the 1970s, successful debt reduction has almost always taken place with low inflation.

      What inflation should we use?

      When talking about debt, it is income inflation not price inflation that matters. Income inflation makes it easier to pay down debt. If a person has a fixed rate mortgage that is three times their income, and their wages rise three times, then it is a lot easier to pay off the mortgage. Their debt to income ratio goes from 300% to 100%. Their income has “inflated” away their debt ratio.

      For governments, the inflation rate that matters is also income inflation. How much a government’s tax revenue is growing tells you how easily they can pay down debt. This is why government debt is normally measured by the debt-to-GDP ratio. Because governments can tax the income of the domestic economy, the growth of the domestic economy is a quick way of measuring how easily debt can be managed.

      The big difference between people and governments is that people are expected to repay their debt at the end of the mortgage. Governments are not. Governments need to borrow again and again. It is that fact that makes it so difficult for governments to inflate away their debt. It creates two problems.

      Problem one – deficits grow with inflation

      Government spending is increasingly tied to inflation. In the 1970s the US began to formally link social security payments to consumer price inflation. Japan’s pension payments have formally been tied to inflation since the 1970s as well. Even if there is not a formal tie, the government is a consumer in the market just like individuals. If prices go up, the consumer pays more. If building costs go up, then governments will pay more to build infrastructure, for example.

      So while a government’s tax revenues will tend to increase with inflation, a significant part of government spending will also increase with inflation. This means that deficits will increase with inflation. Inflation is unlikely to help reduce the amount of money spent each year. This makes it harder to reduce the overall debt level. But the fact that deficits rise with inflation does not stop debt reduction. It just makes it harder. The real damage is done by the second problem—the reaction of bond markets.

      Problem two – bond markets’ punishment offsets inflation’s help

      Inflation itself is not a problem for bond investors. If investors were sure inflation will be 10% a year for ten years, they would happily buy bonds that covered the inflation cost. Bond yields would be 11.5%, guaranteeing a 1.5% real rate of return. But investors cannot be sure inflation will be 10% a year for ten years. Inflation uncertainty is a problem. If you think inflation is going to be 1% and it turns out to be 10% that is very bad news for the investor.

      In reality, inflation cannot be kept absolutely stable. But if there is an expectation that it will not move much, and tend to get back to trend over time, investors are happy. If inflation starts to rise rapidly, that happiness disappears. Investors start demanding some kind of insurance against the unpredictable nature of inflation. Thus, if inflation jumps from 3% to 6% investors will want payment. They will want a real yield (in normal times, perhaps 1.5%). They will want payment for the inflation (6%). They will also want an insurance premium in case inflation does not turn out to be 6%, but comes in at 8% or 10%. That insurance is known as inflation uncertainty risk. It is worth somewhere between 1% and 1.5%.

      In other words, if governments try to inflate their way out of debt, bond markets will demand a price. And because when a bond matures a new bond takes its place, that inflation uncertainty risk will eventually be charged for all the outstanding debt. It is not just new debt that costs government more. Eventually the existing debt will cost more money too.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      This chart is a simulation of what inflation uncertainty risk will do. This shows that inflation reduces debt ratios a little in the short term. As more and more bonds need to be refinanced, the inflation uncertainty risk raises the cost of borrowing for a larger and larger proportion of the debt. The debt-to-GDP ratio starts to rise, in spite of the inflation.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      This chart shows the two-year change in government debt plotted against the two-year change in inflation, for each OECD country. The data covers 1970 to 2019, where available. Nearly all the debt reductions take place when inflation is low (below 5% per year). High inflation and debt reduction almost never take place at the same time.

      Repression and inflation

      Governments are likely to try to reduce debt levels after the virus by taxation. There is one particular form of tax that is likely to be popular— financial repression. Financial repression is when investors are forced to hold government bonds, at a lower yield than they would freely accept. Investors have been forced to give up some of the yield that they want to the government. Giving up money to the government is a tax, however much it may be disguised.

      Financial repression has been effective in cutting debt in the past. Financial repression also means that bond markets cannot punish governments for inflation (at least, not as easily). Bond yields are forced lower under financial repression. So why not mix repression and inflation together?

      While this mix would cut debt ratios, it would come at quite a high price. Financial repression normally only applies to government bonds. The inflation uncertainty risk would apply to corporate bonds. Without financial repression to help, the real cost of borrowing for companies would rise, hurting economic growth.

      For a government it makes more sense to tax savers through financial repression, while keeping inflation moderate. Adding inflation does not reduce debt in the long term.

    • America's First-Ever Jury Trial By Zoom Streamed Live Today
      America’s First-Ever Jury Trial By Zoom Streamed Live Today

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 22:25

      Seemingly everyone knows about videoconferencing software company Zoom. Friends, family, co-workers, grandparents, and neighbors have stayed connected with video chat during the pandemic. Now a Texas court is preparing to conduct a jury trial by Zoom this week. 

      In a first, lawyers in an insurance dispute in Collin County District Court will present their case on Monday via Zoom to court officials, which will be available to watch on YouTube (click here for live stream — video will be streamed at some point on Monday). Jurours will be able to hear a “condensed version of a case and deliver a non-binding verdict,” reported Reuters

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      “So we are going to have the jurors report through zoom,” 470th District Court Judge Emily Miskel told NBC DFW last week. “Doing a short trial through zoom. Having them deliberate through zoom and give a verdict.”

      Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Nathan Hecht recently said, “it’s just too dangerous” to have people in a “courthouse and make them sit together for days at a time.” 

      Judge Miskel said the Zoom trial could serve as a pilot program to see if the future of trials could one day be virtual. 

      “We’re open to creatively thinking about any way to be able to get the jury trials that they need, to allow citizens to participate in their jury service, and to do it through creative remote ways,” she said.

      US courts have limited operations since mid-March when the pandemic lead to soaring virus cases and deaths. Many states locked down economies and enforced stay-at-home orders for citizens to flatten the pandemic curve. Some courts have already experimented with videoconferencing platforms, but the trial on Monday is a first. 

      Monday’s case is a dispute involving commercial property damages during a severe weather event in 2017. The summary jury trial is non-binding, which means lawyers could settle the matter. If there’s no agreement, a full jury trial will be slated an unknown date. 

      As concerns emerge about a second wave of the virus, courts might have to quickly adopt videoconferencing for trials. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      If all goes well on Monday, virtual trials could soon become the norm. 

    • Ron Paul Rages: Listening To Virus "Experts" Has Led To Death & Despair
      Ron Paul Rages: Listening To Virus “Experts” Has Led To Death & Despair

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 22:05

      Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

      On April 21st the Washington Post savaged Georgia governor Brian Kemp’s decision to begin opening his state after locking down for weeks. “Georgia leads the race to become America’s No. 1 Death Destination,” sneered the headline.

      The author, liberal pundit Dana Milbank, actually found the possibility of Georgians dying to be hilarious, suggesting that, “as a promotion, Georgia could offer ventilators to the first 100 hotel guests to register.”

      Milbank, who is obviously still getting paid while millions are out of work, sees his job as pushing the mainstream narrative that we must remain in fear and never question what “experts” like Dr. Fauci tell us.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Well it’s been three weeks since Milbank’s attack on Georgia and its governor, predicting widespread death which he found humorous. His predictions are about as worthless as his character. Not only has Georgia not seen “coronavirus…burn through Georgia like nothing has since William Tecumseh Sherman,” as Milbank laughed, but Covid cases, hospitalizations, and deaths have seen a steep decline since the governor began opening the state.

      Maybe getting out in the fresh air and sunshine should not have been prohibited in the first place!

      In fact, as we now have much more data, it is becoming increasingly clear that the US states and the countries that locked down the tightest also suffered the highest death rates. Ultra locked-down Italy suffered 495 Covid deaths per million while relatively non-locked down South Korea suffered only five deaths per million. The same is true in the US, where non lockdown states like South Dakota were relatively untouched by the virus while authoritarian-led Michigan, New York, and California have been hardest hit.

      In those hardest hit states, we are now seeing that most of the deaths occurred in senior care facilities – after the governors ordered patients sick with Covid to leave the hospitals and return to their facilities. There, they infected their fellow residents who were most likely to have the multiple co-morbidities and advanced age that turned the virus into a death sentence. Will these governors be made to answer for this callous disregard for life?

      Yesterday, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar admitted the obvious:

      “We are seeing that in places that are opening, we’re not seeing this spike in cases.”

      So why not open everything? Because these petty tyrants cannot stand the idea of losing the ability to push people around.

      Shutting down the entire United States over a virus that looks to be less deadly than an average flu virus – particularly among those under 80 who are not already sick – has resulted in mass unemployment and economic destruction. More Americans may die from the wrong-headed efforts to fight the virus than from the virus itself.

      Americans should pause and reflect on the lies they are being sold. Masks are just a form of psychological manipulation. Many reputable physicians and scientists have said they are worthless and potentially harmful. Lockdowns are meant to condition people to obey without question.

      A nation of people who just do what they are told by the “experts” without question is a nation ripe for a descent into total tyranny.

      This is no empty warning – it’s backed up by history. Time to stand up to all the petty tyrants from our hometowns to Washington DC. It is time to reclaim our freedom.

    • Majority On Wall Street Expects Stocks Lower In 3 Months, Braces For Second Virus Wave
      Majority On Wall Street Expects Stocks Lower In 3 Months, Braces For Second Virus Wave

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 21:45

      Between May 13 -15th, Deutsche Bank conducted its seventh monthly market sentiment survey covering 450 market professionals across the world, in which questions emphasized the covid-19 pandemic around the working from home (WFH) experience as well as also people’s thoughts on the duration of this pandemic, and how that will impact various parts of their lives as well as how market expectations have evolved.

      In terms of WFH it seems that more people are getting comfortable with this being a more regular feature post covid relative to last month. 57% (39% last month) think they’ll do 1-3 days per week WFH in a post-covid world. Those thinking they’ll only do it when they need to has dropped to 31% from 47% last month.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      According to DB’s Jim Reid, “this reflects an improvement in productivity in month two of shutdowns. We’ve seen the net balance of more productive vs less productive WFH increase from -13% to +7%. The amount who claim to be as productive or more productive WFH has gone up from 58% to 69%.” This may reflect IT departments getting more able to handle the vast increase in traffic and end users ensuring their set-up has improved. However, 31% say they are less productive WFH (42% last month), so it’s not for everyone.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The survey reveals an age bias: under 34 year olds were net -5% more productive at home. For 35-44yrs this was flat (0%). For 45-55 yr olds (+19%) and over 55 yr old (+15%) the pendulum swings to them being more productive. This is perhaps a reflection of younger people more likely to live in smaller city flats with less space for an optimum set up. They may also require more mentoring and guidance to thrive. The answer may also be skewed to whether people have young kids at home at the moment? Interestingly across all ages the answer “I am far less productive at home” only received 2-5%. I am “far more productive” saw answers of 12-18% across the ages.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The under 34-year-olds are also the one group most likely to review where they live as a result of covid-19 but on balance they are just about net (+1%) happy with where they live. The older we get, though, the less likely we are to reconsider where we live due to the virus with this peaking forv45-55 year olds (-25%). Urban dwellers of all ages are neutral on balance (0%) as to whether covid-19 will make them assess where they live. Suburban (-22%) and Rural (-46%) dwellers are far less inclined to review where they live post covid-19 though.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      In terms of the virus, people are generally optimistic (74%) on a vaccine being available within 18 months even if only 5% think within six months. Only 4% think that we’ll never see one. 48% think social distancing will only last for the next 6 months with a further 30% thinking an extra 6 months on top.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      A net 55% agree with Lloyd Blankfein that there will be a second wave of the virus and a net 58% agree with shielding the elderly and those with underlying conditions and trying to restart the economy prior to a vaccine being available. Unsurprisingly a net 67% of under 34 year olds agreed with this compared to a net 24% for over 55 year olds.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Some good news: in month two of lockdown it seems people are getting healthier relative to month one. Exercise is up on pre-covid levels now with +12% doing more than they were pre-lockdown (-1% balance last month) and whilst alcohol consumption is up (+6%), it’s less than it was last month (+12%). People are still eating more food (+20% balance) but it’s less than last month (+27%).

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Moving to our more markets-based questions, people still think the covid crisis will be inflationary (47% to 40%) but this has narrowed relative to last month (53% to 32%).

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Now that there are seven months’ worth of data on S&P 500 expectations, Jim Reid was able to see how net expectations measure matches up with market performance through the survey history period. 3-month expectations were closely aligned with price action into the market decline during March but seem to not have caught the rebound through April and so far in May. 12-month expectations had been roughly the inverse, but we have seen long-term expectations roll over this month along with the short-term views.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Given the recent rally in equities and lack of improving economic data in Europe and the US, sentiment has gotten more bearish in the last month, especially in the short term. A majority (42%) see equity prices slightly lower over the next 3 months for the S&P 500 and Stoxx 600, before improving over the next 12 months. However, it is the lowest net higher expectation for the S&P 500 since February as ‘only’ 13% on balance believe the index will be higher a year from now, down from 47% two months ago as the crisis was causing the first big dip in markets. Respondents were torn on 12 month expectations for the Stoxx 600, with an equal number thinking the index would be higher or lower.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      With Treasury yields near all-time lows and further conversations over negative US rates (even as they are opposed by the Fed), expectations lean toward US core rates falling further over the next 3 months (37% vs 17% to rise) but then rising again over 12 months (45% rise against 28% lower). Similarly bund yields are expected to fall by 28% of respondents over 3 months (14% rise), but over 12 months, 38% expect a rise against only 23% expecting further falls.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      There continue to be fairly strong expectations that Italian yields to bunds will widen over the next 3 and 12 months. Net 34% expect wider spreads in 3 months, the most one-sided that short term expectations have been in 5 months of asking. Meanwhile, a net 26% expect wider in 12 months. In terms of Italy being in the Eurozone in 5 years, 14% think it won’t be, which is up from 7% when first asked back in November last year. The budgetary pandemic shock is certainly knocking confidence on this measure.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Finally, with the US election just under 6 months away, a net of 23% believe President Trump will receive a second term, though respondents continue to become steadily more bearish on his re-election chances. Our survey has always heavily favored Trump’s electoral chances but more and more doubts are emerging. The economic fallout of covid-19 and the country’s lingering and sizeable case numbers seem to have dulled any polling bounce Mr. Trump received at the beginning of the outbreak. This is the lowest that respondents have thought his re-election was “extremely likely”. This is now at 14%, having peaked at 63% in February.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    • "This Is Not A Costless Exercise" – The Unintended Consequences Of Monetary Inflation
      “This Is Not A Costless Exercise” – The Unintended Consequences Of Monetary Inflation

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 21:25

      Authored by Alasdair Macleod via GoldMoney.com,

      “In short, the Fed is committed to rescue businesses from the greatest economic catastrophe since the great depression and probably even greater than that, to fund the US Government’s rocketing budget deficits, fund the maintenance of domestic consumption directly or indirectly through the US Treasury, while pumping up financial markets to achieve these objectives and preserve the illusion of national wealth.

      Clearly, we stand on the threshold of an unprecedented monetary expansion.”

      Introduction

      President Reagan memorably said that the nine words you don’t want to hear are “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.” Governments in all the major jurisdictions are now making good on that unwanted promise and are taking responsibility for everything from our shoulders.

      Those receiving subsidies and loan guarantees are no doubt grateful, though they probably see it as the government’s duty and their right. But someone has to pay for it. In the past, by the redistribution of wealth through taxes it meant that the haves were taxed to give financial support to the have-nots, at least that was the story. Today, through monetary debasement nearly everyone benefits from monetary redistribution.

      This is not a costless exercise. Governments are no longer robbing Peter to pay Paul, they are robbing Peter to pay Peter as well. You would think this is widely understood, but the Peters are so distracted by the apparent benefits they might or might not get that they don’t see the cost. They fail to appreciate that printing money is not just the marginal source of finance for excess government spending, but it has now become mainstream.

      There is almost a total absence in the established media of any commentary on the consequences of monetary inflation, and in a cry for more we even have financial experts warning us of a deflationary collapse and the need for the Fed to introduce negative interest rates to stave off deflation. Yes, there are deflationary forces, because banks wish to reduce their loan exposure at a time of increasing risk. But we can be sure central banks and their political masters will do everything they can to counter the trend of contracting bank credit by increasing base money. There can only be one outcome: the debasement and eventual destruction of fiat currencies.

      It was the nineteenth century French economist, Frederic Bastiat, who pointed out there were unseen consequences from violating property. He took the biblical approach of a parable, famous as the broken window fallacy. It is not what is seen, but what is unseen. He told of a boy breaking a window, its destruction giving business to the glazier which he would not otherwise have had. That is seen; unseen is the constructive spending that otherwise would have occurred if the cost of the broken window had not been incurred.

      We see the helicoptered money, the furlough support, and the businesses helped not to go bust. But we do not see the cost. We don’t see how the resources taken up might otherwise be constructively deployed. We are told that the government is paying for it all, but taxes are not being raised.

      Was Reagan’s aphorism wrong after all? If so, the government employee on our doorstep with his offer of help is to be welcomed. He comes bearing gifts. And without an increase in taxes what is not to like?

      Bastiat gave us the answer. Unfortunately, the unseen consequences of apparently costless inflationary financing are myriad, as we will painfully discover.

      The Cantillon effect

      Over a century before Bastiat, an Irish banker in France, Richard Cantillon, observed that new money drove up prices as it was spent. He had experienced John Law’s Mississippi bubble, which was fueled by printed money and the issuance of bank credit, so Cantillon had observed the effect. It made well-connected speculators their fortunes, whose profligate spending drove up prices for everyone else. The effect at that time was that in real terms insiders became rich and the poor got poorer. To this day the process by which this happens is known as the Cantillon effect.

      Now that it is official policy, the lesson for today is that a rapid increase in monetary inflation will, as the effects trickle through the economy, further impoverish the poor. It will do this by driving up prices of their essentials and reducing the purchasing power of their salaries, if they are lucky enough to still be employed. But as Cantillon pointed out in his Essai, reflecting the increased quantity of circulating money prices rise unevenly. Never has it been truer than today, when we face the combination of an unprecedented slump in economic activity combined with a sharp escalation in monetary inflation: the rich whose stocks are rising can buy their expensive toys at knockdown prices, while the poor, increasing numbers of which are newly unemployed, struggle to make ends meet with rising prices for life’s essentials.

      It gets worse. Just as in Cantillon’s day, modern monetary policy is aimed at maintaining and increasing financial asset values. John Law’s puffery attempted to inflate the combination of his Banque Royale and his Mississippi ventures. Today it is all government bond markets, corporate debt, and stocks and shares. The intention is to maintain and further a wealth effect to replace the true wealth that has been lost, originally accumulated by entrepreneurs and businessman serving the consumer successfully. All we have now is John Law-style puffery.

      The enrichment of the few at the expense of the many is a finite process. The outcome will inevitably be the same: Law’s scheme began to run into headwinds in December 1719, and by the following September his unbacked currency had failed. It was dead, worthless, an ex-currency. The empirical evidence is clear. Central banks emulating Law’s scheme today will destroy their currencies and everything that floats on their seas of paper credit and debt. The rapidity of the collapse of the Mississippi scheme strongly suggests that once control over bond prices is lost the contemporary financial and monetary collapse will be similarly swift.

      For this reason, understanding the consequences of monetary inflation spiralling out of control has never been more important. We should know what they are from a study of sound economic theory and empirical evidence. The poor will starve and many of those who became rich through financial asset inflation will eventually join them. For the latter class, there will come a point where they abandon a failing dollar-based inflation scheme to save what they can from the financial wreckage.

      Distortions and misallocations of capital

      There is an aspect of the destruction brought about by monetary policy, which is almost never considered by policy makers, and that is how it distorts the allocation of capital and leads to its misallocation. In free markets, capital is scarce and must be used to greatest effect if the consumer is to be properly served and the entrepreneur is to maximise his profits.

      Capital comes in several forms and encompasses every aspect of production; principally an establishment, machinery, labour, semi-manufactured goods and commodities to be processed, and money. An establishment, such as a factory or offices, and the availability of labour are relatively fixed in their capacity. Depending on their deployment and capacity they produce a limited amount of goods. It is just the one form of capital, that is money and credit, which central banks and the banking system now provide, and which in its unbacked form is infinitely flexible. Consequently, attempts to stimulate production by monetary means run into the capacity constraints of the other forms of capital.

      Monetary policy has been increasingly used to manipulate capital allocation since the early days of the great depression in the 1930s. The effect has varied but it has generally come up against the constraints of the other forms of capital. Where there is excess labour, it takes time to retrain it with the specialist skills required, a process hampered by trade unions ostensibly protecting their members, but in reality, resisting reallocation of labour resources. Government control over planning and increasingly stifling regulations, again putting a brake on change, meant that changes and additions to the use of establishments lengthen the time before entrepreneurial investment was rewarded with profits. Government intervention has also discouraged the withdrawal of monetary capital from unprofitable deployment, or malinvestments, lengthening recessions needlessly.

      When the advanced nations had strong industrial cores, the periodic expansions of credit and their subsequent sudden contractions led to observable booms and busts in the classical sense, since production of labour-intensive consumer goods dominated production overall.

      There were then two further developments. The first was the abandonment of the Bretton Woods agreement in 1971, which led to a substantial rise in prices for commodities. According to the broad-based UN index of commodities rose from 33 to 157 during the decade, a rise of 376%. This input category of production capital compared unfavourably with US consumer price increases over the decade of 112%, the mismatch between these and other categories of capital allocation making economic calculation a fruitless exercise. The second development was the liberation of financial controls in the mid-eighties, London’s big-bang and the repeal of America’s Glass Steagall Act of 1933, allowing commercial banks to fully embrace and exploit investment banking activities.

      The banking cartel increasingly directed its ability to create credit towards purely financial activities mainly for their own books, thereby financing financial speculation, while de-emphasising bank credit expansion for production purposes for all but the larger corporations. Partly in response, the nineties saw businesses move production to low-cost centres in South-East Asia where all forms of production capital, with the exception of monetary capital, were significantly cheaper and more flexible.

      There then commenced a quarter-century of expansion of international trade replacing much of the domestic production of goods in the US, the UK, and Europe. It was these events that denuded America of its manufacturing, not unfair competition as President Trump has alleged and Germany’s retention of manufactures proves. But the effect has been to radically alter how we should interpret the effects of monetary expansion on the US economy and others, compared with Hayekian triangles and the like.

      Business cycle research had assumed a capitalistic structure of savers saving and thereby making monetary capital available to entrepreneurs. Changes in the propensity to save sent contrary signals to businesses about the propensity to consume, which caused them to alter their production plans. Based on the ratio between consumer spending and savings, this analytic model has been corrupted by the state and its licensed banks by replacing savers with former savers now no longer saving, and even borrowing to consume.

      Today, the inflationary origins of investment funds for business development are hidden through financial intermediation by venture capital funds, quasi-government funds and others. Being mandatory, pension funds continue to invest savings, but their beneficiaries have abandoned voluntary saving and run up debts, so even pension funds are not entirely free of monetary inflation. Insurance funds alone appear to be comprised of genuine savings within an inflationary system.

      Other than pension funds and insurance companies, Keynes’s wish for the euthanasia of the saver has been achieved. He went on to suggest there would be a time “when we might aim in practice… at an increase in the volume of capital until it ceases to be scarce, so that the functionless investor will no longer receive a bonus…”

      Now that everywhere bank deposits pay no interest, his wish has been granted, but Keynes did not foresee the unintended consequences of his inflationist policies which are now being visited upon us. Among other errors, he failed to adequately account for the limitation of non-monetary forms of capital, which leads to bottlenecks and rising prices as monetary expansion proceeds.

      The unintended consequences of neo-Keynesian policy failures are shortly to be exposed. The checks and balances on the formation and deployment of monetary capital in the free market system based on the division of labour have been completely destroyed and replaced by inflation. So, where do you take us from here, Mr Powell, Mr Bailey, Ms Lagarde, Mr Kuroda?

      Taking stock

      We can now say that America, the nation responsible for the world’s reserve currency, has encouraged policies which have turned its economy from being a producer of goods with supporting services as the source of its citizens’ wealth into little more than a financial casino. The virtues of saving and thrift have been replaced by profligate spending funded by debt. Unprofitable businesses are being supported until the hoped-for return of easier times, which are now gone.

      Cash and bank deposits (checking accounts and savings deposits) are created almost entirely by inflation, and currently total $15.2 trillion in the US, while total commercial bank capital is a little under $2 trillion. This tells us crudely that $13 trillion sitting in customer accounts can be attributed to bank credit inflation. Increasing proportions of those customers are financial corporations and foreign entities, and not consumers maintaining cash and savings balances.

      On the other side of bank balance sheets is consumer debt, mostly off-balance sheet, but ultimately funded on-balance sheet. Excluding mortgages, the total comprised of credit cards, autos and student debt was $3.86 trillion in mid-2019, amounting to an average debt of $27,571 per household, confirming the extent to which consumer debt has replaced savings.

      At $20.5 trillion, bank balance sheets are far larger than just the sum of cash and bank deposits, giving them a leverage of over ten times their equity. Bankers will be very nervous of the current economic situation, aware that loan and other losses of only ten per cent wipes out their capital. Meanwhile, their corporate customers are either shut down, which means most of their expenses continue while they have no income, or they are suffering payment disruptions in their supply chains. In short, bank loan books are staring at disaster. Effectively, the whole banking system is underwater at the same time as the Fed is extolling them to join with it in rescuing the economy by expanding their balance sheets even more.

      The sums involved in supply chains are considerably larger than the US’s GDP. Onshore, it is a substantial part of the nation’s gross output, which captures supply chain payments at roughly $38 trillion. Overseas, there is a further mammoth figure feeding into the dollar supply chain, taking the total for America to perhaps $50 trillion. The Fed is backstopping the foreign element through currency swaps and the domestic element mainly through the commercial banking system. And it is indirectly funding government attempts to support consumers who are in the hole for that $27,571 on average per household.

      In short, the Fed is committed to rescue all business from the greatest economic collapse since the great depression, and probably greater than that, to fund the US Government’s rocketing budget deficits, fund the maintenance of domestic consumption directly or indirectly through the US Treasury, while pumping financial markets to achieve these objectives and preserve the illusion of national wealth.

      Clearly, we stand on the threshold of an unprecedented monetary expansion. Part of it will be, John Law style, to ensure inflated prices for US Treasuries are maintained. At current interest rates debt servicing was already costing the US Government 40% of what was expected to be this year’s government deficit. That bill will now rise beyond control even without bond yields rising. Assistance is also being provided to the corporate debt market. Blackrock has been deputed to channel the Fed’s money-printed investment through ETFs specialising in this market. So not only is the Fed underwriting the rapidly expanding US Treasury market, but it is underwriting commercial dollar debt as well.

      In late-1929, a rally in the stock market was prolonged by a similar stimulus, with banks committed to buying stocks and the Fed injecting $100m liquidity into markets by buying government securities. Interest rates were cut. And when these attempts at maintaining asset prices failed, the Dow declined, losing 89% of its value from September 1929.

      Today, similar attempts to rescue economies and financial markets by monetary expansion are common to all major central banks, with the possible exception of the ECB, which faces the unexpected obstacle of a challenge by the German Constitutional Court claiming primacy in these matters. There is therefore an added risk that the global inflation scheme will unravel in Europe, which if it does will rapidly lead to funding and banking crises for the spendthrift member states. Doubtless, any financial contagion will require yet more money-printing by the other major central banks to ensure there are no bank failures in their domains.

      Whither the exit?

      So far, few commentators have grasped the implications of what amounts to the total nationalisation of the American economy by monetary means. They have only witnessed the start of it, with the Fed’s balance sheet reflecting the earliest stages of the new inflation which has seen its balance sheet increase by 61% so far this year. Not only will the Fed battle to fund everything, but it will also have to compensate for contracting bank credit, which we know stands at about $18 trillion.

      The Fed must be assuming the banks will cooperate and pass on the required liquidity to save the economy. Besides the monetary and operational hurdles such a policy faces, it cannot expect the banks will want responsibility for the management of businesses that without this funding would not exist. The Fed, or some other government agency has to then decide one of three broad options: further support, withdrawing support, or taking responsibility for business activities. This last option involves full nationalisation.

      We must not be seduced into thinking this is an outcome that can work. The nationalisation of failing banks and their eventual privatisation is not a good precedent for wider nationalisation, because a bank does not require the entrepreneurial flair to estimate future consumer demand and to undertake the economic calculations to provide for it. The state taking over business activities fails for this reason, demonstrated by the collapse of totalitarian states such as the USSR and the China of Mao Zedong.

      That leaves a stark choice between indefinite monetary support or pulling the rug from under failing businesses. There are no prizes for guessing that pulling rugs will be strongly resisted. Therefore, government support for failing businesses is set to continue indefinitely.

      At some stage, the dawning realisation that central banks and their governments are steering into this economic cul-de-sac will undermine government bond yields, despite attempts by central banks to stop it, even if the deteriorating outlook for fiat currencies’ purchasing power does not destroy government finances first.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Earlier in the descent into the socialisation of money, nations had opportunities to change course. Unfortunately, they had neither the knowledge nor the guts to divine and implement a return to free markets and sound money. Those opportunities no longer exist and there can be only one outcome: the total destruction of fiat currencies accompanied by all the hardships that go with it.

    • "Bumper Tables" For Socially-Distant Dining Appear In Maryland
      “Bumper Tables” For Socially-Distant Dining Appear In Maryland

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 21:05

      Vistors are headed back to Ocean City, Maryland’s beach and boardwalk after Gov. Larry Hogan relaxes the stay-at-home order. At one restaurant over the weekend, a post-corona world was recognized with what is being called a socially distant dining experience, reported The Baltimore Sun.

      Shaped like a giant donut with an outer perimeter lined with an inner tube, the socially distant tables were custom made for Fish Tales waterfront restaurant. The restaurant posted a Facebook Live video of employees unloading the new tables from a large box truck. 

      “It’s like a bumper boat, but it’s a table,” Fish Tales owner Shawn Harmon told Delmarva Daily Times, referring to the design of the table, which was created by a Baltimore-based design firm. 

      A customer stands in the center of the table surrounded by a rubber barrier that keeps patrons about six-feet apart. The tables have wheels and allow patrons to move around the restaurant. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Several months of lockdowns have led to restaurants and bars shuttering operations across Maryland — except for carryout and delivery service. The state inched into phase one of its Roadmap to Recovery, dining in could become a reality later this year, that is if a second virus wave doesn’t materialize

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Fish Tales is providing curbside and carryout service at the moment, with preparations to reopen its restaurant and bar when restrictions are lifted. 

      Erin Cermak, the owner of Revolution, the firm responsible for designing and producing the tables, said: “we’re an event company, and events have taken a hard hit, so we’ve been trying to figure out a way that events and things can still happen.” 

      She said they’ve gotten an “incredible reaction” so far and are in discussions with other restaurants. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Hogan made the announcement last week to relax stay-at-home orders and reopen the state. Though reopening the state will not return Maryland nor any other part of the country back to 2019 growth levels. Businesses and households have been finally damaged because of lockdowns. 

      Current US reopening timeline 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      At least a quarter of restaurants in the US are expected to fail. Many that remain open will have to develop creative technologies with social distancing in mind to attract patrons. 

      We noted last week, McDonald’s opened a prototype restaurant outfitted with a new social distancing layout. The move is to test new safety measures for guests and employees that will limit the spread of the virus once lockdowns are relaxed. 

      The restaurant industry will be severely impacted and might not return to 2019 activity levels for years. 

    • Nasdaq Imposes Restrictions On Chinese IPOs, Halting Futures Rally
      Nasdaq Imposes Restrictions On Chinese IPOs, Halting Futures Rally

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 21:00

      In a move that anyone who has ever invested in a Chinese fraud stock (which one can argue are most of them) will argue is long overdue, late on Monday Reuters reported that the Nasdaq is set to unveil new restrictions on initial public offerings, in a move that will make it more difficult for some Chinese companies to debut on its stock exchange.

      While Nasdaq will not cite Chinese companies specifically in the changes, according to Reuters, the move is being driven by concerns about some of the Chinese IPO hopefuls’ lack of accounting transparency and close ties to powerful insiders.

      And since the Nasdaq move, which may well be prompted by legitimate widespread concerns about shady Chinese accounting, comes just days after the Trump administration barred a government retirement fund from investing in Chinese equities, it will be seen by Beijing as another political intervention in soft capital controls imposed by the US vis-a-vis Chinese equities, inviting further retaliation from China against this “latest flashpoint in the financial relationship between the world’s two largest economies.”

      Nasdaq also unveiled some restrictions on listings last year, seeking to curb IPOs by small Chinese companies. Their shares often trade thinly because most stay in the hands of a few insiders. Their low liquidity makes them unattractive to many large institutional investors, to whom Nasdaq is seeking to cater.

      Whatever the reason behind the move, it has been a long time coming, considering the ease with which countless Chinese frauds are allowed to list in the US and soak up capital of gullible US investors. Last month, Luckin Coffee which had a U.S. IPO in early 2019, announced that an internal investigation had shown its chief operating officer and other employees fabricated sales deals.

      The new rules will require companies from some countries, including China, to raise $25 million in their IPO or, alternatively, at least a quarter of their post-listing market capitalization, the Reuters sources said. This would represent the first time Nasdaq has put a minimum value on the size of IPOs. The change would have prevented several Chinese companies currently listed on the Nasdaq from going public. Out of 155 Chinese companies that listed on Nasdaq since 2000, 40 grossed IPO proceeds below $25 million, according to Refinitiv data. 

      And while it was not immediately clear how many of these IPOs were Chinese, Reuters notes that Chinese firms have historically pursued such small IPOs because they allow their founders and backers to cash out, rewarding them with U.S. dollars they cannot easily access because of China’s capital controls. And they have US bagholders, and lax exchange listing standards to thank. At the same time, these newly IPOed frauds would also use their Nasdaq-listed status to convince lenders in China to fund them and often get subsidies from Chinese local authorities for becoming publicly traded.

      Finally, the proposed rules will also require auditing firms to ensure that their international franchises comply with global standards, and Nasdaq will also inspect the auditing of small U.S. firms that audit the accounts of Chinese IPO hopefuls, the sources added.

      The news of the restriction hit S&P futures – which were on their way to regaining the 2950 handle that had failed twice – slid to session lows below the key resistance level on a day when there was no talk of trade war, and instead the market was obsessing over what in retrospect will end up being one giant “Made in the US” bait-and-switch by Moderna, which sold $1.25BN in stock after soaring earlier in the day on news of a “successful” Phase 1 coronavirus vaccine trial which involved eight “young and healthy” people.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Meanwhile, ahead of the Nasdaq news and perhaps sensing what was coming, China has been urging domestic companies to look at listing in London, Reuters also reported earlier in the day, as the country aims to revive deals under a Stock Connect scheme and strengthen overseas ties in the wake of the coronavirus crisis.

      The Shanghai-London Stock Connect scheme, which began operating last year, aims to build links between Britain and China, help Chinese companies expand their investor base and give mainland investors access to UK-listed companies.

      The original plan was for several companies to take part in the scheme in the first couple of years, but so far only one company — Huatai Securities — made the trip from Shanghai to London last June.

      But now Chinese authorities have given the go-ahead for China Pacific Insurance and SDIC Power to move ahead with their London-listing plans, the sources said, after both deals were halted last year.

      They also gave the nod to China Yangtze Power (600900.SS) to begin preparations for a secondary listing on the London Stock Exchange, the sources said, speaking on condition of anonymity as the matter is confidential.

      The sources, including officials from banks, government and exchanges, said that the aim was to push for a resumption of listings under the Stock Connect scheme as China seeks to improve ties with the outside world and help to fund its post-lockdown recovery. “In the second half of this year, we could see one or maybe two Chinese companies list in London,” said one of the sources, who is closely involved in the process.

      “China is among the first countries to come out of lockdown, and is keen to get back on track with plans to improve trade relations with the UK,” he added, by which he of course meant finding more gullible, naive investors to part with their money after investing in the next Chinese Luckin-like fraud, especially if the US window is closing.

    • The Revenge Of "Bobo The Clown"? How The Media Is Inadvertently Reelecting Donald Trump
      The Revenge Of “Bobo The Clown”? How The Media Is Inadvertently Reelecting Donald Trump

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 20:45

      Authored by Jonathan Turley,

      Various media outlets are struggling with recent polls that not only show President Trump at the same popularity as this time last year but actually rising in states like Ohio. When one poll found him leading by 7 points in battleground states, John King cautioned viewers to “be careful not to invest too much in any one poll” especially amid the coronavirus.

      It was a CNN poll and, while Biden leads in other polls, it is not unique.

      The media seems honestly confused. It was not supposed to work this way. With unrelentingly negative coverage of an impeachment, a pandemic, and an economic collapse, voters were supposed to be angry. There is even a psychological model for such social cognitive learning or conditioning called “Bobo the Clown” and, while this experiment by psychologist Albert Bandura, these polls suggest that conditioning does not work nearly as well in politics as it does on playgrounds.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      In 1961, Bandura used a goofy inflatable clown named Bobo and had children watch adults as they acted aggressively toward it. Soon the children followed the adults’ example and beat the clown. Conversely, when children watched the clown being treated without aggression, they were less aggressive toward it.

      For many voters, Donald Trump and Joe Biden are not so funny clowns, and voters are being conditioned by some in the media to treat one aggressively and the other not aggressively. It is not the first attempt at media conditioning: In 2016, when every poll indicated that voters wanted outsider candidates, Democratic leaders pushed through one of the two most unpopular presidential candidates in history, Hillary Clinton.

      She was beaten by the other most unpopular figure on the Republican side, Trump. Yet, after largely positive treatment of Clinton and correspondingly negative coverage of Trump, the election results stunned experts who predicted an easy win for Clinton — and why not? Voters had been exposed to unyielding, continual media conditioning against Trump.

      The conclusion of the media today appears to be that the scathing treatment in 2016 was not aggressive enough. Trump is routinely called an actual clown by some in the media. More importantly, there are now consistent attacks on Trump supporters. Washington Post “conservative columnist” Jennifer Rubin has declared that Trump supporters as a whole are racists. That common stereotyping of Trump supporters is uncontested, even as the media objects to Trump’s generalizations about other groups.

      Columnist Leonard Pitts wrote a recent column entitled, “No, it’s not the economy, stupid. Trump supporters fear a black and brown America.” The narrative has moved beyond Clinton’s description of Trump supporters as a “basket of deplorables” to now portraying all Trump supporters as open racists. “Make America Great Again” hats are denounced by academics as the symbol of “modern day hitlerjugend” and hate speech.

      It is all part of media-cognitive learning, and it is working in a curious way. Recent polls show Trump at the exact same spot as he was last year, with roughly 43 percent support. In Ohio he actually is ahead by 3 percentage points in a survey from Emerson College and Nexstar Media; he and Biden are in a statistical dead heat in Wisconsin. In other words, as in 2016, the media campaign is forcing Trump supporters into the closet, but not away from Trump.

      Meanwhile, the media has been working hard at non-aggressive treatment of Biden. His frequent gaffes are quickly dismissed; when he was accused of sexual assault, the media reluctantly noted the story. Even when Biden recently espoused a conspiracy theory that Trump was going to halt the November election, the media called it a “prediction” and ignored that it was based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the Constitution.

      At the end of last year, the Media Research Center found that network evening news was 96 percent negative against Trump. The drumbeat has only increased with impeachment and pandemic coverage this year. Despite such saturated messaging, polls show that the number of voters expressing strong “enthusiasm” for Biden is wallowing at just 24 percent, while Trump remains at 53 percent. Biden is just 3 points ahead of Trump in the most recent polls, actually behind where Clinton was in 2016. The reason may be that the anti-Trump narrative is so overwhelming that voters feel they are being played like the kids in the Bandura experiment.

      Consider again the recent attack of the Post’s Rubin on most Republicans. Rubin lashed out at the immigration freeze ordered by Trump during the pandemic; however, she was not satisfied with denouncing the policy as a political stunt to appeal to the unemployed. She declared:

      “No doubt Trump’s base is primarily motivated by racism. This is why Trump does this.”

      The statement captures the accepted, unhinged bias against all Trump supporters in the mainstream media.

      I did not vote for Trump, and I have regularly criticized him in columns and blog posts. However, I have watched the stereotyping of Trump supporters at media conferences for years. It suggests that roughly 63 million people in this country who voted for Trump in 2016 are knuckle-dragging racists. It ignores the fact that Hillary Clinton had record negative polling before the nomination and was widely viewed as pathologically inauthentic.

      Recently, polls show 85 percent of Republicans support Trump. Thus, according to Rubin, 85 percent of Republicans (and roughly 10 percent of Democrats and 47 percent of independents) — in other words, almost half of America — are primarily motivated by racism. Does that track with any sense of reality? There are a host of reasons for these voters to support Trump other than racism.

      What is not being discussed much in the media is that people might have non-racist reasons for supporting Trump. The fact is that Trump has a curious record: He has been repeatedly (and correctly) chastised for untrue statements, and yet he has one of the best records for actually keeping campaign promises — the crackdown on immigration, building of the border wall, pro-life policies and appointments, selection of conservative jurists, tax cuts, regulation rollbacks, opening up areas to oil drilling.

      These and many other aspects of his administration are the most controversial but also are the long-held wish list of conservatives going back to Ronald Reagan. Indeed, while 85 percent of Republicans support Trump, a new poll shows that 23 percent would like to see someone else as their nominee. Yet, Rubin and others simply dismiss all Trump supporters as monolithic, pathological racists.

      Thus, polls indicate that the unending attacks on Trump and his supporters in the media are not conditioning but, instead, are repelling voters. They are fulfilling his narrative that voters cannot trust the media. Many voters may still view both Trump and Biden as over-inflated clowns, but they resent being continually conditioned to hit one clown and hug the other.

      Indeed, if Trump is reelected, he may have the media to thank.

    • The Oil Rally Is Running On Fumes
      The Oil Rally Is Running On Fumes

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 20:38

      Submitted by Nick Cunningham at Oilprice.com

      Oil prices have surged to two-month highs on growing signs of a rebound in oil demand, as the easing of lockdowns spread worldwide. At its peak in April, global lockdown measures affected around 3.9 billion people. But an estimated 3.7 billion people are now living in areas that are experiencing some version of a “reopening,” according to an estimate from Raymond James. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Data from China has stoked some bullishness in oil markets, although there are some mixed signals. Traffic is back in many Chinese cities, and there are early signs that China’s oil demand is rising back close to pre-pandemic levels around 13 million barrels per day (mb/d). 

      At the same time, a new coronavirus cluster in China suddenly sparked another lockdown measure. While Wuhan and other regions may be opening up, roughly 108 million people in Jilin province just went into lockdown. It’s a sign that the fight against COVID-19 will likely be frustrated by repeated flare ups in new cases, which may ultimately lead to renewed lockdowns. 

      But for now, the markets apparently want to focus on the positive. On the global vaccine front, there appears to be some progress. Moderna said on Monday that its vaccine has shown to be safe in humans and has also demonstrated promising results in stopping COVID-19. Meanwhile, AstraZeneca said it could have 30 million doses of its vaccine ready by September.

      Financial equities rejoiced, with the Dow Jones up roughly 3.5 percent during midday trading. WTI surged past $30 per barrel, up at one point on Monday by more than 10 percent. 

      Massive supply cuts go even further in explaining the recent jump in prices. Oil traders view the implementation of the OPEC+ cuts favorably, with the 9.7 mb/d cuts phasing in swiftly. Part of the reason is that some oil producers, including Saudi Arabia, began having difficulty finding a home for its oil, so a portion of the cuts arguably became involuntary. 

      Meanwhile, weeks of catastrophically low oil prices ravaged North American oil producers over the past two months. Shut ins could reach 2 mb/d in the U.S. by June, and Canada could lose 1 mb/d. 

      But a reality check is in order. WTI at $30 per barrel is suddenly seen as “bullish,” but that price level is financially unsustainable for a vast swathe of global oil supply, including most of the U.S. shale complex. 

      Moreover, the physical oil market is not “out of the woods” just yet, according to Rystad Energy. “We still see a 13.7 million bpd implied liquids (crude, condensate, NGLs, others) stock builds in May-20,” the firm said in a statement. That is down by half from the peak of the glut (-26.7 mb/d in inventory builds in April), but a significant overhang remains. 

      Separately, Commerzbank argued that the oil market optimism may be running a little too far. “Despite all the euphoria, however, we believe that caution is still advisable: it will probably take some years before demand recovers to its pre-crisis level,” Commerzbank wrote on Monday.

      U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell warned that the American economy recovery could take until the end of 2021. “It could stretch through the end of next year. We really don’t know,” Powell said over the weekend. He noted that the economy might not return to normal simply because stay-at-home-orders are in the process of going away. “For the economy to fully recover people will have to be fully confident, and that may have to await the arrival of a vaccine,” Powell added.

      In addition, the price rally may also be the result of speculative positioning – the physical market is trending towards rebalancing, but the rally can also be explained by overly exuberant speculative positioning. “Retail and institutional investors are also likely to have played a key part in the latest price rise. According to the CFTC, the latter expanded their net long positions in WTI on the NYMEX to around 352,000 contracts in the week to 12 May, putting them at their highest level since September 2018,” Commerzbank added. “Thus the positive trends (for the oil price) are largely expected and already priced in.”

      The lockdowns are lifting, but there is nothing to suggest that the end of the pandemic is near, or that oil supply will remain shut in. “[T]here is significant downside risk related to two events, the resurgence in COVID-19 outbreaks, and deteriorating compliance to OPEC+ cuts as demand comes back,” Rystad warned. 

    • Fearing An Imminent Top, Companies Flood The Market With Stock For Sale After The Close
      Fearing An Imminent Top, Companies Flood The Market With Stock For Sale After The Close

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 20:25

      Last week was remarkable for the capital markets, not because the S&P did something crazy (it actually suffered its biggest weekly drop in months) but because the companies that comprise it appeared to make a collective decision that after its 30% rebound from the March 23 lows, that was as good as it gets and proceeded to flood the market with follow-on and secondary equity offerings.

      As we reported before, in just the first three days of the week, public companies raised more cash from selling shares than in any week in eight years. According to Bloomberg calculations, investment banks conducted no less than 16 secondary offerings on U.S. exchanges in the Monday thru Wednesday interval in stocks such as Zillow, Equinix, MyoKardia, YETI Holdings, and Q2 Holdings Inc. Over that three-day interval, companies raised more than $17 billion from investors, the most since 2012, thanks largely to PNC selling $12.1 billion of its BlackRock shares in the second-largest offering since 2009. That made for the busiest week of 2020.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Buyers – mostly retail investors – have been undaunted by warnings from either Fed Chair Jerome Powell, who cautioned about unprecedented downside risk to the economy, from Goldman Sachs which we first reported said stocks could drop nearly 20% in the next three months, or by investing titans who say this is the most overbought market in history. No, these are retail investors who know better than even corporate management…

      “Now’s the time to act. The rally is extremely fragile,” said Michael Purves, CEO of Tallbacken Capital Advisors, who spent 12 years advising companies on mergers and capital-raising. “When you’re a CFO or a board director of a company in a capital intensive industry, you raise money so that you don’t lose your job. That’s 100% the right thing to do now.”

      More importantly, you raise money when you think the top is in so you don’t leave any on the table. Like now… because after last week’s torrid pace of equity offerings, at least thirteen equity offerings launched after the market closed Monday, the busiest evening of 2020 for such deals, as stocks that surged during the Covid-19 crisis thanks to a frenzy of retail buying, are now tapping the same retail investors for more cash, and follow on last week’s furious offering that raised more cash than in any week in eight years.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      That said, unlike some prior share sales from distressed sectors, Bloomberg notes that almost all of Monday’s deals came from stocks that outperformed since the coronavirus began rattling U.S. markets in late February. Of the thirteen secondary offerings launched so far, all but two have outperformed the Nasdaq Composite Index since March 1.

      Moderna for example, launched the largest of three stock offerings since going public in 2018 after Monday’s 20% rally capped off a more than 300% gain this year on very hasty speculation that the company’s Phase 1 trial which included 8 participants, was supposedly successful when it was, at best, noise.  Fastly also sold shares after rising 69% since May 6, when it boosted its 2020 revenue forecast due to stay-at-home measures.

      Below is a summary of the post-market launches of secondary offerings:

      Avantor (AVTR) 45m shares, trades May 21

      • Bookrunners: Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan
      • Shares -7.0% post-market
      • Seller: Holders

      Bellerophon (BLPH) Shares offered at $13 each

      • Bookrunner: Jefferies
      • Shares -15% post-market
      • Seller: Company

      Cable One (CABO) $400m of shares, trades May 20

      • Bookrunners: JPMorgan, BoFA, Wells Fargo
      • Shares little changed post-market
      • Seller: Company

      Carvana (CVNA) 5m shares at $93-$96

      • Bookrunners: Citi, Wells Fargo
      • Shares -4.8% post-market
      • Seller: Company

      Clovis Oncology (CLVS) $85m of shares at $8.05-$8.50

      • Bookrunners: JPMorgan, BofA
      • Shares -6.9% post-market
      • Seller: Company

      Fastly (FSLY) 6m shares, trades May 21

      • Bookrunners: Morgan Stanley, Citi, BofA, Credit Suisse, William Blair, Raymond James, Baird, Oppenheimer, Stifel, Craig- Hallum, DA Davidson
      • Shares -1.7% post-market
      • Seller: Company

      Gamida Cell (GMDA) Shares offered at $4.50-$5.00

      • Bookrunners: Piper Sandler, Evercore Group, JMP
      • Shares -13% post-market
      • Seller: Company

      Gossamer Bio (GOSS) Shares offered at $13.25- $13.75

      • Bookrunners: BofA, SVB Leerink
      • Shares -11% post- market
      • Seller: Company

      Houlihan Lokey (HLI) 3m shares at $63.50- $64.00

      • Bookrunners: Goldman Sachs
      • Shares -0.8% post-market
      • Seller: Company

      Hexo (HEXO) No terms

      • Bookrunner: Canaccord
      • Shares -12% post-market
      • Seller: Company

      Krystal Biotech (KRYS) Shares offered at $55-$56

      • Bookrunners: Cowen, Evercore
      • Shares -1.2% post- market
      • Seller: Company

      Moderna (MRNA) $1.25b of shares at $75.00- $77.50

      • Bookrunner: Morgan Stanley
      • Shares -3.2% post-market
      • Seller: Company

      RealPage (RP) $300m of shares, trades May 20

      • Bookrunners: Goldman Sachs, BofA Securities, Wells Fargo
      • Shares -3.2% post- market
      • Seller: company
      • Notes: Also offering $300m of convertible bonds

      Source: Bloomberg

    • The Sun "Has Gone Into Lockdown", And This Strange Behavior Could Worsen Global Food Shortages
      The Sun “Has Gone Into Lockdown”, And This Strange Behavior Could Worsen Global Food Shortages

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 20:05

      Authored by Michael Snyder via The End of The American Dream blog,

      At a time when the world is already being hit with major crisis after major crisis, our sun is behaving in ways that we have never seen before.  For as long as records have been kept, the sun has never been quieter than it has been in 2019 and 2020, and as you will see below we are being warned that we have now entered “a very deep solar minimum”.  Unfortunately, other very deep solar minimums throughout history have corresponded with brutally cold temperatures and horrific global famines, and of course this new solar minimum comes at a time when the United Nations is already warning that we are on the verge of “biblical” famines around the worldSo we better hope that the sun wakes up soon, because the alternative is almost too horrifying to talk about.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Without the sun, life on Earth could not exist, and so the fact that it is behaving so weirdly right now should be big news.

      Sadly, most mainstream news outlets are largely ignoring this story, but at least a few are covering it.  The following comes from Forbes

      While we on Earth suffer from coronavirus, our star—the Sun—is having a lockdown all of its ownSpaceweather.com reports that already there have been 100 days in 2020 when our Sun has displayed zero sunspots.

      That makes 2020 the second consecutive year of a record-setting low number of sunspots— which you can see (a complete absence of) here.

      And here is what the New York Post is saying…

      Our sun has gone into lockdown, which could cause freezing weather, earthquakes and famine, scientists say.

      The sun is currently in a period of “solar minimum,” meaning activity on its surface has fallen dramatically.

      Experts believe we are about to enter the deepest period of sunshine “recession” ever recorded as sunspots have virtually disappeared.

      Yes, covering COVID-19 is important, but the fact that scientists are warning that we are potentially facing “freezing weather, earthquakes and famine” should be deeply alarming for all of us.

      And since the mainstream media has been largely silent on this crisis, most Americans don’t even know that it exists.

      Last year, there were no sunspots at all 77 percent of the time, and so far this year there have been no sunspots at all 76 percent of the time

      “This is a sign that solar minimum is underway,” reads SpaceWeather.com. “So far this year, the Sun has been blank 76% of the time, a rate surpassed only once before in the Space Age. Last year, 2019, the Sun was blank 77% of the time. Two consecutive years of record-setting spotlessness adds up to a very deep solar minimum, indeed.”

      So why is this such a big deal?

      Well, every once in a while a very deep solar minimum that lasts for several decades comes along, and when our planet has experienced such periods in the past the consequences have been quite dramatic.

      For example, the New York Post is claiming that NASA scientists fear that we could potentially be facing “a repeat of the Dalton Minimum”…

      NASA scientists fear it could be a repeat of the Dalton Minimum, which happened between 1790 and 1830 — leading to periods of brutal cold, crop loss, famine and powerful volcanic eruptions.

      Temperatures plummeted by up to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) over 20 years, devastating the world’s food production.

      Even worse would be a repeat of the Maunder Minimum which stretched from 1645 to 1715.  It came as the globe was already in the midst of “the Little Ice Age”, and it caused harvest failures and famines all over the globe

      The Maunder Minimum is the most famous cold period of the Little Ice Age. Temperatures plummeted in Europe (Figs. 14.3–14.7), the growing season became shorter by more than a month, the number of snowy days increased from a few to 20–30, the ground froze to several feet, alpine glaciers advanced all over the world, glaciers in the Swiss Alps encroached on farms and buried villages, tree-lines in the Alps dropped, sea ports were blocked by sea ice that surrounded Iceland and Holland for about 20 miles, wine grape harvests diminished, and cereal grain harvests failed, leading to mass famines (Fagan, 2007). The Thames River and canals and rivers of the Netherlands froze over during the winter (Fig. 14.3). The population of Iceland decreased by about half. In parts of China, warm-weather crops that had been grown for centuries were abandoned. In North America, early European settlers experienced exceptionally severe winters.

      Of course this would be an exceptionally bad time for such a cataclysmic climate shift, because African Swine Fever has already wiped out approximately one-fourth of all the pigs in the world, colossal armies of locusts the size of major cities are systematically wiping out crops across much of Africa, the Middle East and Asia, and fear of COVID-19 is greatly disrupting global food supply chains.

      In fact, it is being reported that widespread shutdowns of meat processing facilities in the United States may force farmers to euthanize “as many as 10 million hogs by September”

      U.S. pork farmers may be forced to euthanize as many as 10 million hogs by September as a result of production-plant shutdowns brought on by the coronavirus pandemic, according to the National Pork Producers Council.

      At least 14,000 reported positive COVID-19 cases have been connected to meatpacking facilities in at least 181 plants in 31 states as of May 13, and at least 54 meatpacking facility workers have died of the virus at 30 plants in 18 states, according to an investigation by the Midwest Center for Investigative reporting.

      Even if the sun suddenly started acting perfectly normal once again, we would still be facing what the UN is calling “the worst humanitarian crisis since World War Two”.

      Global food supplies are getting tighter with each passing day, and many are warning that some areas of the globe will soon be dealing with severe food shortages.

      What we really need are a few years of really good growing weather, but the behavior of the sun may not make that possible.

      So let’s keep a very close eye on the giant ball of fire that we are revolving around, because if it remains very quiet that could mean big trouble for all of us.

    • Trump To Nominate New US Attorney For Swampy DC Office
      Trump To Nominate New US Attorney For Swampy DC Office

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 19:45

      President Trump says he plans to nominate Justin Herdman to serve as US attorney for Washington DC – which has been at the center of the controversial prosecutions of Trump allies Michael Flynn and Roger Stone.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      US Attorney Justin Herdman

      Herdman – currently the US attorney for the Northern District of Ohio, would replace interim US attorney for Washington, Timothy Shea – whose appointment may not exceed 120 days by law and will expire next month, according to The Hill. Herdman’s appointment requires Senate approval. If rejected, the DC District Court will appoint a new interim US attorney until the position is eventually filled. He was confirmed in 2017 by voice vote for his current position.

      Shea, meanwhile, has attracted controversy for his involvement in the DOJ’s request to drop charges against former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn, as well as seek a lighter sentence for Stone.

      Critics argue that Shea, who previously served as senior counsel to Attorney General William Barr, has been instrumental in the politicization of the DOJ.

      After Shea and other top agency officials overruled career prosecutors earlier this year to request a more lenient sentence for Stone, the entire four-person prosecution team withdrew from the case, a stunning move taken in apparent protest.

      One of those prosecutors, Jonathan Kravis, quit the department entirely. He broke his silence this month to excoriate what he described as political influence over the DOJ after Shea signed a motion to drop criminal charges against Flynn, despite his previously pleading guilty to lying to the FBI. -The Hill

      Meanwhile, career prosecutor Brandon Van Grack – who was involved in securing Flynn’s ‘perjury trap’ plea agreement, withdrew from Flynn’s case without explanation an hour before the DOJ filed to drop the charges, according to the report. While he hasn’t resigned, he has reportedly also withdrawn from other cases.

    • Hickman: COVID-19 Defies Hyperbole
      Hickman: COVID-19 Defies Hyperbole

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 19:25

      Authored by Hickman via KesslerCompanies.com,

      The economic effects from COVID-19 will be devastating. Stock and asset prices will fall dramatically and will take years to recover. U.S. Treasury yields will turn negative. Sell “risk-on” assets, increase cash, and buy Treasury bonds.

      The U.S., if not the world’s, economy was primed for a serious recession coming into 2020. I argued in an article published on January 13 that, based on economic indicators, a U.S. recession would begin sometime before the end of 2020 and likely by March. In this context, COVID-19 was just the catalyst (albeit, a transcendent one) that tipped the world into it. Pandemic or not, the world was oversupplied and due to flush-out bad debt, weak companies and inequality. It only needed a push. China hadn’t had a recession in 42 years (since modern records have been kept in 1978), Australia in 28 years, and the U.S. in 10 years. Creative destruction had been waiting a long time.

      And what a push it was. Just 10 days later (on January 23), I wrote an e-mail to my clients with an article from The Washington Post about emerging issues in Wuhan saying, “I get the sense that this is a bigger story than we are aware of.” In the ensuing months, COVID-19 has become everything.

      The health side of the story is bad enough, but the economic one is worse. The combined economic effects of the global simultaneous lock-down, nine or more months of social distancing/rolling lock-down until a potential vaccine/treatment is available (the “90% Economy” as The Economist has termed it), as well as the normal deleveraging side of the business cycle (the “knock-on” effects or mentality change that usually is the recession) make for an economic contraction that will be deep (severe), wide (pervasive), and long (time).

      And yet, stock markets are pricing a quick return to normal. It won’t happen. We are still in the first (dare I say, “denial”) stage; something akin to the spring of 1930 when the stock market had rallied back to be down just 19% from the 09/03/1929 peak. I suspect there are many years and chapters of COVID-19 yet to come.

      At the same time, it isn’t the end of the world. If one can appreciate how it works, there are investments that will do well; but just a few.

      The virus is going to be here for a while

      Many prominent people and publications are saying serious things about this virus’ severity and duration:

      • Bill Gates, “It is impossible to overstate the pain that people are feeling now and will continue to feel for years to come.” 4/23/2020

      • German Chancellor Angela Merkel, “We are not living in the final phase of the pandemic, but still at the beginning.” 4/23/2020

      • CDC Director Robert Redfield, “There’s a possibility that the assault of the virus on our nation next winter will actually be even more difficult than the one we just went through.” 4/21/2020

      • WHO Special Envoy David Nabarro, “We think it’s going to be a virus that stalks the human race for quite a long time to come until we can all have a vaccine to protect us…” 4/12/2020

      • Former CDC Director, Tom Frieden, “As bad as this has been so far, we’re just at the beginning.” 5/7/2020

      • New York Magazine, “The FDA has never approved a vaccine for humans that is effective against any member of the coronavirus family, which includes SARS, MERS, and several that cause the common cold.” 4/20/2020

      A vaccine requires several steps past finding the right formula. Once a promising discovery is made, there is animal testing, human testing, dose finding, regulatory approval, large-scale production, distribution and the issue of who pays for it. You cannot inject all humans with something until there is relative certainty it is not going to have adverse effects. Experts seem to agree that this cannot be done faster than nine months. Under the best case scenario, the world will be forced into the “90% economy” until sometime in 2021.

      COVID-19 is still mysterious to scientists. It has several phenomena that make it problematic:

      • Contagious without symptoms;

      • A relatively long incubation period;

      • Symptoms throughout the body (i.e., blood clotting, COVID toe, organ failure);

      • Unknown immunity duration after recovery; and

      • Uneven virulence across strains, the population, and within an infection.

      COVID-19 hit the developed world first; presumably in places where there is greater international travel. And because of that, most developed nations are now seeing a plateau or decrease in new infections (in the first wave at least). But seemingly, many developing economies are just starting their first wave. Developing economies generate the lion’s share of global GDP (estimated to be 60-70%) and thus have a large impact on the developed world.

      The economic picture is serious

      • The economic damage already done from the lock-down as well as the idea that the world was near to a recession will result in a secular change in spending mentality that favors saving over spending.

      • Beyond lock-downs, the social distancing required until a potential vaccine is available has direct ramifications to economic activity. Gatherings with less density imply less demand for goods and services. Common examples are flights with empty middle seats or stadiums half-filled. Social distancing policies will enforce less economic output until a vaccine can be found and distributed broadly.

      • Economic data releases have been “off the charts” bad but dismissed by investors as aberrations. And as yet economists are increasingly clear that even if the economy has already bottomed (I doubt it), it will be a years-long recovery back. But the stock market is priced for a V-shaped recovery (more on this below). Investors are imagining that the new infections curve (of a given country) to be inversely correlated to its economic curve. As the new infections rate falls, the economy will come back in the same proportion. But the economic indicators are “off the charts” in the same proportion to how severe this incident is. In other words, they are real numbers and they are commensurately scary.

      • In any past recession, there were geographical areas or industries that were somewhat unaffected and could mitigate the heavily affected areas. In this case, whole aspects of the global economy were turned off simultaneously in a very specialized and optimized (“just-in-time”) global economy. Also, unlike older historical pandemics when it took days or weeks for news to travel, humanity knew about it at the same time, changing our economic behavior (a little or a lot) all at once. This is unprecedented in human history.

      • With reduced tax revenue, U.S. state, local, and municipal governments are struggling and will likely need a stimulus package of their own. If this is happening in the United States, imagine the fiscal crises that will strike less wealthy economies.

      • Countries that have not locked down (Sweden) or countries well on the other side of the infections curve (South Korea, China) are showing depressed economies even without the lock-down.

      • With the U.S. unemployment rate at 14.7%, the Taylor Rule implies the Fed funds rate should be less than minus -6% to be stimulating the economy. If the unemployment rate were to rise to 25% in May (per Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on 05/10/2020), the Taylor Rule would suggest the Fed funds rate should be below minus -16% to be stimulative. I’m not suggesting the Fed will get to these levels, but it illustrates the scale of the crisis.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Several others have stern warnings about the economic severity of COVID-19:

      • Chairman and CEO of BlackRock Larry Fink, surreptitiously, “Mass bankruptcies, empty planes, cautious consumers and an increase in the corporate tax rate to as high as 29% were part of a vision Fink sketched out on a call this week.” 05/06/2020

      • Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank President Neel Kashkari, “Large banks are eager to be part of the solution to the coronavirus crisis. The most patriotic thing they could do today would be to stop paying dividends and raise equity capital, to ensure they can endure a deep economic downturn.” 4/16/2020

      • Sam Zell, “Sam Zell, the billionaire known for buying up troubled real estate, said the coronavirus pandemic will leave the same kind of impact on the economy and society as the Great Depression 80 years ago, with long-lasting changes in human behavior that imperil many business models.” 05/05/2020

      • Nouriel Roubini, “The Coming Greater Depression of the 2020s,” 04/28/2020

      • Warren Buffett “I don’t know that three, four years from now people will fly as many passenger miles as they did last year.” 05/02/2020

      • Scott Minerd, CIO of Guggenheim Investments, “To think that the economy is going to reaccelerate in the third quarter in a V-shaped recovery to the level where gross domestic product (GDP) was prior to the pandemic is unrealistic. Four years from now the economy will most likely recover to the same level of activity that it was in January.” 4/26/2020

      • Historian Niall Ferguson, “It will take much longer than people assume for the economy to recover.” 05/06/2020

      Global stock markets will fall to new lows

      Prominent publications have come out with specific warnings about the stock market:

      • The Economist, “A one-month bear market scarcely seems enough time to absorb all the possible bad news from the pandemic and the huge uncertainty it has created. This stock market drama has a few more acts yet.”

      • Financial Times, “Equities generally are still priced for a near-perfect bounce-back from the coronavirus crisis. Lockdowns may last longer than planned. Exits may prove bumpier. Hopes that the virus can be eradicated quickly, and a second wave of infections avoided, may be proven wrong. A quick rebound to the status quo ante looks increasingly implausible. Amid so many unknowns, a further market correction looks more than likely.”

      Despite it seeming as though the Federal Reserve and Treasury have spent infinite amounts of money to prop things up, it is still less than the money lost. In a general sense, if the stimulus funds were as big as the problem, economic indicators wouldn’t be weakening. Politicians never accidentally make people more than whole (in the aggregate). No matter how much liquidity there is, stocks are still ultimately beholden to corporate earnings.

      The stock market is fundamentally expensive. The price earnings ratio (trailing) of the S&P 500 is near 20. Prices will need to come down a great deal before stocks look secularly attractive. They will have to come down even further if earnings weaken materially. Multi-decade secular bull markets have begun when these ratios are below 10 (see chart below).

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      This is a big enough demand shock (an economic “earthquake”) that virtually any company (U.S. or international) will struggle for years. Even after the virus and economy improve, paying the huge public debt bills that economies have amassed will become the focus. Higher taxes will ultimately weigh on profitability for decades. There will be exceptions (say Clorox or Netflix, so far), but the majority will struggle.

      Because COVID-19 has only been known for four months (really just three, as the markets are concerned), investors can still imagine a V-shaped recovery.

      The chart below puts the U.S. stock market’s (S&P 500) performance from its recent peak in the context of past major bear markets. In this view, things have only begun. For instance, in the Great Depression, it took nearly three years from the peak to the trough. We are just four months into this.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The stock markets went down through alternating waves of hopes (prices higher) and fears (prices lower). There will be many chapters to COVID-19. We are in the first one.

      The table below shows all of the bear-market rallies greater than 10% in the cycles identified above. There were several strong rallies. The average length of those rallies was about two months (1.8). The current rally has lasted a very similar 1.2 months (assuming 04/29/2020 was the peak).

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      What to invest in?

      There is nothing wrong with cash. Today, we call money not being invested “cash,” but at one time, it was just called “savings.” The importance of savings is that the money is there more than it is growing. Japan has rediscovered this dynamic in the last 30 years. Despite cash earning nothing (and it won’t again for years), if you are in cash and the stock market falls, you get to buy it back cheaper. Having cash gives an investor the freedom to invest in opportunities as they arise and be the “buyer” in a buyer’s market. Don’t think you have to invest all your money to be productive.

      U.S. Treasury bonds will appreciate. They appreciate in price when yields fall and depreciate when yields rise. The more that yields move lower, the more that prices move higher. As an example, if the current 30-year Treasury’s yield were to drop from where it currently yields 1.33% (5/15/2020), to 0.75%, this bond would appreciate by 15%. If it dropped to a zero yield, it would appreciate 40%. These aren’t small returns. But bond prices decrease in the same proportion if rates were to rise.

      As has already happened in Japan and Germany, U.S. Treasury interest rates will fall well below zero as this crisis intensifies. This is why:

      • Deflation will be the theme of the “90% economy” because it implies a 90% price. Meaning that if the economy is expected to operate 10% lower than before, supply and demand would suggest that prices (inflation) would be 10% lower too. I am not suggesting a one-time drop of 10%, but rather that there will be tremendous pressure towards lower prices (in aggregate that-is; individual sectors may have higher prices). But, it isn’t just the initial shock, there will continue to be deflationary pressure as long as the output gap is negative. That is going to take years and years to close. Deflation implies lower Treasury yields, because if prices are deflating at say 5% per year, a minus 4% yield on a Treasury would be valuable (as saving 1% over the alternative). Because of this, there is no limit to how negative Treasury rates can go, they are a function of inflation/deflation.

      • Given the scale of COVID-19, the Fed (and other developed economy central banks) will need to cut short-term rates deeply negative. This will pull all Treasury yields lower. I can already hear the chorus of arguments (“it hasn’t worked!”, “it creates a liquidity trap!”, “it creates hyperinflation!”) Yes, there will be tremendous resistance, but a threshold exists where the importance of protecting an industry (money market managers, banking) will pale in comparison to the economic needs of the whole country. In other words, there is a point where the Fed will alienate creditors at-large for the bigger picture. There are two prominent voices calling for negative rates so far (below), but I suspect these voices will grow in number:

      Professor of Economics and Public Policy at Harvard University Ken Rogoff, “…the Fed could push most short-term interest rates across the economy to near or below zero. Europe and Japan already have tiptoed into negative rate territory. Suppose central banks pushed back against today’s flight into government debt by going further, cutting short-term policy rates to, say, -3% or lower.” 5/4/2020

      Former President of the Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank, Naranya Kocherlakota, “Unprecedented situations require unprecedented actions. That’s why the U.S. Federal Reserve should fight a rapidly deepening recession by taking interest rates below zero for the first time ever.” 4/24/2020

      • But “yield curve control” is the Fed’s next-biggest tool and I suspect it will be used before negative rates because it is more palatable to the banking and money-market industries. “Yield curve control” is a fancy way of saying that the Fed could control longer-term interest rates like they do with short-term rates. Japan is currently doing it and the U.S. did it in the 1950s. The idea is to force term rates down to, or below, a certain threshold to encourage lending. For instance, the Fed could target the 10-year Treasury yield to be 0.25% and ensure it by committing to buy enough 10-year Treasury bonds to take it there. “Committing” is the key word because if the central bank is credible enough, it doesn’t always have prove it with real capital; the threat is enough for the market to take it there. Assuming the mortgage market was functioning normally, it could help get mortgage rates down to 1%. Anyone with a mortgage can imagine how helpful that would be.

      • Some worry that the amount of stimulus the U.S. is spending will lead to hyper-inflation or equivalently, a weakened currency. The fiscal/monetary picture of the U.S. isn’t as extreme as it is made to be. Japan’s finances are a useful example of how far a super-power’s credit stretches. On almost any dimension, Japan’s finances are in worse shape than in the US, and yet their 10-year yield is 0.00% (see table below). Credit risk should show up first in Japan before we would see it in the U.S. They are the canary in the coal mine on this issue.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      All of these things combined portend a continuing U.S. Treasury bull market (lower yields) for a few more years.

      Then, once everyone has given up on the stock market and P/E ratios are in the single digits, it will be time to buy stocks.

      COVID-19 is the equivalent of a 300-year flood. It will be the theme of financial markets for an enduring horizon.

      *  *  *

      Eric Hickman (hickman@kesslercompanies.com) is president of Kessler Investment Advisors, Inc., an advisory firm located in Denver, Colorado specializing in U.S. Treasury bonds.

    Digest powered by RSS Digest

    Today’s News 18th May 2020

    • Why The COVID-19 Model That Inspired UK's Lockdown May Be "The Most Devastating Software Mistake Of All Time"
      Why The COVID-19 Model That Inspired UK’s Lockdown May Be “The Most Devastating Software Mistake Of All Time”

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 02:45

      While Democrats in the US and progressives in the UK continue to push back against efforts to gradually reopen their respective economies, more evidence is emerging that calls into question the models (what the public often refers to as the “science”) which inspired governments across the world to impose crippling lockdowns on their populations.

      Case in point: Since Neil Ferguson and the authors of the Imperial published its modeling for non-pharmaceutical intervention for COVID-19, a number of data scientists have taken a close look and found gaping oversights that seriously undermine the model’s credibility. Of course, this isn’t the first time we have written about Ferguson and his exploits.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Neil Ferguson

      In this weekend’s Telegraph, two of these critics, David Richards, the founder and CEO of global big data leader WANdisco which is jointly headquartered in Silicon Valley and Sheffield, and Dr. Konstantin Boudnik, a pioneering big-data engineer, WANdisco’s VP of architecture and author of 17 US patents, published an editorial in which they carefully examined the model’s shortcomings. Keep in mind, the Imperial model is what ultimately inspired PM Boris Johnson to make a U-turn and adopt what has been an economically devastating lockdown – was nothing short of a catastrophe. Millions have been plunged into hardship and poverty unnecessarily, they explained. Johnson himself was infected by the virus and the public is furious with the government over its rollout of a plan to reopen.

      Given the influence the model had during the early days of the outbreak, the two men argued that the software issues underpinning the model could be ‘the most devastating software mistake of all time’.

      Apparently, the model’s problems are rooted in its most fundamental components. The model was written using a coding language called  Fortran which has been in use for decades.

      Due to its age and inflexibility, Fortran has many inherent problems. But on top of the language itself, the code in the model was sprawling, sloppily written and extremely inefficient, the two men said, claiming it would never pass muster in the private sector.

      Using straightforward, jargon-free language, the two authors explain how the model ran into a problem called “CACE”, or, ‘changing anything changes everything’ – a problem that software engineers and data scientists trying to model, well, anything, really, often encounter.

      The approach ignores widely accepted computer science principles known as “separation of concerns”, which date back to the early 70s and are essential to the design and architecture of successful software systems. The principles guard against what developers call CACE: Changing Anything Changes Everything.

      Without this separation, it is impossible to carry out rigorous testing of individual parts to ensure full working order of the whole. Testing allows for guarantees. It is what you do on a conveyer belt in a car factory. Each and every component is tested for integrity in order to pass strict quality controls.

      It’s just the latest reminder that President Barack Obama’s advice to this year’s graduates rings true: You can’t just blindly accept what the experts and the people in charge tell you.

      Read the full editorial below:

      * * *

      In the history of expensive software mistakes, Mariner 1 was probably the most notorious. The unmanned spacecraft was destroyed seconds after launch from Cape Canaveral in 1962 when it veered dangerously off-course due to a line of dodgy code.

      But nobody died and the only hits were to Nasa’s budget and pride. Imperial College’s modelling of non-pharmaceutical interventions for Covid-19 which helped persuade the UK and other countries to bring in draconian lockdowns will supersede the failed Venus space probe and could go down in history as the most devastating software mistake of all time, in terms of economic costs and lives lost.

      Since publication of Imperial’s microsimulation model, those of us with a professional and personal interest in software development have studied the code on which policymakers based their fateful decision to mothball our multi-trillion pound economy and plunge millions of people into poverty and hardship. And we were profoundly disturbed at what we discovered. The model appears to be totally unreliable and you wouldn’t stake your life on it.

      First though, a few words on our credentials. I am David Richards, founder and chief executive of WANdisco, a global leader in Big Data software that is jointly headquartered in Silicon Valley and Sheffield. My co-author is Dr Konstantin ‘Cos’ Boudnik, vice-president of architecture at WANdisco, author of 17 US patents in distributed computing and a veteran developer of the Apache Hadoop framework that allows computers to solve problems using vast amounts of data.

      Imperial’s model appears to be based on a programming language called Fortran, which was old news 20 years ago and, guess what, was the code used for Mariner 1. This outdated language contains inherent problems with its grammar and the way it assigns values, which can give way to multiple design flaws and numerical inaccuracies. One file alone in the Imperial model contained 15,000 lines of code.

      Try unravelling that tangled, buggy mess, which looks more like a bowl of angel hair pasta than a finely tuned piece of programming. Industry best practice would have 500 separate files instead. In our commercial reality, we would fire anyone for developing code like this and any business that relied on it to produce software for sale would likely go bust.

      The approach ignores widely accepted computer science principles known as “separation of concerns”, which date back to the early 70s and are essential to the design and architecture of successful software systems. The principles guard against what developers call CACE: Changing Anything Changes Everything.

      Without this separation, it is impossible to carry out rigorous testing of individual parts to ensure full working order of the whole. Testing allows for guarantees. It is what you do on a conveyer belt in a car factory. Each and every component is tested for integrity in order to pass strict quality controls.

      Only then is the car deemed safe to go on the road. As a result, Imperial’s model is vulnerable to producing wildly different and conflicting outputs based on the same initial set of parameters. Run it on different computers and you would likely get different results. In other words, it is non-deterministic.

      As such, it is fundamentally unreliable. It screams the question as to why our Government did not get a second opinion before swallowing Imperial’s prescription.

      Ultimately, this is a computer science problem and where are the computer scientists in the room? Our leaders did not have the grounding in computer science to challenge the ideas and so were susceptible to the academics. I suspect the Government saw what was happening in Italy with its overwhelmed hospitals and panicked.

      It chose a blunt instrument instead of a scalpel and now there is going to be a huge strain on society. Defenders of the Imperial model argue that because the problem – a global pandemic – is dynamic, then the solution should share the same stochastic, non-deterministic quality.

      We disagree. Models must be capable of passing the basic scientific test of producing the same results given the same initial set of parameters. Otherwise, there is simply no way of knowing whether they will be reliable.

      Indeed, many global industries successfully use deterministic models that factor in randomness. No surgeon would put a pacemaker into a cardiac patient knowing it was based on an arguably unpredictable approach for fear of jeopardising the Hippocratic oath. Why on earth would the Government place its trust in the same when the entire wellbeing of our nation is at stake?

      * * *

      Source: The Telegraph

    • The 2006 Origins Of The 'Lockdown' Idea
      The 2006 Origins Of The ‘Lockdown’ Idea

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 02:00

      Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The American Institute for Economic Research,

      Now begins the grand effort, on display in thousands of articles and news broadcasts daily, somehow to normalize the lockdown and all its destruction of the last two months. We didn’t lock down almost the entire country in 1968/69, 1957, or 1949-1952, or even during 1918. But in a terrifying few days in March 2020, it happened to all of us, causing an avalanche of social, cultural, and economic destruction that will ring through the ages.

      There was nothing normal about it all. We’ll be trying to figure out what happened to us for decades hence. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      How did a temporary plan to preserve hospital capacity turn into two-to-three months of near-universal house arrest that ended up causing worker furloughs at 256 hospitals, a stoppage of international travel, a 40% job loss among people earning less than $40K per year, devastation of every economic sector, mass confusion and demoralization, a complete ignoring of all fundamental rights and liberties, not to mention the mass confiscation of private property with forced closures of millions of businesses?  

      Whatever the answer, it’s got to be a bizarre tale. What’s truly surprising is just how recent the theory behind lockdown and forced distancing actually is. So far as anyone can tell, the intellectual machinery that made this mess was invented 14 years ago, and not by epidemiologists but by computer-simulation modelers. It was adopted not by experienced doctors – they warned ferociously against it – but by politicians. 

      Let’s start with the phrase social distancing, which has mutated into forced human separation. The first I had heard it was in the 2009 movie Contagion. The first time it appeared in the New York Times was February 12, 2006:

      If the avian flu goes pandemic while Tamiflu and vaccines are still in short supply, experts say, the only protection most Americans will have is “social distancing,” which is the new politically correct way of saying “quarantine.”

      But distancing also encompasses less drastic measures, like wearing face masks, staying out of elevators — and the [elbow] bump. Such stratagems, those experts say, will rewrite the ways we interact, at least during the weeks when the waves of influenza are washing over us.

      Maybe you don’t remember that the avian flu of 2006 didn’t amount to much. It’s true, despite all the extreme warnings about its lethality, H5N1 didn’t turn into much at all. What it did do, however, was send the existing president, George W. Bush, to the library to read about the 1918 flu and its catastrophic results. He asked for some experts to submit some plans to him about what to do when the real thing comes along. 

      The New York Times (April 22, 2020) tells the story from there: 

      Fourteen years ago, two federal government doctors, Richard Hatchett and Carter Mecher, met with a colleague at a burger joint in suburban Washington for a final review of a proposal they knew would be treated like a piñata: telling Americans to stay home from work and school the next time the country was hit by a deadly pandemic.

      When they presented their plan not long after, it was met with skepticism and a degree of ridicule by senior officials, who like others in the United States had grown accustomed to relying on the pharmaceutical industry, with its ever-growing array of new treatments, to confront evolving health challenges.

      Drs. Hatchett and Mecher were proposing instead that Americans in some places might have to turn back to an approach, self-isolation, first widely employed in the Middle Ages.

      How that idea — born out of a request by President George W. Bush to ensure the nation was better prepared for the next contagious disease outbreak — became the heart of the national playbook for responding to a pandemic is one of the untold stories of the coronavirus crisis.

      It required the key proponents — Dr. Mecher, a Department of Veterans Affairs physician, and Dr. Hatchett, an oncologist turned White House adviser — to overcome intense initial opposition.

      It brought their work together with that of a Defense Department team assigned to a similar task.

      And it had some unexpected detours, including a deep dive into the history of the 1918 Spanish flu and an important discovery kicked off by a high school research project pursued by the daughter of a scientist at the Sandia National Laboratories.

      The concept of social distancing is now intimately familiar to almost everyone. But as it first made its way through the federal bureaucracy in 2006 and 2007, it was viewed as impractical, unnecessary and politically infeasible.

      Notice that in the course of this planning, neither legal nor economic experts were brought in to consult and advise. Instead it fell to Mecher (formerly of Chicago and an intensive care doctor with no previous expertise in pandemics) and the oncologist Hatchett. 

      But what is this mention of the high-school daughter of 14? Her name is Laura M. Glass, and she recently declined to be interviewed when the Albuquerque Journal did a deep dive of this history. 

      Laura, with some guidance from her dad, devised a computer simulation that showed how people – family members, co-workers, students in schools, people in social situations – interact. What she discovered was that school kids come in contact with about 140 people a day, more than any other group. Based on that finding, her program showed that in a hypothetical town of 10,000 people, 5,000 would be infected during a pandemic if no measures were taken, but only 500 would be infected if the schools were closed.

      Laura’s name appears on the foundational paper arguing for lockdowns and forced human separation. That paper is Targeted Social Distancing Designs for Pandemic Influenza (2006). It set out a model for forced separation and applied it with good results backwards in time to 1957. They conclude with a chilling call for what amounts to a totalitarian lockdown, all stated very matter-of-factly. 

      Implementation of social distancing strategies is challenging. They likely must be imposed for the duration of the local epidemic and possibly until a strain-specific vaccine is developed and distributed. If compliance with the strategy is high over this period, an epidemic within a community can be averted. However, if neighboring communities do not also use these interventions, infected neighbors will continue to introduce influenza and prolong the local epidemic, albeit at a depressed level more easily accommodated by healthcare systems.

      In other words, it was a high-school science experiment that eventually became law of the land, and through a circuitous route propelled not by science but politics. 

      The primary author of this paper was Robert J. Glass, a complex-systems analyst with Sandia National Laboratories. He had no medical training, much less an expertise in immunology or epidemiology. 

      That explains why Dr. D.A. Henderson, “who had been the leader of the international effort to eradicate smallpox,” completely rejected the whole scheme. 

      Says the NYT:

      Dr. Henderson was convinced that it made no sense to force schools to close or public gatherings to stop. Teenagers would escape their homes to hang out at the mall. School lunch programs would close, and impoverished children would not have enough to eat. Hospital staffs would have a hard time going to work if their children were at home.

      The measures embraced by Drs. Mecher and Hatchett would “result in significant disruption of the social functioning of communities and result in possibly serious economic problems,” Dr. Henderson wrote in his own academic paper responding to their ideas.

      The answer, he insisted, was to tough it out: Let the pandemic spread, treat people who get sick and work quickly to develop a vaccine to prevent it from coming back.

      AIER’s Phil Magness got to work to find the literature responding to this 2006 and discovered: Disease Mitigation Measures in the Control of Pandemic Influenza. The authors included D.A. Henderson, along with three professors from Johns Hopkins: infectious disease specialist Thomas V.Inglesby, epidemiologist Jennifer B. Nuzzo, and physician Tara O’Toole. 

      Their paper is a remarkably readable refutation of the entire lock-down model. 

      There are no historical observations or scientific studies that support the confinement by quarantine of groups of possibly infected people for extended periods in order to slow the spread of influenza. … It is difficult to identify circumstances in the past half-century when large-scale quarantine has been effectively used in the control of any disease. The negative consequences of large-scale quarantine are so extreme (forced confinement of sick people with the well; complete restriction of movement of large populations; difficulty in getting critical supplies, medicines, and food to people inside the quarantine zone) that this mitigation measure should be eliminated from serious consideration

      Home quarantine also raises ethical questions. Implementation of home quarantine could result in healthy, uninfected people being placed at risk of infection from sick household members. Practices to reduce the chance of transmission (hand-washing, maintaining a distance of 3 feet from infected people, etc.) could be recommended, but a policy imposing home quarantine would preclude, for example, sending healthy children to stay with relatives when a family member becomes ill. Such a policy would also be particularly hard on and dangerous to people living in close quarters, where the risk of infection would be heightened…. 

      Travel restrictions, such as closing airports and screening travelers at borders, have historically been ineffective. The World Health Organization Writing Group concluded that “screening and quarantining entering travelers at international borders did not substantially delay virus introduction in past pandemics . . . and will likely be even less effective in the modern era.”… It is reasonable to assume that the economic costs of shutting down air or train travel would be very high, and the societal costs involved in interrupting all air or train travel would be extreme. …

      During seasonal influenza epidemics, public events with an expected large attendance have sometimes been cancelled or postponed, the rationale being to decrease the number of contacts with those who might be contagious. There are, however, no certain indications that these actions have had any definitive effect on the severity or duration of an epidemic. Were consideration to be given to doing this on a more extensive scale and for an extended period, questions immediately arise as to how many such events would be affected. There are many social gatherings that involve close contacts among people, and this prohibition might include church services, athletic events, perhaps all meetings of more than 100 people. It might mean closing theaters, restaurants, malls, large stores, and bars. Implementing such measures would have seriously disruptive consequences

      Schools are often closed for 1–2 weeks early in the development of seasonal community outbreaks of influenza primarily because of high absentee rates, especially in elementary schools, and because of illness among teachers. This would seem reasonable on practical grounds. However, to close schools for longer periods is not only impracticable but carries the possibility of a serious adverse outcome….

      Thus, cancelling or postponing large meetings would not be likely to have any significant effect on the development of the epidemic. While local concerns may result in the closure of particular events for logical reasons, a policy directing communitywide closure of public events seems inadvisable. Quarantine. As experience shows, there is no basis for recommending quarantine either of groups or individuals. The problems in implementing such measures are formidable, and secondary effects of absenteeism and community disruption as well as possible adverse consequences, such as loss of public trust in government and stigmatization of quarantined people and groups, are likely to be considerable….

      Finally, the remarkable conclusion:

      Experience has shown that communities faced with epidemics or other adverse events respond best and with the least anxiety when the normal social functioning of the community is least disrupted. Strong political and public health leadership to provide reassurance and to ensure that needed medical care services are provided are critical elements. If either is seen to be less than optimal, a manageable epidemic could move toward catastrophe.

      Confronting a manageable epidemic and turning it into a catastrophe: that seems like a good description of everything that has happened in the COVID-19 crisis of 2020. 

      Thus did some of the most highly trained and experienced experts on epidemics warn with biting rhetoric against everything that the advocates of lockdown proposed. It was not even a real-world idea in the first place and showed no actual knowledge of viruses and disease mitigation. Again, the idea was born of a high-school science experiment using agent-based modelling techniques having nothing at all to do with real life, real science, or real medicine. 

      So the question becomes: how did the extreme view prevail?

      The New York Times has the answer:

      The [Bush] administration ultimately sided with the proponents of social distancing and shutdowns — though their victory was little noticed outside of public health circles. Their policy would become the basis for government planning and would be used extensively in simulations used to prepare for pandemics, and in a limited way in 2009 during an outbreak of the influenza called H1N1. Then the coronavirus came, and the plan was put to work across the country for the first time.

      The Times called one of the pro-lockdown researchers, Dr. Howard Markel, and asked what he thought of the lockdowns. His answer: he is glad that his work was used to “save lives” but added, “It is also horrifying.” “We always knew this would be applied in worst-case scenarios,” he said. “Even when you are working on dystopian concepts, you always hope it will never be used.”

      Ideas have consequences, as they say. Dream up an idea for a virus-controlling totalitarian society, one without an endgame and eschewing any experienced-based evidence that it would achieve the goal, and you might see it implemented someday. Lockdown might be the new orthodoxy but that doesn’t make it medically sound or morally correct. At least now we know that many great doctors and scholars in 2006 did their best to stop this nightmare from unfolding. Their mighty paper should serve as a blueprint for dealing with the next pandemic. 

    • Chinese NEV Sales Plunge 43%, Falling For The Tenth Straight Month
      Chinese NEV Sales Plunge 43%, Falling For The Tenth Straight Month

      Tyler Durden

      Mon, 05/18/2020 – 01:00

      The auto industry has been under pressure from all angles as a result of the global coronavirus lockdowns. And it looks as though while Elon Musk has been busy melting down, faux-libertarian style, about the re-opening of his California factory, things may have taken a turn for the worse for the EV market overseas. 

      In addition to the pandemic crippling demand, there seem to be far too many players in China’s NEV market, and that has caused sales to come under pressure, according to Automotive News. China’s market now has about 50 established EV startups competing with larger companies like Geely and Tesla.

      In fact, new energy vehicle sales fell for a tenth straight month in April, plunging 43%. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Brian Gu, president of Alibaba-backed Xpeng Motors said: “The difficulties that EV start-ups have encountered, such as the auto sales decline, harsh fundraising environment and subsidies reduction, all started last year. The outbreak will aggravate these issues that already had existed.”

      He continued: “Only the top-tier EV makers will be able to attract attention from investors in this environment.” 

      Experts believe the hit to the EV market could get even worse with the plunging price of oil, even despite subsidies and tax breaks.

      One anonymous investor said: “Those who had not launched mass production of their car models by 2019 would probably die. The outbreak is going to accelerate their death.” 

      The headwinds could make it difficult for China to reach its goal of having EVs account for 25% of all auto sales by 2025, according to the report. Currently, the number stands at about 5%.

      We’ve previously noted that auto dealers in the U.S. are losing billions of dollars in fleet sales, which we documented just last week.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The lack of fleet sales, combined with a massive demand drop off, has led to a massive inventory glut for auto dealers, who are being forced to consider major incentives across the board to try and sell vehicles when the consumer makes their way back to the showroom.

      The inventory glut has gotten so bad that we reported on ships of SUVs coming from Japan being turned away at California ports several weeks ago.

    • Goldman Spots A Huge Problem For The Fed
      Goldman Spots A Huge Problem For The Fed

      Tyler Durden

      Sun, 05/17/2020 – 23:57

      Update:  In implicit confirmation of everything said below, in his 60 Minutes appearance, Jerome Powell said that “There’s a lot more we can do. We’ve done what we can as we go. But I will say that we’re not out of ammunition by a long shot,” he said. Powell noted the Fed can increase its emergency lending programs and make monetary policy more supportive through forward guidance and by adjusting the Fed’s asset-purchase strategy. Which, as explained extensively below, is precisely what the Fed will have to do: by as much as $3 trillion in additional QE just to offset the flood of new debt coming to the market in the next 6 months.

      And just to remove confusion, there was this exchange which the “pajama traders” appear to have focused on:

      Scott Pelley: Fair to say you simply flooded the system with money?

      Jerome Powell: Yes. We did. That’s another way to think about it. We did.

      Scott Pelley: Where does it come from? Do you just print it?

      Jerome Powell: We print it digitally. So we– you know, we– as a central bank, we have the ability to create money digitally and we do that by buying Treasury Bills or bonds or other government guaranteed securities. And that actually increases the money supply. We also print actual currency and we distribute that through the Federal Reserve banks.

      To give Powell the credit, at least he was being somewhat honest: unlike Bernanke who claimed the Fed does not “print” digital bills, Powell no longer felt compelled to make the obvious lie. And judging by the ongoing surge in gold and silver overnight, the market seems to appreciate Powell’s honesty.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      * * *

      Last week, the Treasury shocked the world when it announced that in the current quarter (the 3rd of the fiscal year), the US will need to sell a mindblowing, record $3 trillion (pardon, $2.999 trillion) in Treasurys to finance the US money helicopter.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      This, after selling $807 billion in the first half of the fiscal year, and another $677 billion in the quarter ending Sept 30.

      And since it is just a matter of time before Congress has to pass yet another fiscal package which will be at least another trillion dollars, and up to $3 trillion if the Democrats get their wish, one can say that Guggenheim’s projection of over $5 trillion in debt issuance this calendar year will be wildly conservative.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Now here’s the thing: as Deutsche Bank recently showed, so far this new debt avalanche was entire monetized exclusively by the Fed, whose debt purchasing operations have been far greater than the net Treasury issuance.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      But this was only the case when the Fed was buying a massive $75 billion in TSYs per day in the late March crash, when Powell dumped a monetary nuclear bomb on the market to stabilize the biggest panic selling an entire generation of traders had ever seen, and nearly doubling the Fed’s balance – which is now just shy of $7 trillion, in a few months:

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Since then, however, the Fed’s daily and weekly POMO has shrunk substantially, and as discussed earlier, it is down to just $30BN in Treasury purchases per week as of next week, which amounts to around $1.5 trillion per year.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      There’s just one problem: $30BN per week in TSY monetization is nowhere near enough to consume the trillions in Treasury issuance that is about to hit. In fact, all else equal, the Fed will very soon have to find a pretext to aggressively ramp up its treasury purchases.

      As Goldman writes overnight, putting the problem in its proper context, “Central banks have been purchasing sovereign bonds at a rapid pace (Exhibit 1), faster than past QE programs in most cases. These purchases are occurring against a backdrop of a surge in fiscal deficits, which will require enormous amounts of additional sovereign supply to finance them.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Which makes sense, of course: after all helicopter money, which is what we have now that MMT (Magic Money Theory) has been shoved down everyone’s throat without any debate, only works when there is coordination between the Treasury and the central bank. And while until now Fed purchases have generally offset Treasury issuance, that coordination is about to end. As Goldman puts it, “Central bank buying should absorb a substantial amount of upcoming issuance, though we expect increases in “free float” across most markets, most notably in the US, which adds to the medium-term case for higher yields and steeper curves there.”

      Next, Goldman estimates this so-called free float, defined as the amount of sovereign debt outstanding less central bank and foreign official holdings, across major DM markets, and shows it in the chart below. Through the end of last year, free float was on a downward trend in Germany and Japan, as ECB and BoJ purchases absorbed the bulk of new supply. In contrast, free float had been trending higher for much of the year in the US and UK.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      So with record fiscal deficits and resumption of asset purchases in several markets, where is free float headed this year? In Exhibit 3, Goldman lays out its expectations for total purchase amounts on a net basis along with net supply. It finds the largest increase in free float in the US, as Fed purchases continue to slow; in fact according to Goldman calculations the US public (now that foreign investors have hit the breaks on US TSY purchases), will be on the hook to fund the $1.6 trillion needed to bridge the full amount of US funding needs.

      A similar picture emerges in the Euro area, where supply is also expected outpace ECB purchases, particularly in Italy, Spain and France (absent further increases in ECB purchases). Bizarrely, a similar picture emerges in Japan where even the always ravenous BoJ is expected to absorb a large portion (about ¥25tn) of incoming supply in the upcoming year as Japan is boosting its debt sales by 18.2 trillion yen ($170 billion) to fund a spending package equivalent to a fifth of its annual economic output; but according to Goldman, the scale of supply is likely to exceed even the BOJ’s QE purchases.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      It continues: foreign-ownership of New Zealand sovereign debt has fallen to 50% from 70% just five years ago as central bankers in Wellington snap up bonds as part of a quantitative-easing program.

      In short, even with central banks unleashing $7.9 trillion in QE so far in 2020 (according to Bank of America calculations) of which the Fed accounts for over $2.8 trillion in debt purchases alone, this won’t be enough to monetize the tsunami of debt that is coming to fund the biggest global rescue operation in history, and if investors find that suddenly the bond market has to clear without the only true backstop – the central bank – willing and able to mop up all the supply, a critical precondition for the continuation of “helicopter money”, the outcome could be disastrous.

      Incidentally, we first warned about the urgent need for the Fed to aggressively step up and boost its QE (instead of continuing to taper it by $1 billion week after week as it did again today) on Wednesday when we quoted Curvature Securities’ rates strategist and repo expert Scott Skyrm, who calculated that “there are $689 billion net new Treasurys settling during the month of May and $992 billion net new Treasurys settling between now and June 15. Yes, almost one trillion new Treasury securities hitting the market within the next month!”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      His conclusion: “That means the market needs to come up with about one trillion dollars to pay for those securities over the next month.” Which, of course, is a euphemism because we all know who in the market needs to come up with one trillion dollar – the only one who literally prints money: the Federal Reserve.

      Conveniently, Goldman’s argument allows us to recycle our conclusion from two days ago, in which we said that here is the layman’s version of what was just said: “the Fed has flooded the system with liquidity… and it is not enough, because the way helicopter money works, is that liquidity supply (the Fed), and liquidity demand (Treasury via debt issuance) go hand in hand, and periods of too much supply, as was the cash with the Fed’s massive QE in late March and early April, are promptly followed by periods of dramatic liquidity demand, such as the next month when $1 trillion in liquidity will be drained to fund the US government “money helicopter.”

      Goldman’s own calculations suggest that the shortfall net of the Fed’s ongoing QE tapering could be as much as $1.6 trillion.

      As a result, Powell faces a two-fold problem: since the Fed chair has taken negative rates off the table, Powell has no choice but too boost QE again, and unleash another firehose of debt monetizing liquidity in the financial system. However, any such reversal to the Fed’s current posture of shrinking QE will be met with howls of rage, especially among what’s left of the conservative political establishment. Which means that, just like in March when the Fed used the first pandemic-induced market crash to unleash unlimited QE, the Fed will soon have to go for round 2 and spark a new market crash, one which it then uses as an alibi for the next massive liquidity injection. Failing to do that, watch as the dollar takes off as markets sniff out that another major dollar squeeze is imminent. And since this will accelerate the liquidity crunch, one way or another, the coming $1.6 trillion in Treasury issuance – which has already been generously greenlighted by Congress – will serve as a trigger for the next market shock, one which the Fed will quickly reverse by expanding the already unlimited QE by trillions on very short notice.

      The only question we have is whether this will be the market crash that the Fed uses to unveil it will also buy equity ETfs next, or if Powell will save this final bullet in its ammo for whatever comes next. 

      Finally, it’s not just us reaching this conclusion: yesterday – one day after our dire assessment – Bloomberg reached the same conclusion, and in “An $8 Trillion Spree Sets Clock Ticking for Bonds’ Judgment Day” in which it wrote that “investors are mopping up the sales as long as central banks engage in so-called quantitative easing, buying an unlimited amount of debt to counter the ravages of the pandemic. But at the first whiff of a recovery, or a pullback from policy makers, all bets may be off. Throw in the threat of inflation amid a global fiscal splurge exceeding $8 trillion, and bond investors look set for a toxic cocktail of risks in the not-too-distant future.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Well, today we got another pullback when the Fed tapered its weekly QE to just $30BN from $35BN last week, and a record $75 billion per day two months ago.

      “Given the massive central bank easing, which includes a lot of bond-buying QE in many places, there will be a lot of demand right now to buy government bonds,” said Eric Stein, co-director of global income at Eaton Vance Management, effectively describing what can simply be called “frontrunning” the Fed, a strategy that even BlackRock said is the only one left in this idiotic market.

      “However, if it was a year or two from now and the economy was picking up and inflation had started to pick up, the story could be different.”

      Actually, the economy doesn’t even have to be picking up: an unexpected – and unexplained – slowdown in the pace of the Fed’s “unlimited QE” purchases would be sufficient to throw the bond market into unprecedented turmoil as all those socialists who pretend that MMT makes sense, realize that the only thing permitting their idiotic “theory” to persist is the Fed’s money printer.

      Yet while the Fed’s QE expansion is just a matter of time, whether catalyzed by another market crash or not, the bigger question is what happens after that?

      “Can governments continue to borrow at such record levels? No,” said George Boubouras, head of research at hedge fund K2 Asset Management. “Central-bank support is key in the massive bond buying we’ve seen for now. But if they blink then at some point, in the medium term, it will all likely unravel – with unforgiving consequences for some countries.”

      Ironically, this also means that an end to the coronavirus crisis is the worst possible thing that could happen to a world that is now habituated to helicopter money and virtually unlimited handouts, which however need a state of perpetual crisis.

      “Once there is an end to the crisis in sight, they will be less and less willing to provide support and it will fall more on the street to absorb paper,” said Mediolanum money manager Charles Diebel, who’s adding bond steepeners in anticipation of a coming inflationary supernova.

      That, incidentally, would be the endgame for the current monetary regime, which is why anyone hoping that officials, policymakers and the establishment in general, will allow the coronavirus crisis to simply fade away, is in for the shock of a lifetime.

    • China's Disappeared Heroes & The Silence Of The West
      China’s Disappeared Heroes & The Silence Of The West

      Tyler Durden

      Sun, 05/17/2020 – 23:55

      Authored by Giulio Meotti via The Gatestone Institute,

      Three Chinese internet activists have disappeared and are believed to have been detained by police. They have reportedly been charged with preserving articles that were removed by China’s online censors. Chen Mei, Cai Wei and Cai’s girlfriend went missing on April 19.

      A few days earlier, Beijing police formally arrested retired professor Chen Zhaozhi for “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” in a speech about the pandemic. The former Beijing University of Science and Technology professor had posted comments online, including that “Wuhan pneumonia is not a Chinese virus but Chinese Communist Party virus”. In addition, Wang Quanzhang, a Chinese human rights lawyer, who ended his prison sentence after more than four years for “subversion against the state”, immediately after leaving the penitentiary, was placed in “quarantine“, meaning under arrest.

      These are just the latest Chinese dissidents who were concerned about the virus that began in Wuhan, the ground zero of the Covid-19 pandemic, who have vanished. They were evidently “disappeared” because they were searching for, and telling the truth about, what happened, as well as the Chinese regime’s attempt to bury it.

      Frances Eve, deputy director of research at the Hong Kong-based watchdog group, Chinese Human Rights Defenders, said:

      Everyone who has disappeared is at very high risk of torture – most likely to try to force them to confess that their activities were criminal or harmful to society. Then, as we’ve seen in previous cases, people who have been disappeared will be brought out and forced to confess on Chinese state television”.

      A Chinese citizen journalist, Li Zehua, recently reappeared after having vanished two months previous, while investigating the Wuhan coronavirus cover-up. The Chinese regime made him tame and silenced him. In contrast to the tone of his reporting from Wuhan, Zehua’s new video shows him heaping praise on the regime that detained him:

      “Throughout the whole process, police officers acted civil and legally, making sure that I was resting and eating well, they really cared for me, I had three meals a day, felt safe with guards, and got to watch the news every day.”

      His video shows the tragic consequence of China’s repression.

      In his pre-arrest reports from Wuhan, Zehua had a far more aggressive tone against the authorities:

      “I don’t want to remain silent, or shut my eyes and ears. It’s not that I can’t have a nice life, with a wife and kids. I can. I’m doing this because I hope more young people can, like me, stand up.”

      These Chinese journalists know that the price will be terrible. Beijing just sentenced a journalist, Chen Jieren, to a 15-year prison term for “vilifying the Chinese Communist Party” after state media released his “confession”. China, the world’s largest prison for journalists, has been accused of now having entered a “total censorship era“.

      The “patient zero” of this Chinese repression was Dr. Li Wenliang, an ophthalmologist, who was the whistleblower for Covid-19, and who died, purportedly of the virus, at the age of 34. First, was detained by police in Wuhan for “spreading false rumors” and, for telling the truth, forced to sign a document that he had “told untruthful information online.” Hours after state media reported Dr. Li’s death,” noted Physicians for Human Rights, “official censors scrubbed the Chinese Internet of any mention of his passing without explanation.”

      Another doctor from Wuhan, Ai Fen, head of the emergency room at Wuhan Central Hospital, was apparently also one of the whistleblowers, who had “sounded the alarm” about the virus on December 30, 2019. Ai Fen was “disappeared” after criticizing the censorship concerning the epidemic. “If I had known what was to happen, I would not have cared about the reprimand. I would have fucking talked about it to whoever, where ever I could”, she said. She has not been seen or heard from since early April.

      Chen Qiushi, a citizen journalist who reported from Wuhan, has also been missing since February. “I’m scared, I have the virus in front of me and behind me China’s law enforcement”, Chen said in a video dated January 30. “But I will keep my spirits up, as long as I’m alive and in this city I will continue my reports. I’m not afraid of dying. Why should I be afraid of you, Communist Party?”

      A Wuhan clothing salesman, Fang Bin, apparently committed the crime of counting “too many” body bags. “This is too many, so many dead”, Bin said in a 40-minute video about the virus outbreak. He then disappeared as well. Bin filmed bodies piling up at a crematorium. Two months later, the world discovered that China had lied about the number of victims in Wuhan. Bin was right and Beijing had to raise its coronavirus official death toll in Wuhan by 50 percent.

      A university student in Shandong, Zhang Wenbin, called on President Xi to step down. “When I look at the courage with which Hong Kong and Taiwan stand up to the Communist Party, I want my own voice to be heard”, he said. “I call on you all to look upon the true colors of the Communist Party, and stand together to bring down this wall”. Then Zhang Wenbin disappeared.

      A property tycoon in Beijing, Ren Zhiqiang, also disappeared after writing an essay in which he described Chinese President Xi Jinping as a “clown,” and suggested that the Communist Party’s attack on freedom of speech had exacerbated the epidemic.

      Wang Fang, a native of Wuhan, who won China’s prestigious Lu Xun Literary Prize, faces harassment and death threats after publishing a diary in the West about what happened in her native city. “I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith”, Fang wrote, quoting the Bible. She explained that today’s China reminds her of the Cultural Revolution, when Mao Zedong imposed fanaticism and obedience in the country and when dissidents were humiliated in public, killed by mobs or forced to commit suicide on streets.

      A Chinese law professor at Tsinghua University, Professor Xu Zhangrun, was also placed under investigation after publishing an essay that railed against repression under President Xi. “I don’t know what they’ll do next,” Professor Xu said. “I’ve been mentally preparing for this for a long time. At the worst, I could end up in prison”. He also published a long essay in which he denounced Xi Jinping and the Communist Party. “The coronavirus epidemic has revealed the rotten core of Chinese governance”, Professor Xu wrote. He added that the Chinese system now “values the mediocre, the dilatory and the timid” and that the mess caused by officials in Wuhan who covered up early signs of the virus “has infected every province and the rot goes right up to Beijing”.

      Friends say that since those remarks were published, Professor Xu’s social account was suspended, his name scrubbed from Weibo, a Chinese blogging platform, and that now only articles from official websites show up on the country’s largest search engine, Baidu.

      A prominent Chinese legal activist, Xu Zhiyong, who urged Xi Jinping to resign — “You’re just not smart enough,” he said — was also arrested.

      A pro-democracy activist, Ren Ziyuan, was sent to administrative detention for criticizing the government’s management of the epidemic, Freedom House reported. Additionally, Tan Zuoren, an online activist and former political prisoner, has received multiple visits by police and had his account on the WeChat social media platform frozen. Former professor Guo Quan , after publishing articles about the outbreak, was also arrested for “inciting subversion of state power”.

      These intrepid dissidents showed how fragile, vacuous and dangerous is the edifice of the Chinese regime. The Chinese Communist Party “is the biggest and most serious virus of all”, said the blind activist and dissident Chen Guangcheng, now a refugee in the US. “It is time”, he said, “to recognize the threat the Chinese Communist Party poses to all humanity. The CCP represses and manipulates information to strengthen its hold on power, regardless of the toll on human lives”. Also apparently regardless of the number of victims in the world.

      An open letter from parliamentarians, academics, advocates and policy leaders states:

      “As an international group of public figures, security policy analysts and China watchers, we stand in solidarity with courageous and conscientious Chinese citizens including Xu Zhangrun, Ai Fen, Li Wenliang, Ren Zhiqiang, Chen Qiushi, Fang Bin, Li Zehua, Xu Zhiyong, and Zhang Wenbin, just to name a few of the real heroes and martyrs who risk their life and liberty for a free and open China”.

      The letter was signed by, among others, Judith Abitan, Executive Director of the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights; Lord Alton of the British House of Lords; the French historian Jean-Pierre Cabestan of the Hong Kong Baptist University; Irwin Cotler, Emeritus Professor of Law at McGill University and former Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada; and Giulio Terzi di Sant’Agata, Italy’s former minister of Foreign Affairs.

      While many in the West thought that the Soviet Union was a heaven, it only took a handful of heroes beyond the Iron Curtain to let us know about the gulags, the secret police, the hunger, the repression — in short, they showed us that the heaven was a hell. These heroes included, the Czech writer Václav Havel, the nuclear scientist Andrei Sakharov and the author Alexander Solzhenitsyn in the Soviet Union; and the physicist Robert Havemann in East Germany, to name just a few. They paid with arrest, exile, prison and even their lives, such as Czech philosopher Jan Patočka, who died after being interrogated.

      Today, similarly, if we know something about China, we owe it to China’s vanished heroes. We have, horribly, chosen to abandon them. Very few in the very free West call out the Chinese authorities and ask these great men and women to be released. For its acquiescence, the West will pay dearly.

      The University of Queensland, Australia, which has close links to China, is actually trying to take disciplinary action, including the possible expulsion, against a student, Drew Pavlou, for his criticism of Beijing. Are we already playing Beijing’s game of repressing dissent?

      Bloomberg News is said to censor articles that might anger China and expose Xi’s personal wealth. And the European Union recently softened criticism of China in a report on disinformation about the pandemic. The EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Josep Borrell, admitted that China had “pressured” Brussels.

      “We’re almost extinct,” said Liu Hu, a journalist detained for nearly a year after investigating corrupt politicians. “No one is left to reveal the truth”.

      It looks as though free thought is more valued among China’s daring dissidents than in many corners of the West.

      To paraphrase Leon Trotsky: You may not be interested in China, but China is interested in you.

    • Portland To Vote On $2.5 Billion Homeless Aid Tax Amid COVID Economy
      Portland To Vote On $2.5 Billion Homeless Aid Tax Amid COVID Economy

      Tyler Durden

      Sun, 05/17/2020 – 23:30

      As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to bring the economy to a screeching halt, progressive cities dealing with a large and growing homeless populations face increased pressure to provide assistance amid budget shortfalls and dwindling or delayed tax revenues.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      “Businesses and households are racking up huge amounts of debt. You have people who aren’t paying their rent and who are delaying their mortgages,” according to Eric Fruits, a research director at the Cascade Policy Institute.

      Given this backdrop, voters in Portland, Oregon will decide on Tuesday to approve taxes on personal income and business profits which would raise $2.5 billion over a decade for the city’s homelessness initiatives, according to KATU.

      The ballot measure was planned before the pandemic reduced the U.S. economy to tatters. Proponents, including many business leaders and major institutions, argue the taxes are needed now more than ever in a region that has long been overwhelmed by its homeless problem.

      How voters in the liberal city react amid the pandemic will be instructive for other West Coast cities struggling to address burgeoning homeless populations as other sources of revenue dry up. The measure is believed to be one of the first nationwide to ask voters to open their wallets in a post-COVID-19 world. –KATU

      Instead of housing, the money would be spent on so-called “wrap around services” to help with rent assistance, job training, mental health and substance abuse treatment, and case management and outreach.

      “I think it’s really going to give you a sense about how concerned are people, still, about homelessness as an issue — and what are they willing to pay in to solve that issue,” said Marisa Zapata, head of the Homelessness Research & Action Collaborative (HRAC) at Portland State University. 

      “We know government budgets are going to be eviscerated, so what does this mean for additional revenue-raising opportunities?” she added. “Who could we turn to to bear some of that responsibility and how will voters react?”

      According to HRAC, there are approximately 40,000 people in the greater Portland area who have experienced at least one period of homelessness, and 105,000 households which face housing insecurity.

      Those who oppose the $2.5 billion bill are shocked that organizers continue to push the effort while the economy is stalled and much of Oregon’s population remains under lockdown.

      “People are frustrated. They’re out of work, they’re angry and the last thing they’re thinking about right now is raising taxes,” according to Amanda Dalton, legislative director of the Northwest Grocery Association.

      Voters in the three counties that make up the greater Portland metro region will be asked to consider a 1% marginal income tax on the wealthiest residents and a 1% tax on gross profits for the region’s biggest businesses.

      The measure would apply to individual filers with a taxable income of more than $125,000 or joint filers with taxable income of more than $200,000. Joint filers making $215,000 a year, for example, would be taxed 1% on $15,000, or $150 a year. –KATU

      Approximately 90% of Portland residents and 94% of businesses will be exempt from the tax, says Angela Martin, campaign director for HereTogether – the organization which created the measure.

      Supporting the bill is the Portland Business Alliance, whose members have repeatedly cited homelessness as a ‘critical factor affecting its ability to expand and recruit,’ according to the report. Also backing the measure are the Portland Trail Blazers and other major sports franchises, as well as several local government leaders.

      Last week Gov. Kate Brown asked all state agencies to find a way to cut nearly 20% of their budgets, while the city of Portland is expecting a $75 million drop in revenue.

    • "Overshoot" – Understanding Our Pandemic-Economy Predicament
      “Overshoot” – Understanding Our Pandemic-Economy Predicament

      Tyler Durden

      Sun, 05/17/2020 – 23:05

      Authored by Gail Tverberg via Our Finite World blog,

      The world’s number one problem today is that the world’s population is too large for its resource base. Some people have called this situation overshoot. The world economy is ripe for a major change, such as the current pandemic, to bring the situation into balance. The change doesn’t necessarily come from the coronavirus itself. Instead, it is likely to come from a whole chain reaction that has been started by the coronavirus and the response of governments around the world to the coronavirus.

      Let me explain more about what is happening.

      [1] The world economy is reaching Limits to Growth, as described in the book with a similar title.

      One way of seeing the predicament we are in is the modeling of resource consumption and population growth described in the 1972 book, The Limits to Growth, by Donella Meadows et al. Its base scenario seems to suggest that the world will reach limits about now. Chart 1 shows the base forecast from that book, together with a line I added giving my impression of where the economy really was in 2019, relative to resource availability.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Figure 1. Base scenario from 1972 Limits to Growth, printed using today’s graphics by Charles Hall and John Day in “Revisiting Limits to Growth After Peak Oil,” with dotted line added corresponding to where the world economy seems to be have been in 2019.

      In 2019, the world economy seemed to be very close to starting a downhill trajectory. Now, it appears to me that we have reached the turning point and are on our way down. The pandemic is the catalyst for this change to a downward trend. It certainly is not the whole cause of the change. If the underlying dynamics had not been in place, the impact of the virus would likely have been much less.

      The 1972 model leaves out two important parts of the economy that probably make the downhill trajectory steeper than shown in Figure 1. First, the model leaves out debt and, in fact, the whole financial system. After the 2008 crisis, many people strongly suspected that the financial system would play an important role as we reach the limits of a finite world because debt defaults are likely to disturb the worldwide financial system.

      The model also leaves out humans’ continual battle with pathogens. The problem with pathogens becomes greater as world population becomes denser, facilitating transmission. The problem also becomes greater as a larger share of the population becomes more susceptible, either because they are elderly or because they have underlying health conditions that have been hidden by an increasingly complex and expensive medical system.

      As a result, we cannot really believe the part of Figure 1 that is after 2020. The future downslopes of population, industrial production per capita, and food per capita all seem likely to be steeper than shown on the chart because both the debt and pathogen problems are likely to increase the speed at which the economy declines.

      [2] It is far more than the population that has overshot limits.

      The issue isn’t simply that there are too many people relative to resources. The world seems to have

      • Too many shopping malls and stores

      • Too many businesses of all kinds, with many not very profitable for their owners

      • Governments with too extensive programs, which taxpayers cannot really afford

      • Too much debt

      • An unaffordable amount of pension promises

      • Too low interest rates

      • Too many people with low wages or no wages at all

      • Too expensive a healthcare system

      • Too expensive an educational system

      The world economy needs to shrink back in many ways at once, simultaneously, to manage within its resource limits. It is not clear how much of an economy (or multiple smaller economies) will be left after this shrinkage occurs.

      [3] The economy is in many ways like the human body. In physics terms, both are dissipative structures. They are both self-organizing systems powered by energy (food for humans; a mixture of energy products inducing oil, coal, natural gas, burned biomass and electricity for the economy).

      The human body will try to fix minor problems. For example, if someone’s hand is cut, blood will tend to clot to prevent too much blood loss, and skin will tend to grow to substitute for the missing skin. Similarly, if businesses in an area disappear because of a tornado, the prior owners will either tend to rebuild them or new businesses will tend to come in to replace them, as long as adequate resources are available.

      In both systems, there is a point beyond which problems cannot be fixed, however. We know that many people die in car accidents if injuries are too serious, for example. Similarly, the world economy may “collapse” if conditions deviate too far from what is necessary for economic growth to continue. In fact, at this point, the world economy may be so close to the edge with respect to resources, particularly energy resources, that even a minor pandemic could push the world economy into a permanent cycle of contraction.

      [4] World governments are in a poor position to fix the current resource and pandemic crisis.

      In our networked economy, too low a resource base relative to population manifests itself in a strange way: It appears as an affordability crisis that leads to very low prices for oil. It also appears as terribly low prices for many other commodities, including copper, lithium, coal and even wholesale electricity. These low prices occur because too large a share of the population cannot afford finished goods, such as cars and homes, made with these commodities. Recent shutdowns have suddenly increased the number of people with low income or no income, pushing commodity prices even lower.

      If resources were more plentiful and very inexpensive to produce, as they were 50 or 70 years ago, wages of workers could be much higher, relative to the cost of resources. Factory workers would be able to afford to buy vehicles, for example, and thus help keep the demand for automobiles up. If we look more deeply into this, we find that energy resources of many kinds (fossil fuel energy, nuclear energy, burned biomass and other renewable energy) must be extraordinarily cheap and abundant to keep the system growing. Without “surplus energy” from many sources, which grows with population, the whole system tends to collapse.

      World governments cannot print resources. What they can print is debt. Debt can be viewed a promise of future goods and services, whether or not it is reasonable to believe that these future goods and services will actually materialize, given resource constraints.

      We are finding that using shutdowns to solve COVID-19 problems causes a huge amount of economic damage. The cost of mitigating this damage seems to be unreasonably high. For example, in the United States, antibody studies suggest that roughly 5% of the population has been infected with COVID-19. The total number of deaths associated with this 5% infection level is perhaps 100,000, assuming that reported deaths to date (about 80,000) need to be increased somewhat, to match the approximately 5% of the population that has, knowingly or unknowingly, already experienced the infection.

      If we estimate that the mean number of years of life lost is 13 years per person, then the total years of life lost would be about 1,300,000. If we estimate that the US treasury needed to borrow $3 trillion dollars to mitigate this damage, the cost per year of life lost is $3 trillion divided by 1.3 million, or $2.3 million dollars per year of life lost. This amount is utterly absurd.

      This approach is clearly not something the United States can scale up, as the share of the population affected by COVID-19 relentlessly rises from 5% to something like 70% or 80%, in the absence of a vaccine. We have no choice but to use a different approach.

      [5] COVID-19 would have the least impact on the world economy if people could pay little attention to the pandemic and just “let it run.” Of course, even without mitigation attempts, COVID-19 might bring the world economy down, given the distressed level of today’s economy and the shutdowns experienced to date.

      Shutting down an economy has a huge adverse impact on that economy because quite a few workers who are in good health are no longer able to make goods and services. As a result, they have no wages, so their “demand” goes way down. If the economy was already having an affordability crisis for goods made with commodities, shutting down the economy tends to greatly add to the affordability crisis. Prices of commodities tend to fall even lower than they were before the crisis.

      Back in 1957-1958, the Asian pandemic, which also started in China, hit the world. The number of deaths was up in the range of the current pandemic, relative to population. The estimated worldwide death rate was 0.67%.  This is not too dissimilar from a death rate of 0.61% for COVID-19, which can be calculated using my estimate above (100,000 deaths relative to 5% of the US population of 33o million).

      Virtually nothing was shut down in the US for the 1957-58 pandemic. When doctors or nurses became sick themselves, wards were simply closed. Would-be patients were told to stay at home and take aspirin, unless a severe case developed. With this approach, the US still faced a short recession, but the economy was soon growing again. Populations seemed to soon reach herd immunity quite quickly.

      If the world could somehow have adopted a similar approach this time, there still would have been some adverse impact on the economy. A small percentage of the population would have died. Some businesses might have needed to be closed for a short time when too many workers were out sick. But the huge burden of job loss by a substantial share of the economy could have been avoided. The economy would have had at least a small chance of rebounding quickly.

      [6] The virus that causes COVID-19 looks a great deal like a laboratory cross between SARS and HIV, making the likelihood of a quick vaccine low.

      In fact, Professor Luc Montagnier, co-discoverer of the AIDS virus and winner of a Nobel Prize in Medicine, claims that the new coronavirus is the result of an attempt to manufacture a vaccine against the AIDS virus. He believes that the accidental release of this virus is what is causing today’s pandemic.

      If COVID-19 were simply another influenza virus, similar to many we have seen, then getting a vaccine that would work passably well would be a relatively easy exercise. At least one of the vaccine trials that has been started could be reasonably expected to work, and a solution would not be far away.

      Unfortunately, SARS and HIV are fairly different from influenza viruses. We have never found a vaccine for either one. If a person has had SARS once, and is later exposed to a slightly mutated version of SARS, the symptoms of the second infection seem to be worse than the first. This characteristic interferes with finding a suitable vaccine. We don’t know whether the virus causing COVID-19 will have a similar characteristic.

      We know that scientists from a number of countries have been working on so-called “gain of function” experiments with viruses. These very risky experiments are aimed at making viruses either more virulent, or more transmissible, or both. In fact, experiments were going on in Wuhan, in two different laboratories, with viruses that seem to be not too different from the virus causing COVID-19.

      We don’t know for certain whether there was an accident that caused the release of one of these gain of function viruses in Wuhan. We do know, however, that China has been doing a lot of cover-up activity to deter others from finding out what actually happened in Wuhan.

      We also know that Dr. Fauci, a well-known COVID-19 advisor, had his hand in this Chinese research activity. Fauci’s organization, the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, provided partial funding for the gain of function experiments on bat coronaviruses in Wuhan. While the intent of the experiments seems to have been for the good of mankind, it would seem that Dr. Fauci’s judgment erred in the direction of allowing too much risk for the world’s population.

      [7] We are probably kidding ourselves about ever being able to contain the virus that causes COVID-19. 

      We are gradually learning that the virus causing COVID-19 is easily spread, even by people who do not show any symptoms of the disease. The virus can spread long distances through the air. Tests to see if people are ill tend to produce a lot of false negatives; because of this, it is close to impossible to know whether a particular person has the illness or not.

      China is finding that it cannot really contain the virus that causes COVID-19. A recent South China Morning Post article indicates that roughly 14 million people are to be tested in the Wuhan area in the next ten days to try to control a new outbreak of the virus.

      It is becoming clear, as well, that even within China, the lockdowns have had a very negative impact on the economy. The Wall Street Journal reports, China Economic Data Indicate V-Shaped Recovery Is Unlikely. Supply chains were broken; wholesale commodity prices (excluding food) have tended to fall. Joblessness is increasingly a problem.

      [8] If we look at deaths per million by country, it is difficult to see that lockdowns are very helpful in reducing the spread of disease. Masks seem to be more beneficial.

      If we compare death rates for mask-wearing East Asian countries to death rates elsewhere, we see that death rates in mask-wearing East Asian countries are dramatically lower.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Figure 2. Death rates per million population of selected countries with long-term exposure to the virus causing COVID-19, based on Johns Hopkins death data as of May 11, 2020.

      Looking at the chart, a person almost wonders whether lockdowns are a response to requests from citizens to “do something” in response to an already evident surge in cases. The countries known for their severe lockdowns are at the top of the chart, not the bottom.

      In fact, a preprint academic paper by Thomas Meunier is titled, “Full lockdown policies in Western Europe countries have no evident impacts on the COVID-19 epidemic.” The abstract says, “Comparing the trajectory of the epidemic before and after the lockdown, we find no evidence of any discontinuity in the growth rate, doubling time, and reproduction number trends.  .  . We also show that neighboring countries applying less restrictive social distancing measures (as opposed to police-enforced home containment) experience a very similar time evolution of the epidemic.”

      It appears to me that lockdowns have been popular with governments around the world for a whole host of reasons that have little to do with the spread of COVID-19:

      • Lockdowns give an excuse for closing borders to visitors and goods from outside. This was a direction in which many countries were already headed, in an attempt to raise the wages of local workers.

      • Lockdowns can be used to hide the fact that factories need to be closed because of breaks in supply lines elsewhere in the world.

      • Many countries have been faced with governmental protests because of low wages compared to the prices of basic services. Lockdowns tend to keep protesters inside.

      • Lockdowns give the appearance of protecting the elderly. Since there are many elderly voters, politicians need to court these voters.

      [9] A person wonders whether Dr. Fauci and members of the World Health Organization are influenced by the wishes of vaccine and big pharmaceutical companies.

      The recommendation to try to “flatten the curve” is, in part, an attempt to give vaccine and pharmaceutical makers more time to work on their products. Is this really the best recommendation? Perhaps I am being overly suspicious, but we recently have been dealing with an opioid epidemic which was encouraged by manufacturers of Oxycontin and other opioids. We don’t need another similar experience, this time sponsored by vaccine and other pharmaceutical makers.

      The temptation of researchers is to choose solutions that would be best from the point of their own business interests. If a researcher gets much of his funding from vaccine and big pharmaceutical interests, the temptation will be to “push” solutions that are beneficial to these interests. In some cases, researchers are able to patent approaches, even when the research is paid for by governmental grants. In this case they can directly benefit from a new vaccine or drug.

      When potential solutions are discussed by Dr. Fauci and the World Health Organization, no one brings up improving people’s immunity so that they can better fight off the novel coronavirus. Few bring up masks. Instead, we keep being warned about “opening up too soon.” In a way, this sounds like, “Please leave us lots of customers who might be willing to pay a high price for our vaccine.”

      [10] One way the combination of (a) the activity of the virus and (b) our responses to the virus may play out is as a slow-motion, controlled demolition of the world economy. 

      I think of what we are experiencing as being somewhat similar to a toggle bolt going around and around, moving down a screw. As the toggle bolt moves around, I picture it as being similar to the virus and our responses to the viruses hitting different parts of the world economy.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Figure 3. Image of how the author sees COVID-19 as being able to hit the economy multiple times, in multiple ways, as its impact keeps impacting different parts of the world.

      If we look back, the virus and reactions to the virus first hit China. China’s recovery is moving slowly, in part because of reduced demand from outside of China now that the virus is hitting other parts of the world. In fact, additional layoffs occurred after Chinese shutdowns ended, because it then became clear that some employers needed to permanently scale back operations to meet the new lower demand for their product.

      Commodity prices, including oil prices, are now depressed because of low demand around the world. These low prices can be expected to gradually lead to closures of wells and mines extracting these commodities. Processing centers will also close, making these commodities less available even if demand temporarily rises.

      As one country is hit by illnesses and/or shutdowns, we can expect supply lines for manufacturing around the world to be disrupted. This will lead to yet more business closures, some of them permanent. Debt defaults tend to happen as businesses close and layoffs occur.

      With all of the layoffs, governments will find that their tax collections are lower. The resulting governmental funding issues can be expected to lead to new rounds of layoffs.

      Natural disasters such as hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, earthquakes and forest fires can be expected to continue to happen. Social distancing requirements, inadequate tax revenue and broken supply lines will make mitigation of all of these disasters more difficult. Electrical lines that fall down may stay down permanently; bridges that are damaged may never be repaired.

      Initially, rich countries can be expected to try to help as many laid-off workers as possible with loans and temporary stipends. But, after a few months, even with this approach, many individual citizens and businesses will likely not be able to pay their rent. Default rates on home mortgages and auto loans can be expected to rise for a similar reason.

      We can expect to see round after round of business failures and layoffs of employees. Financial systems will become more and more stressed. Pensions are likely to default. Death rates will rise, in part from epidemics of various kinds and in part from growing problems with starvation. In fact, in some poor countries, lower-income citizens are already having difficulty being able to afford adequate food. Eventually we can expect collapsing governments (similar to the collapse of central government of the Soviet Union) and overthrown governments.

      Longer-term, after this demolition ends, there may be some surviving pieces of economies. These new economies will be much smaller and less dependent upon each other, however. Currencies are likely to be less interchangeable. The remaining people will need to learn to make do with many fewer goods than are available today. It will be a very different world.

    • Can't Make This Up: Beijing Begins Construction Of A P-3 Biolab
      Can’t Make This Up: Beijing Begins Construction Of A P-3 Biolab

      Tyler Durden

      Sun, 05/17/2020 – 22:56

      As the new trade/tech/diplomatic/cultural (in fact, everything but kinetic) war between the US and China is heating up by the hour, one would think that China would do everything in its power to defuse one of the core accusations by the Trump administration, namely that the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China was the source of the global coronavirus pandemic (going so far as to spark unofficial demands for hundreds of billions in reparations from Beijing for its “criminal” actions), an allegation which Peter Navarro on Sunday expanded when he accused China of deliberately “seeding” the world with the “China virus”:

      “The Chinese behind the shield of the World Health Organization – for two months – hid the virus from the world and then sent hundreds of thousands of Chinese on aircraft to Milan, New York and around the world to seed that,” Navarro said on ABC. “They could have kept it in Wuhan. Instead it became a pandemic.”

      Well, one would be wrong, because in a “completely unexpected” twist – assuming China was indeed telling the truth and that the WIV had nothing to do with the original viral release – on Friday, a senior Chinese official confirmed Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s allegation that Beijing had told labs in the country to destroy coronavirus samples in early January.

      Recall that in a May 6 press briefing, Pompeo accused China of covering up the Covid-19 outbreak as it emerged in the central city of Wuhan, saying China’s National Health Commission had ordered destruction of samples of the virus on Jan. 3.

      Asked about those comments at a press briefing in Beijing on Friday, NHC official Liu Dengfeng confirmed that the commission had issued these guidelines at that time “for pandemic prevention and control, which also played an important role in preventing biosafety risks.”

      “If the laboratory conditions cannot meet the requirements for the safe preservation of samples, the samples should be destroyed on the spot or transferred to a professional institution for safekeeping,” said Liu, supervisor of the commission’s Department of Health Science, Technology and Education.

      Chinese law has clear rules for the handling of highly pathogenic samples, he said, and we are sure that it does… but wait a gosh darned minute? According to Dengfeng, China is basically admitting that the coronavirus samples – which were held in China’s P-4 rated, top “biosafety” lab in Wuhan which incidentally is also where the virus was leaked from according to a mountain of circumstantial evidence – were not safe in the Wuhan lab and thus had to be destroyed?

      Considering that one of the core arguments made by the Trump administration (and this website) is that the virus (whether genetically engineered or otherwise) was released (hopefully without premeditation although there is no way of knowing for certain) by the Wuhan lab, China’s actions essentially confirm that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was unsafe, and thus every last sample of the virus had to be destroyed.

      Of course, the real reason why China destroyed the samples was different, and it had to do with not only destroying all the evidence but crushing any hope of finding what the real source of the pandemic was. As the WSJ reported, “Public health experts say it is likely too late to investigate the role of the market in Covid-19’s spread and that proving its origin might now be impossible.” And with China destroying the last remaining coronavirus samples, well – there goes any hope of proving or disproving that the virus emerged from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

      Just as China wanted.

      So with all that in mind, and with China’s track record in biotechnology, “gain of function” experiments and reputation of deadly viral “containment” destroyed, what does China do? Why it plans to build an entirely new biolab, only this time not in the industrial backwater of Wuhan, but in the capital itself.

      According to the Global Times, China’s capital Beijing will build its own, P-3 rated laboratory “to improve and explore infectious disease detection capacity” Lei Haichao, director of Beijing Municipal Health Commission, said at a press conference on Sunday, Chinanews reported.

      There is no P-3 laboratory in Beijing now, while the nation’s only P-4 lab – which as a reminder  is the highest level of biosafety precautions, and is appropriate for work with “agents that could easily be aerosol-transmitted within the laboratory and cause severe to fatal disease in humans for which there are no available vaccines or treatments” – remains in Wuhan.

      When COVID-19 emerged, the nation’s capital had 17 facilities equipped with nucleic acid testing capabilities. Within two months, 70 institutions had added testing capabilities necessary to conduct 51,000 tests daily, Lei said.

      Recently, the highest number of tests completed in one day is 30,000, indicating ample reserve capacity. However, the ability of Beijing laboratories to target infectious diseases needs to be explored and improved in the long term, according to Lei.

      Of course, testing is just one of the many aspects that a biosafety level 3 lab does. According to the CDC’s “Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories” manual, P-3 labs are appropriate for work involving microbes which can cause serious and potentially lethal disease via the inhalation route. This type of work can be done in clinical, diagnostic, teaching, research, or production facilities. Here, the precautions undertaken in BSL-1 and BSL-2 labs are followed, as well as additional measures including:

      • All laboratory personnel are provided medical surveillance and offered relevant immunizations (where available) to reduce the risk of an accidental or unnoticed infection.
      • All procedures involving infectious material must be done within a biological safety cabinet.
      • Laboratory personnel must wear solid-front protective clothing (i.e. gowns that tie in the back). This cannot be worn outside of the laboratory and must be discarded or decontaminated after each use.
      • A laboratory-specific biosafety manual must be drafted which details how the laboratory will operate in compliance with all safety requirements.

      In addition, the facility which houses the BSL-3 laboratory must have certain features to ensure appropriate containment. The entrance to the laboratory must be separated from areas of the building with unrestricted traffic flow. Additionally, the laboratory must be behind two sets of self-closing doors (to reduce the risk of aerosols escaping). The construction of the laboratory is such that it can be easily cleaned. Carpets are not permitted, and any seams in the floors, walls, and ceilings are sealed to allow for easy cleaning and decontamination. Additionally, windows must be sealed, and a ventilation system installed which forces air to flow from the “clean” areas of the lab to the areas where infectious agents are handled.  Air from the laboratory must be filtered before it can be recirculated.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      So after Wuhan and the whole “coronavirus thing”, what do Beijing residents have to look forward to?

      According to the CDC, biosafety level 3 is commonly used for research and diagnostic work involving various microbes which can be transmitted by aerosols and/or cause severe disease. These include Francisella tularensis, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Chlamydia psittaci, Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus, Eastern equine encephalitis virus, Coxiella burnetii, Rift Valley fever virus, Rickettsia rickettsii, several species of Brucella, chikungunya, yellow fever virus, West Nile virus, Yersinia pestis.

      Oh, and the SARS coronavirus, SARS-Cov-2, and MERS coronavirus. Just in case the world really needs that second wave.

    • The Top 4 Themes And Trends From Q1 Earnings Conference Calls
      The Top 4 Themes And Trends From Q1 Earnings Conference Calls

      Tyler Durden

      Sun, 05/17/2020 – 22:40

      Every quarter, Goldman Sachs published its so-called Beige Book (not to be confused with the Fed’s publication by that name) in which the bank gathers anecdotal evidence of fundamental and thematic trends from the earnings transcripts of companies in the S&P 500. Obviously, the latest, Q1 edition, spotlights commentary around the coronavirus outbreak. As Goldman’s David Kostin summarizes, there were four key themes to emerge across sectors:

      1. Business outlook (uncertainty, earnings guidance withdrawal, U- or L-shaped path more likely than a V);
      2. Accelerating revenue model changes (digitalization, DTC, automation initiatives);
      3. Corporate operations and labor force changes (WFH, cutting labor costs);
      4. Cash use priorities (liquidity paramount, suspending buybacks and dividends).

      Some more observations on these four key themes:

      Theme 1: An uncertain recovery

      Many corporate managers highlighted extreme uncertainty around the path to recovery. Amid the ongoing stay-at-home mandates, business closures, and social distancing measures, roughly 180 companies pulled earnings guidance. The bottom-up consensus estimate of 2020 S&P 500 EPS has been revised down by 27% since the start of the year.

      Overall, managements anticipated activity would trough in 2Q 2020, but firms had mixed views on how long the financial impact of the pandemic would last. Only a few companies posited a V-shaped rebound while most others expected a U- or L-shaped recovery. Unsurprisingly, companies facing greater exposure to travel and requiring face-to-face interactions expected a longer stretch of time before business activities would return to normal. In contrast, companies in market segments like construction, business supplies, and data centers expected faster normalization. Although some companies gained insight from their business recovery experience in China, others were wary to extrapolate China’s rebound to other countries due to varying national responses and governing systems.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Selected examples:

      • Uncertainty around financial guidance: AKAM, CMS, FB, KSU, MDLZ, MMM, PKG, UPS
      • Anticipated 2Q trough: ADM, AMGN, APTV, DD, HLT, JNJ, LDOS, NEM, REGN
      • U or L more common than V-shaped recovery: ABBV, ABT, ADP, CE, ECL, EMR, HBAN, IDXX, PNC, PPG, RF, WHR, WY
      • Wary of extrapolating China’s recovery: APH, ETN, IEX, ZTS
      • Pockets of optimism: AXP, BAC, FOXA, IQV, V

      Theme 2: Accelerating digitalization, direct-to-consumer, and automation strategies

      Executives highlighted digital transformation as their top priority given online engagement has skyrocketed following stay-at-home mandates and government-mandated business closures. Digitalization solutions centered around shifting consumer behaviors within the low mobility, contact-less environment. Among the broad span of businesses that accelerated digitalization: Restaurants added online order-and-pay services, retailers turned to digital marketing and e-commerce, patient care pivoted to telemedicine, work-from-home mandates boosted collaborative technologies, and banks further invested in mobile financing capabilities. Companies within consumer sectors, in particular, overwhelmingly cited spikes in online sales. Video chat apps (+1,485%), home fitness apps (+288%), grocery apps (+214%) and e-commerce apps (+116%) have all more than doubled the number of app downloads since last year .

      Direct-to-consumer channels experienced a similar surge as retail customers found alternative ways to purchase goods. Executives highlighted sustained or increased direct-to-consumer sales, with many consumer-facing companies aggressively pivoting to sell directly to their end-market customers.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Managements also escalated automation strategies into their operations and supply chains. Automation technologies were cited as long-term strategies to permanently lower operating costs. Reduced headcount and social-distancing measures within facilities further increased the demand for automation to help firms sustain or increase operational efficiency.

      Selected examples:

      • Digitalization: ACN, AKAM, ANTM, AOS, C, CDW, CFG, CHD, CHTR, CMCSA, CMG, CVS, EL, FB, GE, GM, GOOGL, GPC, HBI, HSY, ICE, KEY, KO, LEN, MA, MGM, NKE, NOW, TSCO, UPS, WBA, WRK
      • Direct-to-consumer: AFL, CHTR, CL, DRE, GRMN, LEG, MKC, STZ, WHR
      • Automation: AME, OXY, SEE, SLB, TEL, XYL, YUM, ZBRA

      Theme 3: A changing workforce

      Amid the economic and health crisis, many companies reduced labor costs through layoffs, furloughs, and pay cuts. Actions on labor costs were widespread and were not confined to the industries that were most acutely impacted by government-mandated social distancing. Pay cuts were a common labor cost reduction lever, especially at the executive level. In April alone, 20.5 million jobs were lost and the US unemployment rate spiked to 14.7%. Many companies indicated actions on labor costs were intended to be temporary, suggesting that the lasting economic effects of job losses may be limited at the moment.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Companies able to transition employees to working-from-home did so, with mixed results. Some companies called out sustained or improved efficiency from their remote employees and potential opportunities for some of their employees to continue working remotely long-term, whereas other companies discussed diminished productivity and operational challenges. Firms with employees still on-site incurred additional costs associated with ensuring employee safety.

      Selected examples:

      • A remote workforce: AEP, APD, APTV, CDNS, COF, CTXS, GPN, HCA, LHX, NEM, OMC, SLG, SPGI, VRSK
      • Cutting labor costs: BWA, CAT, CHRW, EMR, L, LH, LKQ, MGM, NWL, TDG
      • COVID-19 related employee expenses: AIZ, CVS, SYF, TSN, YUM

      Theme 4: New cash spending priorities

      Management teams prioritized liquidity and balance sheet strength. Heightened uncertainty prompted companies to reduce capital expenditures, buybacks, and dividends. Many companies, however, committed to their dividends, emphasizing the importance of dividend payments to shareholders and their priority of maintaining their long track record of paying dividends.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Goldman also notes that some companies were also opportunistic around M&A given the current environment, and the bank’s Strong Balance Sheet basket (GSTHSBAL) outperformed its Weak Balance Sheet basket (GSTHWBAL) by 24 pp YTD (2% vs. -22%), but trades at a forward P/E of 32x, representing a 3 standard deviation premium vs. history. As a reminder, Goldman recently forecast S&P 500 buybacks will fall by 50% and dividends by 25% in 2020.

      Selected examples:

      • Liquidity: AIG, BA, CDW, DVN, HSIC, MDLZ, SWK, WAB
      • Cutting out of caution: CHRW, IVZ, MCO, NTRS
      • Commitment to dividends: CAT, ETN, FANG, FLIR, KSU, PEG, PG, TRV, WM
      • M&A opportunities: BAX, CERN, JKHY, LVS, SYK, XRX

      * * *

      In addition to these four key themes, Kostin also highlights 4 core trends that emerged during Q1 conference calls:

      First, S&P 500 earnings are partially insulated relative to the economy given its large-cap tilt and high weight in non-cyclical industries.

      Concentration within the equity market has been growing. The ongoing crisis has exacerbated the “winner-takeall” nature of the equity market, acutely affecting small companies with less operational and balance sheet flexibility than their larger peers. While S&P 500 EPS fell by 14% in 1Q, small-cap Russell 2000 EPS fell by 90%. Furthermore, the S&P 500 carries large earnings weights in non-cyclical industries, which posted positive EPS growth in 1Q and are expected to post much stronger full-year EPS growth relative to the broad index. Software & Services share of S&P 500 EPS has grown to 9%, led by MSFT. Health Care and Consumer Staples account for 16% and 7% of S&P 500 EPS, respectively.

      Second, online platforms and shifting business models will partially offset the revenue declines in in-person consumption.

      The consumer accounts for 70% of the US economy and has been impaired by restrictions on face-to-face transactions. Consumer Discretionary sales excluding AMZN fell by 6% in 1Q and US retail sales fell by 16% in April. However, restrictions have expedited the shift to e-commerce and other online services. For example, online retailer Wayfair (W) reported that gross revenues 2QTD have grown by 90% year/year, Target (TGT) reported 275% growth in digital sales MTD through April 23, and Chipotle (CMG) reported that, while in-store ordering plunged by 75%, delivery and order-ahead sales surged by
      150% and 120%. Video chat apps (+1,255%), grocery apps (+134%) and ecommerce apps (+118%) have all more than doubled the number of downloads since last year. Several companies have also adjusted their business models. In mid-April, Best Buy (BBY) reported that it had retained 70% of sales by enhancing curbside pickup offerings despite all US stores being closed to customer traffic.

      Third, increased costs associated with maintaining or resuming business activity will continue to pressure profit margins.

      S&P 500 net margins fell by 107 bp in 1Q. Several brick-and-mortar companies have highlighted increased costs associated with coronavirus. Target (TGT) noted that costs were expected to be higher because of investments in pay and benefits as well as additional cleaning of stores and distribution centers. Even Amazon (AMZN), a relative revenue beneficiary, guided for $4 billion of extra costs related to COVID-19, including worker safety measures, virus testing, and higher labor costs.

      Fourth, several companies noted that revenue declines stabilized in April and there were pockets of improvement in early 2Q.

      Commentary on signs of stabilization was present in a variety of sectors, such as Consumer Discretionary (e.g., MAR, BKNG, YUM), Industrials (e.g., URI, WM), and Info Tech (e.g., FIS, IT, ADP). Several firms leveraged to consumer spending,  such as payment processors V, MA, and GPN, even highlighted sequential improvements in April and May. On Thursday, MA noted that it believed it was starting to see the transition from the “stabilization” phase to the “normalization” phase in some markets. This pattern is consistent with data from Opportunity Insights, which tracks consumer spending, and also our own observations form last week.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Their measure of total consumer spending stabilized at -30% in the first half of April and has improved to -20% at the end of April. While this nascent improvement is encouraging, it certainly reflects the direct consumer payments under the CARES Act, which will prove temporary. However, even outside of the consumer, FB noted that after an initial steep decline in March ad revenue was roughly flat during the first three weeks of April vs. the same period a year ago.

    • Chinese Ambassador To Israel Found Dead In Home, Sparking Avalanche Of Rumors Amid Tensions With US
      Chinese Ambassador To Israel Found Dead In Home, Sparking Avalanche Of Rumors Amid Tensions With US

      Tyler Durden

      Sun, 05/17/2020 – 22:21

      China’s Ambassador to Israel has been found dead inside his home near Tel Aviv Sunday morning, Israel’s Foreign Ministry has confirmed.

      57-year old ambassador Du Wei had only assumed his post in February 2020 in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, due to which he entered a two week mandatory self-quarantine upon his arrival. He’d previously been China’s envoy to Ukraine and is survived by his wife and son, who were not yet in the country.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      China’s ambassador to Israel Du Wei, file image, 

      Police were reported outside his residence in Herzliya, which lies just north of the Israeli capital, conducting an investigation but have told the media Wei’s death isn’t being treated as suspicious. However, a number of commentators are highlighting the context of tensions between the US and China inside Israel as being essentially in a state of behind-the-scenes diplomatic war after Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s visit there last week.

      Pompeo sought to urge the Israelis against trading or investing with China, especially the agreement for China to start operating Haifa Port in 2021. As multiple reports underscored

      On Wednesday, Mr Pompeo denounced Chinese investments in Israel and accused China of withholding information about the coronavirus outbreak.

      Washington has sought to strip China of ability to exercise influence in this strategically key part of the Mediterranean where the US Navy’s 6th fleet often docks and restocks.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Chinese Embassy in Tel Aviv, Wiki Commons.

      Du Wei reportedly specifically condemned Pompeo’s anti-China rhetoric on the embassy’s official website days ago.

      While there was no immediately forthcoming statement on the ambassador’s death out of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, it is likely Beijing has yet to rule anything out in terms of the suspicious timing of it all.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Meanwhile, Israeli newspapers were quick to underscore that the immediate rapid spread of the news across global press almost immediately after the discovery of the death was accompanied by widespread rumors and speculation.

      “The level of conspiracies and anti-China comments after the death of the ambassador reached a crescendo on Sunday afternoon,” Jerusalem Post wrote. This is also due to it being rare that an ambassador dies while on the job, as multiple reports have noted. 

    • The US Is Caught In An Economic Death Spiral, And One Group Is Being Hit Particularly Hard…
      The US Is Caught In An Economic Death Spiral, And One Group Is Being Hit Particularly Hard…

      Tyler Durden

      Sun, 05/17/2020 – 22:15

      Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

      Many have been warning for years that our economic bubble would eventually burst and that a collapse was inevitably coming, but the ferocity of this new economic crisis has caught just about everyone off guard.  And even though some states have been attempting to “reopen” their economies in recent days, the job loss tsunami just continues to roll on.  Prior to this year, the all-time record for the most new unemployment claims in a single week was 695,000.  That record was set all the way back in 1982, and it had survived all the way until 2020.  But now we have been absolutely dwarfing that number week after week.  On Thursday, we learned that another 2.9 million Americans filed initial claims for unemployment benefits last week, and that brings the grand total for this pandemic to more than 36 million

      New filings for unemployment claims totaled just shy of 3 million for the most recent reporting period, a number that while still high declined for the sixth straight week, according to Labor Department figures Thursday.

      The total 2.981 million new claims for unemployment insurance filed last week brought the coronavirus crisis total to nearly 36.5 million, by far the biggest loss in U.S. history. The count announced last week count was revised up by 7,000 to 3.176 million, putting the weekly decline at 195,000 between the two most recent reports.

      To put that in perspective, at the lowest point of the Great Depression only 15 million Americans were unemployed.

      Of course our population is quite a bit larger today, and so it isn’t a straightforward comparison.

      But what everyone can agree on is the fact that we have never seen a two month spike in unemployment like this in all of U.S. history.

      And according to the Federal Reserve, low income workers are getting hit harder than anyone else…

      The Federal Reserve Bank on Thursday reported just how unequally the coronavirus-induced economic downturn is hitting Americans.

      On one hand, lower-income people are getting slammed. Nearly 40% of those with a household income below $40,000 reported a job loss in March, according to the Economic Well-Being of US Households report.

      Sadly, this is what seems to happen every time that there is an economic downturn.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The powerless people on the bottom of the food chain get hurt the most, but the fat cats with political influence are able to get the big bailouts.

      Millions of newly unemployed low income workers used to be employed by the restaurant industry, but that industry has been absolutely decimated by this crisis…

      The National Restaurant Association says some $30 billion was lost by its members in March, and $50 billion in April.

      In the last week alone, several restaurants have announced that they won’t re-open, including the buffet chain Souplantation and Sweet Tomatoes, Jen’s Grill in Chicago and Ristorant Franchino, which has been serving patrons in the San Francisco area for over 32 years.

      Of course most restaurant closings will never even make the news because they are small independent operations without corporate backing.

      In the days ahead, we are going to see a “restaurant apocalypse” like we have never seen before in American history.  If you can believe it, one industry expert just told Bloomberg that about one-fourth of all U.S. restaurants will be closing down permanently…

      Your favorite restaurant, now closed or only accepting take out orders due to the coronavirus, may never reopen, according to a top exec with reservation service OpenTable.

      Steve Hafner, CEO of Booking Holdings’ OpenTable and travel site Kayak, told Bloomberg that one out of every four restaurants won’t come back.

      This is truly a great tragedy, and it is going to be so depressing to see so many buildings sitting empty in communities all across the nation.

      And things will be much, much different for the restaurants that are able to stay open.  For example, just check out the changes that are happening at McDonald’s

      When McDonald’s restaurants reopen their dining rooms, customers should expect stickers on the floor encouraging social distancing and the closure of self-serve beverage bars. Workers wearing masks might check in with a thumbs up, or kindly ask you to move away from others.

      If that is what a trip to McDonald’s is going to be like, I don’t think that I will be visiting one for a long time to come.

      What we really need is for the country to try to return to normal, but in some of the more liberal areas of the U.S. that is not going to happen for the foreseeable future.

      So the U.S. economy will continue to be caught in this death spiral, and Fed Chair Jay Powell is warning that we could soon see a “wave of bankruptcies” from coast to coast…

      Federal Reserve Chief Jay Powell warned Wednesday of a potential “wave of bankruptcies” that could cause lasting harm to the world’s largest economy, and said more fiscal support may be needed to prevent the devastation, despite the massive cost.

      Powell, who has launched a host of key programs to support credit markets and provide funds directly to companies, said there are limits to how far the Fed can go.

      In particular, keep a close eye on the commercial real estate industry.

      In order to service their loans, owners of commercial property need to successfully collect rent from their tenants, and right now many of those tenants are not able to pay.

      For example, just look at the numbers that one New York City commercial landlord is reporting

      A major New York City commercial landlord collected just 73 percent of its April office rent from tenants, with an increasing number defaulting on payments amid growing uncertainty over whether corporate buildings will become a thing of the past.

      Empire State Realty Trust, owner of the Empire State Building, collected only 73 percent of its office rents and 46 percent of its retail rents due in April.

      Unless there is some sort of a bailout, we are going to see commercial real estate carnage on a scale that is far greater than anything we have ever seen before.

      Of course just about every industry needs a bailout at this point, and not everyone is going to get one.

      Fear of COVID-19 did not create the conditions for this new economic crisis, but it did finally burst the debt-fueled economic bubble that was keeping conditions relatively stable the past few years.

      Now that our economy has begun to spiral out of control, nobody is going to be able to put the pieces back together again, and the truth is that this is just the very beginning of our problems.

      So many of the things that I have been warning about are starting to happen, and without a doubt our economy will continue to fall apart in the months ahead, but that does not mean that your life is over.

      Yes, the days ahead will be exceedingly challenging, but heroes are born when things are at their darkest.

    • US Headed For Another 'Tanker War' With Iran – This Time Off Venezuela's Coast
      US Headed For Another ‘Tanker War’ With Iran – This Time Off Venezuela’s Coast

      Tyler Durden

      Sun, 05/17/2020 – 21:50

      Iranian state TV has announced at least five least five Iranian-flagged tankers are transporting fuel to Venezuela through the Atlantic Ocean and plan to break the American blockade on the Latin American country.

      Iran has warned that any US attempt at intercepting its fuel tankers “would have serious repercussions for the Trump administration ahead of the November elections.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      File image via National Iranian Oil Tanker Company (NITC)

      State-funded PressTV underscores that “Iran is shipping tons of gasoline to Venezuela in defiance of US sanctions on both countries in a symbolic move guaranteed by Tehran’s missile prowess.”

      Both countries have been targeted under US sanctions and various levels of covert military action of late. President Trump has taken a personal interest in renewed pressure on Maduro, within the past months reportedly pushing his generals to go forward with a ‘naval blockade’ of the socialist nation

      State media has further emphasized that the Iranian fuel tankers will not attempt to conceal their presence or mission: “Iran has intentionally hoisted its own flag over the huge tankers which are navigating through the Atlantic before the eyes of the US Navy,” according to the report.

      Reuters has also reported that US defense officials are planning a potential response:

      The United States has a “high degree of certainty” that Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro’s government is paying Iran tons of gold for the fuel, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

      “It is not only unwelcome by the United States but it’s unwelcome by the region, and we’re looking at measures that can be taken,” the official said.

      The contentious issue of closer ties between Tehran and Caracas became center stage after in April a series of sanctioned Iranian Mahan Air flights landed in Venezuela to transport badly needed equipment to fix fuel refining plants for domestic gas consumption amid a severe national shortage. 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Secretary of State Pompeo at the time called on all countries to block airspace for such ‘banned’ flights. In the past months the US administration reportedly ordered a naval build-up in the Caribbean in order to thwart ‘illegal’ sanctions-busting activities involving Venezuela.

      With the Iranians now brazenly advertising their efforts, and with Trump apparently in the mood to renew counter-Maduro efforts, things look headed toward another ‘tanker war’ showdown such as played out in the Persian Gulf and Mediterranean last summer (when the UK and Gibraltar captured an Iranian tanker, but then Tehran returned the favor with the IRGC capture of the Stena Impero tanker).

      But given such a scenario could repeat in what the US sees as its own backyard of the Caribbean, things would get much messier and likely more aggressive. 

    • "Dying Economy, Fed Incompetence" – Robert Kiyosaki Sees Bitcoin At $75k In 3 Years
      “Dying Economy, Fed Incompetence” – Robert Kiyosaki Sees Bitcoin At $75k In 3 Years

      Tyler Durden

      Sun, 05/17/2020 – 21:25

      Authored by Jeffrey Albus via CoinTelegraph.com,

      Robert Kiyosaki predicts that Bitcoin’s price will rise nearly 100% per year over the next three years.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Image courtesy of CoinTelegraph

      Robert Kiyosaki, businessman and best selling author of the book Rich Dad, Poor Dad, has taken to Twitter once again to proclaim his bullish position on Bitcoin.

      His prognosis? BTC’s price is heading to $75,000 in three years.

      How Kiyosaki values each asset

      In a viral May 16 tweet, Kiyosaki states that his fear of a dying economy has led him to purchase more of three assets that he ostensibly considers valuable outside of the traditional financial system: Gold, Silver, and Bitcoin (BTC).

      “ECONOMY [is] dying. FED incompetent. Next BAILOUT trillions in pensions. HOPE fading.”

      The author’s tweet outlines just how valuable he thinks each asset will be in the coming years. He reveals:

      “Bought more gold silver Bitcoin. GOLD [currently] at $1700. Predict $3000 in 1 year. Silver [currently] at $17. Predict $40 in 5 years. Bitcoin [currently] at $9800. Predict $75000 in 3 years.”

      By the numbers, this prediction reflects an expected yearly increase of approximately 76%, 19%, and 97% for gold, silver, and Bitcoin respectively. This indicates that, at least by Kiyosaki’s reckoning, Bitcoin has the most favorable profit potential out of the three.

      A growing interest in Bitcoin

      This isn’t the first time that Robert Kiyosaki has used his platform to expound on the virtues of Bitcoin and the Blockchain. In recent months, the businessman has spoken out on his faith in the future of the tech numerous times.

      In an April appearance on Anthony Pompliano’s podcast, Kiyosaki praised Bitcoin, saying:

      “The reason I endorse Bitcoin is just for one frickin reason — you’re not part of the system,”

      Noting also that “gold and silver are God’s money, and Bitcoin is open-source people’s money.”

    • Goldman Quietly Cuts Q3, Q4 EPS Forecasts, Now "Values" Market Off 2023 Earnings
      Goldman Quietly Cuts Q3, Q4 EPS Forecasts, Now “Values” Market Off 2023 Earnings

      Tyler Durden

      Sun, 05/17/2020 – 21:19

      So much for the V-shaped recovery. With even Jerome Powell warning that the US economy won’t fully recover until the end of 2021 (assuming no second infection wave; should that happen it’s pretty much game over), Goldman has quietly gone from V to U, and in the penultimate paragraph of David Kostin’s latest Weekly Kickstart report, the Goldman strategist writes that he is further cutting his forecast for corporate profitability this year (which perhaps is why futures are on a rampage on Sunday night; not really – it’s just because retail investors have gone batshit insane and are buying every fractional share they see, even as hedge funds remain paralyzed in dread at what’s coming).

      Validating the scariest – for bulls – chart, namely the one showing that 2-year (not 1-year forward) valuations are now the highest on record

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      …  Kostin writes that while he maintains his 2020 S&P 500 EPS estimate of $110 (-33%), he is adjusting his quarterly path of earnings growth in Q3 and Q4 substantially lower: “we still expect that 2Q will represent the trough in EPS growth, driven in part by further reserve builds in Financials, but we lift our 2Q growth estimate from -123% to -70% yr/yr given the relative health of several major stocks accounting for 20% of EPS.” However, at the same time, Goldman is lowering its EPS growth estimates for 3Q to -30% (from -21%) and no longer sees a full recovery in the fourth quarter, instead expecting Q4 EPS to be down -17%Y/Y (from +27%) “to reflect a more gradual recovery with quarterly EPS remaining below 2019 levels for the full year.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Looking beyond 2020, the Goldmanite writes that “investors remain focused on how quickly lost earnings can be recouped” and for his part, has a “base case” forecast for S&P 500 EPS to reach $170 in 2021, just barely above the level from 2019 ($165), and which as a reminder was virtually unchanged with 2018 due to all the trade war tension and turmoil in 2019 which meant the only source of upside was multiple expansion. However, further bifurcating a market that is largely a reflection of just 5 megatech stocks (FAAMGs), the “recovery” would continue to be uneven, “with EPS in cyclical sectors unlikely to recover to 2019 levels by 2021″ if ever.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      An even worse, case, however, is Goldman’s downside scenario where S&P 500 EPS falls to $70 this year and reach just $115 in 2021…

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      … which would mean that the S&P is now trading at a 25x multiple not on 2020 earnings by 2021!

       

      “We envision this downside scenario occurring either because the path to economic normalization is slower than we now expect or because of lingering economic impact even after the spread has been controlled. “

      The silver lining is that consensus bottom-up EPS estimates remain more closely aligned to Goldman’s optimistic base case than its downside case; 2021 consensus estimates have been cut by 16% YTD to $165. Alas, consensus is always wrong, which means that within a few months, the talking heads will be on TV desperately seeking to justify why 3000 on the S&P make sense based on a 150 EPS in 2021.

      And since fundamentals no longer matter, but fundamental analysts still have to somehow justify absolutely idiotic valuations, Goldman has done what until recently would have been deemed idiotic by most, and now admits that EPS are unlikely to return to previous peaks until 2023, which means that the goalseeked “proper” forward PE multiple one should use is no longer based on 2020 EPS, or 2021, or even 2022 for that matter… but 2023!

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      In other words, we have now teleported into some batshit insane world, where one has to look at earnings 3.5 years into the future (which, needless to say, one has no hope in hell of accurately predicting… which is precisely why Goldman is using them) to “justify” current market valuations.

    • 'Most Isolated Person On Planet': Sailor Emerges After 9-Month Solo Trip To Find COVID-Altered World
      ‘Most Isolated Person On Planet’: Sailor Emerges After 9-Month Solo Trip To Find COVID-Altered World

      Tyler Durden

      Sun, 05/17/2020 – 21:00

      Dubbed the “safest man on the planet,” Canadian sailor Bill Norrie has been on a solo yachting expedition for the past nine months. And since a brief resupply stop off South Africa three months ago he’s traversed the treacherous Southern Ocean, when he first heard the term coronavirus via a satellite phone call from the water to his wife back in Canada.

      The 67-year old finally arrived last Thursday on New Zealand’s coast at Canterbury’s Lyttelton Harbour, and after clearing customs he was caught up to speed over his first steak and beers in months. 

      He emerged from the risky solo trip across the ocean to find a vastly different society altered by the pandemic. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Canadian sailor Bill Norrie, via stuff.co.nz

      ”It’s still unreal to me because I’ve only heard text messages from my wife about how’s it all shut down [everything]. I’m very thankful New Zealand let me come in,” he said.

      His solo trip began last September, which took him around South America, Africa and Australia, ultimately around the entire globe.

      After so long at sea he was shocked by what he found upon finally completing his trip in New Zealand

      When he finally arrived in Christchurch, he said he was surprised to hear harbor officials ask where he would be self isolating for the next two weeks.

      “Initially they said, ‘You can’t come here,’ so I was like, ‘Where am I gonna go, right,’” he said with a laugh. “I was the most isolated person on the planet, they didn’t want to let me in. It was too funny!”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Canadian sailor Bill Norrie on his British Channel Cutter yacht, Pixie. Image source: via stuff.co.nz

      In the end authorities did let him in and even waved the isolation period, after he proved he hadn’t had human contact throughout his solo tour.

      He told New Zealand broadcaster TVNZ of his initial difficulty in processing the ‘new normal’ of social distancing and learning more of the global shutdowns first-hand: “it’s still sorta strange to me,” he said.

      A local news crew had captured the moment he finally jumped off his boat and knelt on the ground after not having been on dry land for multiple months.

      “I never thought it was going to happen!” Norrie said while getting emotional. He had been stunned upon his first communication with the port, not realizing the crisis could be such that they might not even let him dock. 

      Apparently he’s actually at this point prepping a return voyage to his home in Canada. The fact that much of the globe and its economies are shut down means he likely feels better off at sea anyway.

    • The Silver Lining…
      The Silver Lining…

      Tyler Durden

      Sun, 05/17/2020 – 20:35

      Authored by Robert Gore via StraightLineLogic.com,

      Who will fight for your rights?

      …we are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force.

      Ayn Rand, Capitalism, The Unknown Ideal, Appendix, “The Nature of Government,” 1967

      We are no longer fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion, we’ve arrived. It is the stage of which every would-be dictator dreams, where his whims are absolute, and everything everyone else says, does, or thinks must comport with those whims, even – impossible though it would be – when they are contradictory.

      Science is anti-whim. Nature, as Francis Bacon observed, to be commanded must be obeyed. Nothing illustrates the ultimate inversion of the official coronavirus response better than its leaders’ assault on science in the name of their “science.”

      Doctors have been discouraged or prohibited from administering hydroxychloroquine, by itself or in conjunction with other medications, vitamins, and zinc compounds, to treat Covid-19. They have observed and documented the effectiveness of such remedies—mitigation or elimination of the disease’s symptoms—but their observation and documentation are dismissed. Only the validation procedure mandated by the medical bureaucracy—the expensive and complex multistage tests required of new drugs to establish their efficacy and safety—will suffice for official permission. It’s what their “science” demands of a cheap and seemingly effective remedy that’s been on the market for years as a treatment for lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, and malaria.

      So where were the tests and control-group studies for the pandemic models, lockdowns, social distancing, masks, flattening the curve, closing businesses, and contact tracing that have been the official coronavirus responses? Projections are hypotheses, but only one class of hypotheses was officially accepted—disaster scenarios that fed panic and paved the way for further expansion of governments’ power. The doomsday models have been discredited; cases and deaths have been orders of magnitude less than projected.

      Countries that haven’t instituted lockdowns have fared no worse than countries that have. Andrew Cuomo, governor of hard-hit New York, recently expressed surprise that two-thirds of hospitalized coronavirus patients had been sheltering in place. As if locking people down—often families under close quarters—in apartment buildings that can’t control cockroaches would somehow protect dwellers against a microscopic, easily spread, fast replicating, and virtually infinite virus.

      No science at all supports social distancing; six-feet is an arbitrary construct (i.e., whim) of some medical would-be dictator. Masks force the rebreathing of your own respiratory waste, weakening your immune system for the dubious benefit of that all-powerful totem: public health. The health you’re supposedly protecting is certainly not your own. It’s like eating your own feces or drinking your own urine for a purported public benefit.

      Flattening the curve to ensure adequate hospital space for the wave of coronavirus patients that hasn’t happened has flattened the hospitals, leading to empty rooms and wards and layoffs for medical workers. Bankruptcies will follow.

      Lost jobs and shuttered businesses are just collateral damage for our would-be emperors, who have waged senseless wars and inflicted grievous collateral damage on other countries for decades. Now the devastation and misery they’ve left in their wake have come home. Americans who’ve never asked themselves how it felt to be a victim of their government’s senseless wars are now victims of their government’s senseless war on a germ. After an unsustainable debt-propelled respite, the Greater Depression has resumed (it started in 2008) and will last for years. Its poverty and devastation will sicken and kill multiples of the people who will ultimately be afflicted by the coronavirus.

      All this supposedly guided by “science,” yet its proponents commit the most unscientific offense—they corrupt their own data. By their own admission the tests they use give both false negatives and false positives. By their own admission they’re corrupting the death count. Doctors have been instructed to list Covid-19 as a cause of death if the deceased had any of the symptoms associated with Covid-19, even though those symptoms characterize a number of other diseases that singly or in combination kill people, especially people with compromised immune systems. Hospitals have a financial incentive to perpetuate this fraud. They receive $13,000 from Medicare for each Covid-19 patient and $39,000 for each patient put on a ventilator (Links here and here).

      The coronavirus tyranny has nothing to do with science, medicine, or health, and everything to do with establishing that ultimate inversion: the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission. These past few weeks we’ve seen how our rulers attempted to discard the last fig leaf—democracy—covering their creeping, now galloping, totalitarianism and complete lack of legitimacy.

      A camarilla within the nation’s intelligence services, the Department of Justice, and members of the previous administration, including Barack Obama, attempted to depose the democratically elected president of the United States. Such coups are the province of two-bit plotters in banana republics that make no pretense of observing or protecting rights, where might alone makes right. The United States has gone full banana—the stage of rule by brute force.

      Democracy is tyranny of the majority, a system that inevitably destroys individual rights. For the history-challenged, individual rights were the still revolutionary concept on which the idea—although not always the reality—of the United States was established. The logical consequence of the full protection of individual rights is the freedom to live your life as you see fit, as long as you don’t abridge the rights of others. Society or any other group of people has no rights apart from the rights of the individuals that comprise it. Governments have no rights, only the duty to protect the rights of individuals to live peaceably and freely. Government must be the servant, not the master, of its citizens. (See the Ayn Rand Appendix cited above, “The Nature of Government,” for a more detailed exposition of the proper role of government.)

      We’re light years from that ideal. Individuals must receive permission to, among other things, leave their homes, hold a job, assemble with other individuals, attend houses of worship, visit parks and beaches, or patronize businesses. The governor of my state, Michelle Lujan Grisham, just decreed that masks must be worn by everyone outside of their own dwellings (I wrote STOP MLG’S TYRANNY on mine). Breathing fresh air is now at the sufferance of our overlords. Civilly disobedient soul that I am, I have yet to don my mask. Don’t think sheep don’t get angry—I get murderous looks from mask-wearers.

      With every decree issued since this repression began, those who advocate for their individual rights or actually exercise them by violating the decree are denounced, shamed, censored, and in some cases arrested. Anyone who disagrees by word or deed is “selfish,” unwilling to sacrifice for the common good.

      What do they mean by selfish? Is it selfish to fight for your rights? Is it selfish to want to work and produce? Is it selfish to be more concerned with your own welfare and the welfare of your family and friends than with the welfare of strangers, the public, or the government that supposedly represents that public? Is your desire for freedom selfish?

      There are those who will tie themselves in intellectual knots answering those questions in the negative, but nevertheless asserting that individual rights and their exercise—free expression, free inquiry, free production, and free exchange—can all be justified as conferring the greatest public good. They then wonder why they never win arguments with those pushing collectivized notions of the public good. When might makes right, the public good is whatever the collective’s masters say it is—argument over.

      Fighting for one’s freedom and all that flows from it is selfish, profoundly so. If you don’t fight for that which is yours—the individual rights that are the essential condition of your existence—who’s going to do it for you? Anthony Fauci? Bill Gates? Nancy Pelosi? President Trump? Joe Biden? George Soros? Jerome Powell? Adam Schiff? Mark Zuckerberg? Eric Schmidt? Santa Claus? The Tooth Fairy? When was the last time you even heard the term “individual rights” in polite, mainstream discourse? When individual rights are mentioned at all, they’re treated as a quaint anachronism.

      And what do they mean by sacrifice? They mean that instead of selfishly fighting for your rights and freedom, you are to unselfishly place them on the sacrificial altar known as the public good. You’re selfish for resisting the sacrifice of that which is rightfully yours, but those collecting what is not rightfully theirs are selfless saints. If you voluntarily board that cattle car, you’ll secure your spot in the Unselfish Hall of Fame, along with millions of others who have lost their property, happiness, freedom, and lives without selfish protest or resistance. You might even be designated a Hero of the Public Good, posthumously of course.

      If you find the world’s descent into evil unfathomable, it’s time to rethink the premises that the selfless is the good and the selfish is evil. Collectivist butchers, including the ones pushing the coronavirus hoax, always demand fealty to some cause greater than one’s self. Fall for that one and you’ve already lost two important parts of yourself—your self-respect and your ability to reason.

      The precautionary principle—that no risks can be assumed if someone or something somewhere might be harmed—is anti-mind and anti-life, absurdly evil on its face. That philosophical abomination now excuses wholesale violation of individual rights and deadly economic devastation based on projections, bureaucratic whim, and political expediency. The precautionary principle would, if consistency applied, bring human progress to a halt, eventually rendering the human race extinct. Nothing is as unsafe as an insistence on absolute safety.

      Risk is what makes life worth living—it’s the driver of human knowledge and progress. Imagine the choices that confronted early humans as they made their first choices. If we build a fire, will it warm us and cook our meat…or consume us? If we eat oysters, will they nourish or kill us? Will the canoe we’ve built float or sink? The forward steps of both our individual and humanity’s journeys have always involved unanswered questions, hypotheses, risk, experimentation, trial and error, tragedy, and triumph. It takes no imagination at all to envision potential risks. Make fear and safety paramount and none of those steps could have or will be taken.

      To believe that risks can be eliminated by arbitrary edicts is delusional; to enforce those edicts tyrannical; to comply with them suicidal. Wars are always fought and tyrannies always established in the name of somebody’s safety. The betrayal of individual conscience and surrender of individual rights to a collective for safety’s sake never produces safety, only misery, destruction, despair, terror and death. That’s a lesson we’re set to relearn as we proceed through one of those darkest periods of human history.

      There is a silver lining in all this: the curtain has been lifted, we now know exactly what we confront. Present governments and their many bootlickers and minions do not recognize—much less protect or hold themselves subordinate to the protection of—individual rights. Nor should we expect that they will do so within our lifetimes. Absent their replacement via revolution or abandonment via secession, we will continue to live in a political order where they are free to do as they please while we may act only by permission.

      If we want our rights, our freedom, and our lives, we’re going to have to fight for them with word and deed. It has ever been so; it will ever be so. Those who choose to fight will have one important ally: rule by brute force is the agent of its own collapse. It has always failed, it always will. Whether we have the virtue and wisdom to replace it with it’s antitheses—freedom and individual rights protected rather than destroyed by government—remains to be seen.

      Stay sane.

    • First Wave Out, Second Wave In: Where The World Is On The Corona Curve
      First Wave Out, Second Wave In: Where The World Is On The Corona Curve

      Tyler Durden

      Sun, 05/17/2020 – 20:10

      Global infection growth slowed from 20% W/W to 16% W/W last fortnight (total infections: 4,443,986, deaths: 302,468, 6.8% mortality rate). And as the rate of new infections is slowing, concerns emerge about a second wave of the coronavirus pandemic.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      As JPMorgan’s MW Kim writes, China and South Korea are in the stage of full “recovery” from the first infection curve as 99.9%/ 91% of cumulative infections have been removed from the infection pool.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      If we assume that the infection is just one-time outbreak, both countries’ progress in the infection cycle and large relaxation of social distancing should be plausible. However, based on both the bank’s conservative assumptions and epidemiologist observations, a full removal of COVID-19 would be almost impossible until the vaccine is available to the larger public. This suggests that increasing human mobility/ business activities would pose the risk of a second wave outbreak by way of faster transmission rate increase.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      As China and Korea are heading toward being first-out of the curve, both countries have relaxed social distancing measures/ city lockdowns in April ahead of European/ ASEAN countries. Unfortunately, over the last 10 days, we are observing growing risk of a second wave in both countries as new infections start to increase. Thus, JPMorgan is now evaluating the risk of a second wave risk in China and South Korea.

      Based on JPMorgan’s assessment, Korea looks to be entering into the stage of second wave as new infection growth looks faster and larger scale. Therefore, the bank introduces the second curve forecast into its existing epidemiology modelling in Korea.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Separately, China’s new infection trend post the test outcome of China’s Wuhan city will also be closely watched by JPMorgan. As MW Kim notes, “as we factor this potential risk under the pessimistic scenario in epidemiology modelling in China, should there be a greater number of infections monitored, we would consider plugging this fine-tuning into the pessimistic scenario.” That said, he notes that “the second infection wave could be smaller scale in terms of total infections, mortality rate, and having a shorter period from infection to recovery. This is due to the government having experience from first wave infection management and the public largely being aware of potential infection risks with experience of social distancing.”

      China: Rising daily new infections

      Daily new local infections in China have started to rise since May 9th. 17/14 new infections were reported on May 9th and 10th and among those, 10/12 cases were local infections and mainly from Ji Lin and Hubei provinces. On May 10th, Shu Lan city of Ji Lin province announced city lockdowns again due to increasing local new infections. On May 11th, Wuhan government announced testing of the full population (~11M) in 10 days. China government’s surprising measures on new infection control may be read as an early wake-up call of the larger-scale second wave possibility instead of pre-emptive control measures.

      At this stage, it is almost impossible to forecast the potential size of new infections including asymptomatic cases as current statistics suggest Wuhan is almost a COVID-19 free city through full recovery (based on official data which as has been repeatedly observed, is bogus at best). Therefore, after this large scale test is done, expected outcomes include (1) better understanding of potential infections out of total population post the curve-end; (2) % of immunity groups post one infection curve in the society; and (3) recurrence rate. These should be important statistics globally to gauge the risk of the second wave as many countries are planning to reopen the economy under relaxed social distancing measures

      Shu Lan city of Ji Lin province lockdowns from May 10th

      On May 7th, one local new infection was reported in Shu Lan city, Ji Lin province after 73 days of no new local infections province wide. On May 9th, 11 new local cases were reported, all in Shu Lan city and three new cases in Ji Lin city on the 10th. The risk level in Shu Lan city was raised from low to medium on the 9th and subsequently raised again from medium to high on the 10th. On May 10th, Shu Lan city government announced a city lockdown with strict control on mobility.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      There has been one connected case found in Liao Ning province (a nearby province) that’s related to Shu Lan city’s confirmed case. At this stage, it is uncertain where the origin of the second wave in Ji Lin province came from. As Ji Lin province is located in the northeast of China and borders Russia, it is likely that imported cases have led to spread of the virus in the local community, at least if one believes the official government narrative.

      South Korea: Emergence of second infection wave

      Korea relieved its strict social distancing measures starting from Apr 20, and relaxed them further on May 6, partially lifting work from home measures, and resuming activities in malls, parks etc. However in the past week, there has been a rise in daily new infections from the previous single-digit new cases per day to ~30 cases per day.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Total infections in the country stood at 11,018, as of May 15, with 260 total deaths. The recent outbreak is expected to add another 2,000 new infection to the curve and this should delay the curve end to mid August from the end of May.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Those cases, according to JPMorgan, “illustrate the risk of a second wave in the process of economic reopening” and “considering the first-in first-out (FIFO) concept of the infection curve, similar experiences perhaps are likely to be replicated in other countries in the recovery stage.”

    • An Anatomy Of Long-Term US Dollar Cycles
      An Anatomy Of Long-Term US Dollar Cycles

      Tyler Durden

      Sun, 05/17/2020 – 19:40

      Authored by Viraj Patel, FX & Global Macro Strategist at Arkera, originally posted by the author’s Medium page.

      Over the last 45 years, a typical US dollar trend cycle has lasted around 6 to 7 years — with the Broad Real Dollar index posting an average change of 34% per cycle. Assuming that we’re in the midst of a dollar bull run that started in August 2011 — the current upswing to date has posted a 36% rally and is almost 9 years in duration. So, is the dollar about to peak and embark on a multi-year bear trend?

      In short, no — at least not yet. When we look at the cyclical and structural macro conditions that have underpinned major downswings in the dollar since 1975, none of these are currently being met. Instead, the backdrop that is set to prevail in the initial stages of the COVID-19 global economic depression is likely to remain supportive for dollar haven flows.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Characteristics of a Dollar Bear Trend

      Taking a deeper look into the factors that have underpinned major cyclical moves in the dollar — we see that bear trends typically show the following 6 common characteristics:

      1. A substantial decline in the USD’s relative interest rate advantage — with the dollar always exhibiting negative carry
      2. Stronger GDP growth in the Rest of the World (RoW) relative to the US — thus declining US-RoW growth differentials
      3. Rising US twin deficits driven by a joint widening of fiscal and current account deficits (bear cycles start 2–3 years after initial widening)
      4. High global trade and manufacturing activity (periods of above-trend world trade growth)
      5. Money being put to work in RoW assets — driven by relative underperformance of US equities and low market volatility
      6. Official US Treasury FX intervention (prior to 2000) — coordinated across major countries with the aim of achieving a weaker dollar

      Aside from the Fed’s balance sheet, there’s very little working against the dollar at present. There is too much uncertainty to confidently say whether the RoW will be able to recover from the Global Coronavirus Pandemic materially faster than the US — whilst global trade uncertainty driven by a protectionist US administration is likely to continue weighing on cross-border activity and RoW asset performance for the foreseeable future. The dollar is normally the best place to hide in the FX world when there is this level of uncertainty around in global markets.

      If anything, the relationship between the Fed’s balance sheet and the dollar mirrors the 2008/2009 crisis playbook — where the USD continued to strengthen even after the Fed’s initial QE intervention. The broader macro backdrop of a global recession, weak cross-border trade and relative underperformance of RoW assets also lends support to the idea that the dollar will behave in 2020 just like it did in 2008/2009. The main difference, however, is that back then the dollar entered the crisis from a much fundamentally weaker standpoint — the BIS USD REER index was around 15% below its 10-year average in July 2008. In February 2020, the dollar was just over 14% overvalued based on the same measure. This, coupled with the Fed’s relatively more aggressive response, may prove to be a strong limiting factor for how much the dollar can strengthen in the current crisis relative to 2008/2009.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      What is needed to set in motion a multi-year dollar bear trend?

      If the 6 common characteristics of a USD bear trend are anything to go by — then the next few years would need to see a distinctly different cyclical and structural backdrop for the dollar if it is to experience a 20–30% decline in line with historical bear trends. This would involve: (1) deeply negative US rates and persistently weak US GDP growth relative to the RoW; (2) a wider US current account deficit and above-trend global trade growth; and (3) underperformance of US equities and low market volatility. We explore the likelihood of each of these scenarios unfolding below.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      1. Deeply negative US rates and relatively weaker US GDP needed to see a weaker dollar

      Whilst the Fed’s aggressive easing actions so far have eliminated the USD’s carry advantage — it may not be enough to see a weaker dollar.

      US relative rate differentials against major trading partners have declined around 180bps since Oct 2018. But it’s still not enough to see negative USD carry given the number of developed countries either at the Zero Lower Bound (ZLB) or with Negative Interest Rate Policy (NIRP). The Fed has an impossible task of driving US rates low enough to materially impact the dollar — especially when we’re in midst of a race to the bottom across global central banks. As we’ve seen in New Zealand last week, most developed market central banks are not done easing yet — we should certainly expect more from the ECB, BoE and BoJ in the coming months. On the flip side, we think the Fed will be hesitant to take policy rates below 0% given the market structure in the US and the negative implications for banks and money market funds — meaning we’ve reached a point where US rate differentials (even when adjusted for relative central bank balance sheet expansion) have likely bottomed out for now. If that’s the case, the 180bps adjustment in rate differentials in the last 18 months is not sufficient to trigger a USD bear cycle — the past two major dollar downswings have seen a downward adjustment in relative US rate differentials by around 300bps.

      Look for ‘Fed last to hike’ or Yield Curve Control for a weaker dollar heading into 2021. Policy divergences may become more apparent as we transition from the global downturn to the global rebound phase — with economies exhibiting different recovery paths based on domestic factors (COVID-19 second wave, ability to successfully reopen economies, varying hysteresis effects). As short-dated global yields begin to recover, one way US rates could be anchored lower for longer is if the Fed adopts some form of Yield Curve Control (or flexible QE) — that sees the pace of asset-buying marginally increased to curb any pre-emptive shift higher in the US yield curve. Certainly, if any ‘Fed last to hike’ sentiment were reflected in market pricing — then short-term US rate differentials could move lower in a way that would see a weaker USD. But given where we are today — and still grappling with the fallout from the crisis — we may be a good 6–12 months away from even considering this scenario from being priced into markets.

      On the growth side, the US economy is not currently expected to be hit worse than the RoW from the Corona Crisis — although it really is too early to call. Our Dollar Smile Theory work shows that global economic recessions yield a strong dollar environment — and this should be the baseline for how the dollar performs in 2020. Beyond this, the US economy would have to materially underperform the RoW for the dollar to weaken over the next few years — and it may require something like a US health policy mistake (opening up the economy too fast) for this divergence to occur. RoW-US growth differentials tend to widen by around 2ppts during USD bear cycles. Even if the US recovers slower than other major economies (not the consensus scenario), it is highly unlikely that we’ll any significant divergence in the recovery paths that would warrant a substantially weaker US dollar.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      2. A wider US current account deficit and above-trend global trade growth are necessary for a dollar bear trend

      Unlike in 2010, ongoing US-China trade uncertainty puts a dampener on the prospects of a big post-crisis global trade rebound

      A bigger twin deficit in the US is almost certain for the next few years — not least given the large fiscal stimulus that has been deployed by Congress to fight the US economic lockdown. The US government primary deficit is expected to reach 13.5% of GDP in 2020 (versus 3.6% in 2019) — on par with what was seen during the Great Financial Crisis. However, there is a high degree of uncertainty over how the current account deficit evolves in the coming years given the current US administration’s protectionist policy stance.

      Global trade growth has already been on a declining path since 2019 following the onset of US tariffs on Chinese imports. With US-China trade and geopolitical uncertainty set to continue in the run-up to the November 2020 US Presidential Elections — one has to question the ability and extent to which global trade can rebound in 2H20. Indeed, the minor USD bear trend that followed the GFC between March 2009 and July 2011 was underpinned by several years of above-trend global trade growth. Given the circumstances, it is highly likely that this time may be different.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      3. Global investors need to put money to work in cheap RoW assets for the dollar to weaken

      US equities continue to outperform in 2020 despite their relatively expensive valuations — suggesting that global investors still see US stocks and credit as the best of a bad bunch

      The recent USD bear trends of 2002–2008 (-25%) and 2009–2011 (-17%) were both characterised by greater global portfolio shifts towards RoW assets — with US equities underperforming during these periods. Of late, however, there has been a clear preference by global investors for US equities — with the S&P 500 posting an average annual outperformance of 9.8% since August 2011 versus its global peers. This relative outperformance has only accelerated since the Corona Crisis hit global markets (albeit stock markets across the world have been very choppy). There’s little to suggest that this trend will turn on its head anytime soon — much like the US relative growth story, there would need to be an idiosyncratic US shock from the current crisis that clearly impedes the US recovery relative to the RoW. With the Fed also making sure this doesn’t happen by buying just about anything it can get its hands on — it is highly unlikely that US policy inertia will be such an idiosyncratic shock. Instead, one would have to look to arguments such as a greater risk of a second COVID-19 wave in the US or a bigger US corporate default cycle to justify US equities from materially underperforming the RoW from here. It’s too early for anyone to make this their central scenario right now.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      And what about the possibility of official US Treasury FX intervention to weaken the dollar…?

      The Broad Real Dollar Index has never embarked on a multi-year bull run when it has been more than 7% overvalued in the last 50 years. That’s because the 1980s and 1990s were defined by large-scale coordinated FX interventions across major economies — aimed at either weakening or strengthening the dollar whenever it reached extreme levels of misvaluation.

      The idea of official US Treasury FX intervention to weaken the dollar has gained greater airtime in recent years — not least due to anti-strong dollar comments by President Trump. This debate certainly needs its own separate article (see here for a quick primer). But here’s the bottom line. Is it possible for the US to unilaterally intervene in FX markets to weaken the dollar? Yes. Will they? Highly doubt it. As the experience over the 1980s and 1990s shows, official FX interventions by authorities tend to do more harm than good. There are solid reasons why the dollar is strong right now — not least portfolio-related flows. Governments attempting to correct any arbitrary concept of misvaluation would only create more uncertainty in an already highly uncertain investment environment. But another 10% rally in the dollar — and, well, the idea of unilateral US FX intervention stands a greater chance of becoming a reality.

    • US And Its Allies Will Confront China, Demand Investigation During Tomorrow's Annual WHO Summit
      US And Its Allies Will Confront China, Demand Investigation During Tomorrow’s Annual WHO Summit

      Tyler Durden

      Sun, 05/17/2020 – 19:15

      Since the coronavirus outbreak, the profile of the World Health Organization has skyrocketed, and so have suspicions about its motives and alliances. Which is why this year’s annual meeting of the organization’s members – which is slated to begin on Mondayshould get interesting.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      As the US, Australia and other skeptical western states are expected to confront China and about the possibility of an investigation into Beijing’s and the WHO’s handling of the outbreak during its earliest days.

      The coronavirus will be the focus for the World Health Assembly meeting, to be attended by all 194 WHO member states plus observers, and where policies and budgets are reviewed and approved.

      But all eyes will be on how countries – including the US, Australia, Canada, France and Germany – pursue an investigation into China’s handling of the pandemic within the framework of the global health body. That could include taking the Chinese government to the international court.

      Leaders of these countries have already made clear that they want an inquiry, including investigating the origin of the virus, whether it was initially covered up by China, and if Beijing was slow to tell the world that the virus was being transmitted between humans.

      The WHO has itself been under fire, attacked for praising China’s pandemic response as “transparent” despite Beijing’s suppression of whistle-blowers and information at the start of the outbreak.

      Beijing has, of course, rejected accusations that it covered up the virus during the initial weeks after the outbreak, as well as claims the virus might have leaked or, worse, been purposefully released, by a biolab in Wuhan. And while the CCP has said it would support a WHO-led inquiry into the virus’s origins, it has simultaneously slammed Australia, the US and other countries that have insisted on an investigation in the face of Beijing’s reticence and obvious reluctance by accusing them of “politicizing” the outbreak (language that, like CCP criticism of phrases like “Chinese virus” and “Wuhan virus”, has found its way into the rhetoric of the American left).

      However, hypothetically speaking, even if the WHO authorized an investigation, which stumbled upon some new evidence or a ‘smoking gun’ to suggest that China is much more culpable than initially believed, there’s little the WHO could do to hold China to account. Legally speaking, the WHO has the power to refer cases to the International Court of Justice in the Hague. However, China has already flouted the ICJ once, a gesture which underlined the fact that the ICJ has no power to enforce any of its decisions, as the SCMP reminds us.

      The last time the Chinese government was sued in the international court was in 2016, when the Permanent Court of Arbitration ruled in favour of the Philippines over the South China Sea. It said Beijing’s territorial claims to the area lacked legal basis and were contrary to an international maritime convention. Beijing did not take part in the trial and has rejected the legitimacy of the ruling.

      Thanks to its position as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, China is effectively immune to any kind of legal or police action from an international standpoint. A decision against China by the ICJ would require a vote by the Security Council to approve enforcement, a vote which China would obviously veto.

      Another mechanism, though it has also never before been used (just like the WHO has never actually referred a case to the ICJ), is the International Health Regulations. Enacted and adopted by all WHO members in 2005, the IHR “suggests” – a key word – that all conflicts brought before the WHO should be resolved in a matter “related to its interpretation or application through negotiation, meditation and conciliation.”

      But the IHR has already been repeatedly violated by almost every WHO member (travel restrictions are one example).

      “The WHO has never taken another state to the ICJ, and I do not anticipate that,” said Steven Hoffman, professor of global health, law and political science at York University’s Global Strategy Lab in Toronto. “If it happens it will be unprecedented.”

      […]

      “There are a lot of challenges as to how countries can successfully resolve disputes. Dozens of countries have violated regulations under the IHR in the Covid-19 pandemic and even back in the days during Ebola,” he said.

      “When countries imposed targeted trade and travel restrictions on a particular country, it was already a clear violation of Article 43 of the IHR. There is no effective way to complain or seek recourse among countries. China has been subjected to such restrictions and in theory they can take those countries to the ICJ, but I also do not think they will,” he said.

      With few obvious alternatives, politicians in the US have been pushing to pass a federal law that would allow plaintiffs to sue the Chinese state in US courts. Last month, Missouri became the first state to sue the Chinese government since the outbreak began. The lawsuit, filed in the US District Court for Eastern Missouri, alleges Beijing’s denials and cover-ups led to a pandemic that caused “enormous loss of life, human suffering and economic turmoil.” Republican Senators have introduced a bill that would allow US citizens to sue, potentially creating an avenue for those infected and the families of survivors to sue.

      Gian Luca Burci, adjunct professor of international law at the Graduate Institute Geneva, said national lawsuits and unilateral actions by the US government would do more reputational than legal harm to China. “While there’s a low legal risk, there is a political and reputational risk here,” he said.

      “Negative repercussions could be multifarious and damaging. China is concerned that there will be any kind of international investigation – China would have to consent to one, but it is not clear they would,” he said. “There is a need for a fact-finding mission to confirm what happened, and what went wrong, in China and around the world.”

      Certainly, tomorrow’s meeting is bound to be unbelievably tense considering the continuing escalation between the US and China. The 73rd World Health Assembly begins Monday and will continue on Tuesday. We suspect it will draw far more interest from investors and the public than in years past.

    Digest powered by RSS Digest

    Today’s News 17th May 2020

    • How Huxley's X-Club Created Nature Magazine & Sabotaged Science For 150 Years
      How Huxley’s X-Club Created Nature Magazine & Sabotaged Science For 150 Years

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 23:30

      Authored by Matthew Ehret via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

      Amidst the storm of controversy raised by the lab-origin theory of COVID-19 extolled by such figures as Nobel prize winning virologist Luc Montagnier, bioweapons expert Francis Boyle, Sri Lankan Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith and the head of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, an elaborate project was undertaken under the nominal helm of NATURE Magazine in order to refute the claim once and for all under the report ‘The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2’.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      This project was led by a team of evolutionary virologists using a line of reasoning that “random mutation can account for anything” and was parroted loudly and repeatedly by Fauci, WHO officials and Bill Gates in order to shut down all uncomfortable discussion of the possible laboratory origins of COVID-19 while also pushing for a global vaccine campaign. On April 18, Dr. Fauci (whose close ties with Bill Gates, and Big Pharma have much to do with his control of hundreds of billions of dollars of research money), stated:

      “There was a study recently that we can make available to you, where a group of highly qualified evolutionary virologists looked at the sequences there and the sequences in bats as they evolve. And the mutations that it took to get to the point where it is now is totally consistent with a jump of a species from an animal to a human.”

      I think at this moment, rife as it is with speculative arguments, confusion and under-defined data, it is useful to remove oneself from the present and look for higher reference points from which we can re-evaluate events now unfolding on the world stage.

      In order to do this, let us begin by asking a new series of questions:

      What is Nature Magazine exactly? Is it truly an “objective” platform for pure scientific research untainted by the filth of political agendas? Is this standard-bearer of “proper method”, which can make or break the career of any scientist, truly the scientific journal it claims to be or is there something darker to be discovered?

      As I presented a part of this story in my previous installment in this series The Rise of Optical Biophysics and Clash of the Two Sciences, a very old battle has been waged around political systems but also what sort of scientific paradigms will shape our future.

      A Bit of Historical Context

      In 1865, a group of 12 scientists under the leadership of Thomas Huxley, Matthew Arnold, Joseph Hooker, and Herbert Spencer (founder of social Darwinism) was created under the name “X Club” with the mandate to reform global British Imperial strategy.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      At the time of this group’s formation, Lincoln’s north was on the cusp of putting down the secessionist rebellion which the British Intelligence establishment had work decades to nurture guided by Anglo-American operatives in America itself as well as operations in British Canada.

      Having far over-extended itself during the 2nd Chinese Opium War (1856-1860) to the Crimean War (1853-1856) to putting down Indian uprisings (1857-1858) and sponsoring the Southern Confederacy (1861-1865), the British Empire knew that it was on the verge of collapse. The world was quickly waking up to its evil nature, and a new paradigm of win-win cooperation was being exported from Lincoln’s America to nations across the world (American was a very different nation from the Anglo-American dumb giant the world has known since JFK’s 1963 murder -MEK).

      Lincoln’s system had been known as ‘American System of National Economy’, a name created by the father of Germany’s Zollverein Friedrich List years earlier. Unlike British Free Trade, this ‘American System’ was premised on protectionism, national banking, long term infrastructure and most importantly placed the source of value on the human mind’s capacity to make discoveries and inventions as outlined by Lincoln’s 1858 speech by the same name. In this system, the Constitutional concept of the General Welfare was not mere ink on parchment but rather the governing principle of monetary value and national policy.

      Lincoln’s chief economic advisor and coordinator of the export of the American system internationally after the Civil War was named Henry C. Carey. As early as 1851, Carey wrote his Harmony of Interests which stating:

      Two systems are before the world;

      the one looks to increasing the proportion of persons and of capital engaged in trade and transportation, and therefore to diminishing the proportion engaged in producing commodities with which to trade, with necessarily diminished return to the labour of all;

      while the other looks to increasing the proportion engaged in the work of production, and diminishing that engaged in trade and transportation, with increased return to all, giving to the labourer good wages, and to the owner of capital good profits…

      One looks to pauperism, ignorance, depopulation, and barbarism; the other in increasing wealth, comfort, intelligence, combination of action, and civilization.

      One looks towards universal war; the other towards universal peace.

      One is the English system; the other we may be proud to call the American system, for it is the only one ever devised the tendency of which was that of elevating while equalizing the condition of man throughout the world.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      In Germany, the American System inspired Zollverein (custom’s union) had not only unified a divided nation, but elevated it to a level of productive power and sovereignty which had outpaced the monopoly power of the British East India Company. In Japan, American engineers helped assemble trains funded by a national banking system, and protective tariff during the Meiji Restoration.

      In Russia, American System follower Sergei Witte, Transport Minister and close advisor to Czar Alexander III, revolutionized the Russian economy with the American-made trains that rolled across the Trans-Siberian Railway. Not even the Ottoman Empire remained untouched by the inspiration for progress, as the Berlin to Baghdad Railway was begun with the intention of unleashing a bold program of modernization of southwest Asia.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The construction of continental railroads, and industrial powers of nations internationally was quickly bringing the world land bridge concept first elaborated by Colorado’s Governor William Gilpin quickly into being. For those who are unaware, Gilpin (who was also Lincoln’s body guard and loudest advocate of America’s transcontinental railroad) spent decades championing the international system of win-win cooperation which he outlined in his 1890 Cosmopolitan Railroad stating:

      “The weapons of mutual slaughter are hurled away; the sanguinary passions find a check, a majority of the human family is found to accept the essential teachings of Christianity IN PRACTICE… Room is discovered for industrial virtue and industrial power. The civilized masses of the world meet; they are mutually enlightened, and fraternize to reconstitute human relations in harmony with nature and with God. The world ceases to be a military camp, incubated only by the military principles of arbitrary force and abject submission. A new and grand order in human affairs inaugurates itself out of these immense concurrent discoveries and events”.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Reorganize or Perish

      The British Empire knew that this emerging new paradigm would render both its maritime control of international trade as obsolete as its international program of usury and cash cropping.

      It was clear that something had to change dramatically, for if the empire could not adapt in response to this new paradigm, it surely would soon perish. The task of re-shaping imperial policy from a “material force” approach of control to a more “mental force” of control, was assigned to T. H. Huxley and the X Club. This group established the guiding scientific principles of empire that were soon put into practice by two new think tanks known as the Fabian Society and Rhodes Scholar Trust which I outlined in my 3-part series ‘Origins of the Deep State in North America’.

      Huxley, who is famously known as ‘Darwin’s bulldog’ for relentlessly promoting Darwin’s theory of Natural Selection (a theory in whose scientific merits he didn’t even believe) soon decided that the group should establish a magazine to promote their propaganda.

      Founded in 1869, the magazine was called Nature and featured articles by Huxley and several X Club members. The deeper purpose of the X Club and its magazine as outlined in a 2013 report entitled ‘Hideous Revolution: The X Club’s Malthusian Revolution in Science’, was geared towards the redefinition of all branches of science around a statistical-empiricist interpretation of the universe which denied the existence of creative reason in mankind or nature. Science was converted from the unbounded study and perfectibility of truth to a mathematically sealed “science of limits”.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Darwin, Malthus and the Political Use of a ‘Science of Limits’

      The science of “limits” became the foundation of an oligarchical economic science for the elite and naturally had to be kept hidden from the minds of the general population since it followed Thomas Malthus’ mathematical principle of population growth. Malthus’ “principle” of population supposed that unthinking humans reproduce geometrically while nature’s bounty only grows arithmetically and as such periodic population collapses were an unavoidable law of nature which could at best be managed by an oligarchical scientific priesthood who were obliged to periodically cull the herd.

      Malthus and the X Club leaders believed that nature bestowed upon the ruling class certain tools to accomplish this important task (namely war, famine and disease) and Malthus stated so cold-bloodedly in his 1799 Essay on Population:

      “We should facilitate, instead of foolishly and vainly endeavoring to impede, the operations of nature in producing this mortality; and if we dread the too frequent visitation of the horrid form of famine, we should sedulously encourage the other forms of destruction, which we compel nature to use. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and court the return of the plague.”

      The X Club’s support of the Darwinian theory of Natural Selection was less a scientific decision in this respect and more of a political one, as Darwin later admitted in his autobiography that his own theory arose directly from his study of Malthus:

      “In October 1838, fifteen months after I had begun my systematic inquiry, I happened to read for amusement Malthus on Population, and being prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence which everywhere goes on, from long-continued observation of the habits of animals and plants, it at once struck me that under these circumstances favourable variations would tend to be preserved, and unfavourable ones to be destroyed. The result would be the formation of a new species. Here then, I had at last got a theory by which to work”.

      By universalizing Malthus onto all living creation, the X Club obscured the qualitative difference between humans and monkeys which was advantageous for an empire that can only control humans when they adopt the law of the jungle as standards of moral practice and identity formation rather than anything actually moral.

      It was thus no accident that Henry C. Carey targeted Darwinism, Malthus and the X Club relentlessly in his Unity of Law: An Exhibition on the Relations of Physical, Social, Mental and Moral Science (1872). In this important book, Carey attacked all systems founded upon master-slave relations saying:

      “Hence it is that it has given rise to the doctrine e of over-population, which is simply that of slavery, anarchy and societary ruin, as the ultimate condition of mankind; that, too, coming as a consequence of laws emanating from an all-wise and all powerful Being who could, if He would, have instituted laws in virtue of which freedom, order, peace and happiness would have been the lot of man. That these latter have been instituted- that the scheme of creation is not a failure; that is marred by no such errors as those assumed by Mr. Malthus; is proved by all the facts presented for consideration by the advancing communities of the world- the habit of peace, among both individuals and nations, growing with growth of numbers, and increase in power for self-direction.”

      Anti-Darwinian Approaches to Evolution

      Although we are told too often today that no alternative system ever existed outside of Darwin’s theory of evolution, a closer inspection of science history during the 19th century proves that to be far from true.

      During this period, an anti-Darwinian scientific revolution was blossoming in the life sciences under the guiding leadership of figures like James Dwight Dana, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, Alexander von Humboldt, Georges Cuvier, Karl-Ernst von Baer, and Benjamin Silliman. These scientists not only began questioning the static theory of nature as derived from a literal reading of the Bible, but made huge strides in realizing the higher causal mechanisms defining the flow of evolution. This process was outlined in a 2010 lecture delivered by the author of this report entitled “the Matter Over Darwin’s Missing Mind”.

      Unlike many of our modern scientists, these figures never saw a dichotomy separating science from religion, as “science” was understood as nothing less than the investigation and participation in God’s Creation, and as such the biosphere and all “units” within it were implicitly defined as more than the sum of its parts and all fast approaching theories of evolution that were driven by intention, harmony and directionality.

      This outlook was showcased brilliantly by the great naturalist and embryologists Karl Ernst von Baer who wrote in his On the Purpose of Nature (1876):

      “The reciprocal interconnections of organisms with one another and their relationship to the universal materials that offer them the means for sustaining life, is what has been called the harmony of nature, that is a relationship of mutual regulation. Just as tones only give rise to a harmony when they are bound together in accordance with certain rules so can the individual processes in the wholeness of nature only exist and endure if they stand in certain relationships to one another. Chance is unable to create anything enduring, rather it is only capable of destruction.”

      Huxley and the Darwinians on the other hand, promoted an opposing “bottom up” interpretation of evolution by starting with the imagined ‘random mutations’ in the immeasurably small which supposedly added up to the collective sum of all species and biosphere. This biosphere was thus defined as little more than the sum of its parts.

      The imperial school of Huxley’s X Club denied not only creativity’s existence from this higher metaphysical standpoint, but also denied the fact that humanity can uniquely translate the fruits of those creative discoveries into new forms of scientific and technological progress which had the effect of increasing our species’ ability to transcend our “limits to growth” (or as modern neo-Malthusians have termed our “carrying capacity”).

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Nature Magazine Continues its Dismal Legacy

      Throughout the 20th century Nature Magazine has won an ugly reputation as an enforcer of deductive/inductive models of thinking which have destroyed the careers and lives of many creative scientists.

      One of these scientists was the preeminent immunologist Jacques Benveniste (1935-2004) who suffered a 15 year witch hunt led by Nature Magazine as punishment for his discoveries on “water memory and life” (ie: how organic molecules configure the geometry of H2O molecules and imprint their “information” into said water).

      This defamation campaign began in 1988 when Nature Magazine conducted an “official” attempt to duplicate the results of Benveniste’s discoveries on water’s power to retain the information of allergenic substances within its structure which continued to cause allergic reactions upon living tissues and organs long after all traces of the substances were filtered from various solutions.

      As outlined in the 2014 documentary Water Memory, Nature Magazine went so far as to hire a stage magician named James Randy to co-lead an investigative team which intentionally botched Benveniste’s results, lied about the data and condemned Benveniste as a fraudster. This operation ruined the scientist’s reputation, dried up his funding and kept biology locked into the materialist cage for another three decades. Nature Magazine’s slander campaigns were described by Benveniste as a “mockery” which used “McCarthy-like methods and public defamation campaigns” to crush him.

      Today’s Fight for a Science of Causes

      Whether or not COVID-19 arose naturally as Nature Magazine attests or whether it arose in a laboratory as Dr. Luc Montagnier believes, what is certain is that science can be temporarily retarded, but its course of evolution cannot be held back forever.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Today, the legacy of Alexander von Humboldt, Karl Erst von Baer and Cuvier, Dana, Vernadsky and Benveniste is alive and well with Dr. Montagnier and teams of international researchers who have taken the theoretical, experimental and clinical work on water memory to a revolutionary new level with the opening up of a new school of quantum optical biophysics as I outlined in my recent paper Big Pharma Beware: Dr. Montagnier Shines New Light on COVID-19 and The Future of Medicine.

      Describing the coming revolutions in biology, Montagnier said:

      “The day that we admit that signals can have tangible effects, we will use them. From that moment on we will be able to treat patients with waves. Therefore it’s a new domain of medicine that people fear of course. Especially the pharmaceutical industry… one day we will be able to treat cancers using frequency waves.”

      With Montagnier’s bold call for an international scientific crash program into wave harmonics therapy to deal with COVID-19, and with the new alignment of nationalist systems amidst the multi-polar alliance led by Russia and China, there is a serious chance that the new paradigm of win-win cooperation championed by Henry C. Carey, Lincoln and other international patriots in the wake of America’s Civil War, may actually be blossoming once more.

    • "Everybody Is A Believer" – COVID Sparks Apocalypse Bunker Boom 
      “Everybody Is A Believer” – COVID Sparks Apocalypse Bunker Boom 

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 23:00

      “People thought we were crazy because they never believed anything like this could happen,” Vivos CEO Robert Vicino, who operates an international doomsday bunker company, recently told The Verge, referring to the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in a global economic collapse. “Now, they see it. Everybody is a believer.”

      Vicino operates several apocalypse bunker communities, in particular, The Verge visited xPoint, an abandoned military facility-turned-survivalist town at the base of the Black Hills in Fall River County, South Dakota. He said, “demand for doomsday bunkers is at an all-time high,” due mostly to the virus pandemic. 

      Apocalypse bunkers were once for fringe preppers, now have become mainstream, and to some bunker buyers, it has become their vacation home. Vicino said sales are booming:

      “We’re selling almost one a day right now,” he said, adding that his company recently brought in a million dollars in sales one day, and following that day, another $500,000. 

      xPoint’s website says there are “575 private military-built, concrete and steel, all-risk bunkers, is now repurposed and affordably priced – ready to provide life-saving shelter for your entire family or group.” 

      xPoint map 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The history behind the site is that it was originally constructed by the Army Corps of Engineers as a bomb storing facility, from the 1940s through late 1960, when the base was retired. The Army then sold the property to the City of Edgemont, which in turn sold it to local farmers. Since then, Vivos bought the land with reporupose in mind. 

      xPoint community 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The website goes on to say that each bunker “provides enough floor area, with attic potential, to comfortably accommodate 10 to 24 people and their needed supplies, for a year or more, of autonomous shelterization without needing to emerge outside. The compressive elliptical-shaped concrete bunker includes a massive front bulkhead wall, with a solid concrete and steel blast door entrance.”

      xPoint bunker 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Each bunker is priced at a “one-time upfront payment of $35,000, plus an ongoing annual ground rent of $1,000 per bunker,” the site said. 

      Bunker floor plan 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Competely outfitted bunker 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      For the low-cost, bottom barrel bunker setup, mainly for paranoid hipsters. The company offers “bunker glamping” that can be outfitted in the space for an additional $25,000. 

      Low-cost bunker setup 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The Verge spoke Tom and Mary, a pair of full-time residents at xPoint, who moved into their apocalypse bunker after the virus pandemic consumed the US earlier this year. The bunker was going to be their home base after retirement, but after they saw food shortages at supermarkets and the economy plunged — they decided it was the right time to move. 

      “We recognized that if we did have a full-on collapse of society as we know it, that we would be very vulnerable in our home west of Atlanta,” Tom said. 

      Both were inspired to purchase the bunker last year after they read  Patriots: A Novel of Survival in the Coming Collapse, which is a best-seller among prepper communities. In short, the book is about the economic collapse of the US. Tom said, “It opened my eyes to the level of vulnerability that most people have if something happens and food can’t be delivered to the store for whatever reason.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      xPoint residents Tom & Mary

      Here’s their setup, including a camper and bunker at xPoint. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Tom & Mary’s bunker 

      For those seeking “luxury doomsday bunkers” — we noted in April, New Zealand has become the mecca of pandemic escape in the world.  

    • Watch Live: Massive Fire After Explosion In Downtown LA, Multiple Firefighters "Down"
      Watch Live: Massive Fire After Explosion In Downtown LA, Multiple Firefighters “Down”

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 22:52

      At least 10 firefighters were injured as multiple buildings were on fire in downtown Los Angeles Saturday, according to the Los Angeles Fire Department.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      The condition of the firefighters was not immediately known Saturday evening.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      The LA fire department issued a “mayday” call and characterized the incident as a “major emergency.”

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      The fire, located in the 300 block of East Boyd Street, was upgraded to a “major emergency” around 6:36 p.m., with an explosion reported on scene, according to the LAFD.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      NBC Los Angeles reports that as of 7:05 p.m., more than 230 firefighters were responding to the fire and firefighters had moved to a defensive posture for fire attack, the LAFD said.

      Live Feed:

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    • Obamagate Is Not A Conspiracy Theory
      Obamagate Is Not A Conspiracy Theory

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 22:30

      Authored by David Harsanyi via The National Review,

      Those sharing #Obamagate hashtags on Twitter would do best to avoid the hysterics we saw from Russian-collusion believers, but they have no reason to ignore the mounting evidence that suggests the Obama administration engaged in serious corruption.

      Democrats and their allies, who like to pretend that President Obama’s only scandalous act was wearing a tan suit, are going spend the next few months gaslighting the public by focusing on the most feverish accusations against Obama. But the fact is that we already have more compelling evidence that the Obama administration engaged in misconduct than we ever did for opening the Russian-collusion investigation.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      It is not conspiracy-mongering to note that the investigation into Trump was predicated on an opposition-research document filled with fabulism and, most likely, Russian disinformation. We know the DOJ withheld contradictory evidence when it began spying on those in Trump’s orbit. We have proof that many of the relevant FISA-warrant applications — almost every one of them, actually — were based on “fabricated” evidence or riddled with errors. We know that members of the Obama administration, who had no genuine role in counterintelligence operations, repeatedly unmasked Trump’s allies. And we now know that, despite a dearth of evidence, the FBI railroaded Michael Flynn into a guilty plea so it could keep the investigation going.

      What’s more, the larger context only makes all of these facts more damning. By 2016, the Obama administration’s intelligence community had normalized domestic spying. Obama’s director of national intelligence, James Clapper, famously lied about snooping on American citizens to Congress. His CIA director, John Brennan, oversaw an agency that felt comfortable spying on the Senate, with at least five of his underlings breaking into congressional computer files. His attorney general, Eric Holder, invoked the Espionage Act to spy on a Fox News journalist, shopping his case to three judges until he found one who let him name the reporter as a co-conspirator. The Obama administration also spied on Associated Press reporters, which the news organization called a “massive and unprecedented intrusion.” And though it’s been long forgotten, Obama officials were caught monitoring the conversations of members of Congress who opposed the Iran nuclear deal.

      What makes anyone believe these people wouldn’t create a pretext to spy on the opposition party?

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      If anyone does, they shouldn’t, because on top of everything else, we know that Barack Obama was keenly interested in the Russian-collusion investigation’s progress.

      In her very last hour in office, national-security adviser Susan Rice wrote a self-preserving email to herself, noting that she’d attended a meeting with the president, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, FBI director James Comey, and Vice President Joe Biden in which Obama stressed that everything in the investigation should proceed “by the book.”

      Did high-ranking Obama-administration officials not always conduct such investigations “by the book”? It is curious that they would need to be specifically instructed to do so. It is also curious that the outgoing national-security adviser, 15 minutes after Trump had been sworn in as president, would need to mention this meeting.

      None of this means that Obama committed some specific crime; he almost assuredly did not. In a healthy media environment, though, the mounting evidence of wrongdoing would spark an outpouring of journalistic curiosity.

      “But,” you might ask, “why does it matter, anymore?”

      Well, for one thing, many of the same characters central to all this apparent malfeasance now want to retake power in Washington. Biden is the Democratic Party’s presumptive presidential nominee, he’s running as the heir to Obama’s legacy, and he was at that meeting with Rice. He had denied even knowing anything about the FBI investigation into Flynn before being forced to correct himself after ABC’s George Stephanopoulos pointed out that he was mentioned in Rice’s email. It’s completely legitimate to wonder what he knew about the investigation.

      Skeptics like to point out that the Obama administration had no motive to engage in abuse, because Democrats were sure they were going to win. Richard Nixon won 49 states in 1972. His cronies had no need to break into the DNC’s offices and touch off Watergate. But as the FBI agents involved in the case noted, they wanted to have an “insurance policy” if the unthinkable happened.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      In 2016, the unthinkable did happen, and we’re still dealing with the fallout four years later. We don’t know where this scandal will end up, but one doesn’t have to be a conspiracy theorist to wonder.

    • California Denies SpaceX Subsidy Request – Is Musk's Government Gravy Train Coming To An End?
      California Denies SpaceX Subsidy Request – Is Musk’s Government Gravy Train Coming To An End?

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 22:00

      California is taking a swipe back at Elon Musk.

      A state panel voted on Friday to reject Musk’s request for $655,000 in job and training funds for SpaceX, citing the CEO’s recent bizarre behavior and threats to move Tesla out of state. 

      We have been documenting Musk’s threats to move out of California and the CEO’s supposed plans to take his operation to Texas or Nevada instead. 

      Five members of the panel voted against the proposal and two voted for it. The California’s Employment Training Panel openly discussed the CEOs Tweets and media reports about layoffs at SpaceX’s Hawthorne headquarters, according to Reuters

      Gretchen Newsom, a panel member and the political director of an IBEW electrical workers union local, said: “In my opinion, given the recent threats of the CEO to leave the state of California, and everything else we’ve discussed today, this proposal does not rise to the level for me to feel secure in supporting it.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      “SpaceX is a different company, but they have the same CEO,” she concluded. 

      Tesla and SpaceX remain non-union shops. Funding from the state was supposed to help SpaceX train 900 new employees for its Starlink satellite project and hire an additional 300 to work on its Starship program. It’s unclear whether or not SpaceX will move forward with the hiring without the state aid.

      Recall, this past week, longtime Tesla fans turned against the company as many accused Musk of placing Tesla’s share price – not to mention his own personal gain – above the safety of his workers.

      After President Trump spoke out in Musk’s defense, Alameda County folded and Musk mostly got his way about re-opening his plant.

      But apparently, the bad taste that the incident left in Musk’s mouth prompted him to leak a story about Tesla picking Austin, Texas as the site of its next Gigafactory. Tesla has four gigafactories – Sparks, Nevada, Buffalo, New York, Shanghai, China and one under construction in Berlin.

      Hopefully other U.S. states follow California’s lead and decide to cut Musk’s gravy train off. It sure would be tough for Tesla to operate with demand and production at coronavirus lockdown-levels – and without the help of ZEV credits or government subsidies…

    • Nothing Changes As Long As You Obey
      Nothing Changes As Long As You Obey

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 21:30

      Authored by Paul Rosenberg via Free-Man’s Perspective blog,

      I hear the same complaints about politicians that you do. And while I understand them, the fact is that complaining accomplishes almost nothing. And there is a very simple reason why complaining has no real effect:

      Because the complainers keep right on obeying.

      As long as you obey, the things you complain about will keep on happening.

      The Proof

      This idea that “nothing changes as long as you obey” has a modern proof – that of American blacks in the southern United States. Specifically, between the civil war and Martin Luther King Jr.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      King is badly misunderstood. His legacy has become a tool for garnering of political power. He has been turned into a semi-mystical symbol and used by power grabbers of many types.

      The real Martin King, however, was a minister who exposed the truth that obedience keeps us in chains. His crucial synthesis was to combine disobedience with goodness. His crucial work (and this is greatly under-appreciated) was to hold disobedience and goodness together.

      Blacks suffered for many decades in the American south. They complained endlessly, but the laws were against them and remained against them. A significant number of white people were sympathetic, but everyone obeyed the law and little changed.

      Until King came along, of course, with his new strategy of goodness plus disobedience.

      King, for whatever his shortcomings, was a serious minister, and had a clear vision of what goodness entailed. And, he became very good at communicating it. King added disobedience to goodness, and combined them with teachings on courage and self-control.

      Within a decade or so of using this strategy, things changed in the American south. First, individuals changed. And, after a while, laws followed.

      There is far too much to tell of this decade, so I will give you some quotes from Dr. King:

      Non-cooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good.

      We will not obey unjust laws or submit to unjust practices. We will do this peacefully, openly, cheerfully because our aim is to persuade. We adopt the means of nonviolence because our end is a community at peace with itself.

      Most people can’t stand up for their convictions, because the majority of people might not be doing it. See, everybody’s not doing it, so it must be wrong. And since everybody is doing it, it must be right.

      Cowardice asks the question: is it safe? Expediency asks the question: is it politic? Vanity asks the question: is it popular? But conscience asks the question: is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular – but one must take it simply because it is right.

      Human salvation lies in the hands of the creatively maladjusted.

      How to Stop Obeying

      First of all, understand that how to do this must be YOUR decision. If you follow the “blueprint” of anyone but yourself, you’ll be falling right back into the same trap of obeying an authority. Yes, we’ve been trained in that all our lives, but it remains a fundamental error.

      You must decide for yourself what path to take, and you must – inside of yourself – summon the courage to act upon it, without anyone else telling you what to do.

      You must choose and you must act. Until then, your suffering will remain. But when you do choose and act, you make yourself a free man or woman.

      So choose a good path, then break the inertia of compliance and step out on your own. Make yourself into someone you’ll be proud of.

    • FDA Halts Bill Gates-Backed COVID-19 Testing Program 
      FDA Halts Bill Gates-Backed COVID-19 Testing Program 

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 21:00

      About a month after Bill Gates criticized President Trump’s decision to suspend funding to the World Health Organization (WHO), the federal government has just halted a Seattle-based COVID-19 testing program backed by Gates. 

      What are the odds, right?

      “Please discontinue patient testing and return of diagnostic results to patients until proper authorization is obtained,” the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) wrote in a memo, addressed to the Seattle Coronavirus Assessment Network (SCAN), according to The New York Times.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      SCAN posted an update on its website on Thursday (May 14) describing how the FDA had asked it to “pause” testing while it receives further guidance on new procedures for its COVID-19 test kits that collect samples at home. 

      The FDA “recently clarified its guidance for home-based, self-collected samples to test for COVID-19. We have been notified that a separate federal emergency use authorization (EUA) is required to return results for self-collected tests,” the post read.

       “The FDA has not raised any concerns regarding the safety and accuracy of SCAN’s test, but we have been asked to pause testing until we receive that additional authorization.” 

      An FDA spokesperson told The Times, the home collection test kits raised some concerns about “safety and accuracy that required the agency’s review.” 

      The issue in the Seattle case appears to be that the test results are being used not only by researchers for surveillance of the virus in the community but that the results are also being returned to patients to inform them.

      The two kinds of testing — surveillance and diagnostic — fall under different F.D.A. standards. In a pure surveillance study, the researchers may keep the results just for themselves. But coronavirus testing has largely revolved around getting results returned to doctors who can share the results with patients.

      “We had previously understood that SCAN was being conducted as a surveillance study,” the spokesperson said.

      SCAN is backed by The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the University of Washington Medicine. The testing program was sending free test kits to participants’ homes in the Seattle Metropolitan Area, with the goal of testing people in the region to get a sense of how the virus was spreading through the community. 

      As SCAN gathers more test results in the weeks ahead, researchers expect the new data to provide a better sense of the number of infections and serve as one source to help answer other questions, like when physical distancing measures can be relaxed,” Gates wrote on his blog, several days before the FDA halted the testing program. 

      New concerns emerged last week when the accuracy of Abbott Laboratories’ COVID-19 antibody test was questioned by the FDA. SCAN tests do not use antibodies for testing, and SCAN said it is working with health officials to restore the program. 

      Abbott’s COVID-19 test has been widely pumped by the Trump administration as a key factor in winning the fight against the virus, along with its use for daily testing in the White House. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Is it just a coincidence that after Gates bashed President Trump on WHO defunding and the president’s favorite COVID-19 test now has accuracy issues — that the federal government would, out of the blue, halt Gates’ SCAN test? 

      These are things that make you go hmmm..

    • Goldman Spots A Huge Problem For The Fed
      Goldman Spots A Huge Problem For The Fed

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 20:44

      Last week, the Treasury shocked the world when it announced that in the current quarter (the 3rd of the fiscal year), the US will need to sell a mindblowing, record $3 trillion (pardon, $2.999 trillion) in Treasurys to finance the US money helicopter.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      This, after selling $807 billion in the first half of the fiscal year, and another $677 billion in the quarter ending Sept 30.

      And since it is just a matter of time before Congress has to pass yet another fiscal package which will be at least another trillion dollars, and up to $3 trillion if the Democrats get their wish, one can say that Guggenheim’s projection of over $5 trillion in debt issuance this calendar year will be wildly conservative.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Now here’s the thing: as Deutsche Bank recently showed, so far this new debt avalanche was entire monetized exclusively by the Fed, whose debt purchasing operations have been far greater than the net Treasury issuance.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      But this was only the case when the Fed was buying a massive $75 billion in TSYs per day in the late March crash, when Powell dumped a monetary nuclear bomb on the market to stabilize the biggest panic selling an entire generation of traders had ever seen, and nearly doubling the Fed’s balance – which is now just shy of $7 trillion, in a few months:

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Since then, however, the Fed’s daily and weekly POMO has shrunk substantially, and as discussed earlier, it is down to just $30BN in Treasury purchases per week as of next week, which amounts to around $1.5 trillion per year.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      There’s just one problem: $30BN per week in TSY monetization is nowhere near enough to consume the trillions in Treasury issuance that is about to hit. In fact, all else equal, the Fed will very soon have to find a pretext to aggressively ramp up its treasury purchases.

      As Goldman writes overnight, putting the problem in its proper context, “Central banks have been purchasing sovereign bonds at a rapid pace (Exhibit 1), faster than past QE programs in most cases. These purchases are occurring against a backdrop of a surge in fiscal deficits, which will require enormous amounts of additional sovereign supply to finance them.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Which makes sense, of course: after all helicopter money, which is what we have now that MMT (Magic Money Theory) has been shoved down everyone’s throat without any debate, only works when there is coordination between the Treasury and the central bank. And while until now Fed purchases have generally offset Treasury issuance, that coordination is about to end. As Goldman puts it, “Central bank buying should absorb a substantial amount of upcoming issuance, though we expect increases in “free float” across most markets, most notably in the US, which adds to the medium-term case for higher yields and steeper curves there.”

      Next, Goldman estimates this so-called free float, defined as the amount of sovereign debt outstanding less central bank and foreign official holdings, across major DM markets, and shows it in the chart below. Through the end of last year, free float was on a downward trend in Germany and Japan, as ECB and BoJ purchases absorbed the bulk of new supply. In contrast, free float had been trending higher for much of the year in the US and UK.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      So with record fiscal deficits and resumption of asset purchases in several markets, where is free float headed this year? In Exhibit 3, Goldman lays out its expectations for total purchase amounts on a net basis along with net supply. It finds the largest increase in free float in the US, as Fed purchases continue to slow; in fact according to Goldman calculations the US public (now that foreign investors have hit the breaks on US TSY purchases), will be on the hook to fund the $1.6 trillion needed to bridge the full amount of US funding needs.

      A similar picture emerges in the Euro area, where supply is also expected outpace ECB purchases, particularly in Italy, Spain and France (absent further increases in ECB purchases). Bizarrely, a similar picture emerges in Japan where even the always ravenous BoJ is expected to absorb a large portion (about ¥25tn) of incoming supply in the upcoming year as Japan is boosting its debt sales by 18.2 trillion yen ($170 billion) to fund a spending package equivalent to a fifth of its annual economic output; but according to Goldman, the scale of supply is likely to exceed even the BOJ’s QE purchases.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      It continues: foreign-ownership of New Zealand sovereign debt has fallen to 50% from 70% just five years ago as central bankers in Wellington snap up bonds as part of a quantitative-easing program.

      In short, even with central banks unleashing $7.9 trillion in QE so far in 2020 (according to Bank of America calculations) of which the Fed accounts for over $2.8 trillion in debt purchases alone, this won’t be enough to monetize the tsunami of debt that is coming to fund the biggest global rescue operation in history, and if investors find that suddenly the bond market has to clear without the only true backstop – the central bank – willing and able to mop up all the supply, a critical precondition for the continuation of “helicopter money”, the outcome could be disastrous.

      Incidentally, we first warned about the urgent need for the Fed to aggressively step up and boost its QE (instead of continuing to taper it by $1 billion week after week as it did again today) on Wednesday when we quoted Curvature Securities’ rates strategist and repo expert Scott Skyrm, who calculated that “there are $689 billion net new Treasurys settling during the month of May and $992 billion net new Treasurys settling between now and June 15. Yes, almost one trillion new Treasury securities hitting the market within the next month!”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      His conclusion: “That means the market needs to come up with about one trillion dollars to pay for those securities over the next month.” Which, of course, is a euphemism because we all know who in the market needs to come up with one trillion dollar – the only one who literally prints money: the Federal Reserve.

      Conveniently, Goldman’s argument allows us to recycle our conclusion from two days ago, in which we said that here is the layman’s version of what was just said: “the Fed has flooded the system with liquidity… and it is not enough, because the way helicopter money works, is that liquidity supply (the Fed), and liquidity demand (Treasury via debt issuance) go hand in hand, and periods of too much supply, as was the cash with the Fed’s massive QE in late March and early April, are promptly followed by periods of dramatic liquidity demand, such as the next month when $1 trillion in liquidity will be drained to fund the US government “money helicopter.”

      Goldman’s own calculations suggest that the shortfall net of the Fed’s ongoing QE tapering could be as much as $1.6 trillion.

      As a result, Powell faces a two-fold problem: since the Fed chair has taken negative rates off the table, Powell has no choice but too boost QE again, and unleash another firehose of debt monetizing liquidity in the financial system. However, any such reversal to the Fed’s current posture of shrinking QE will be met with howls of rage, especially among what’s left of the conservative political establishment. Which means that, just like in March when the Fed used the first pandemic-induced market crash to unleash unlimited QE, the Fed will soon have to go for round 2 and spark a new market crash, one which it then uses as an alibi for the next massive liquidity injection. Failing to do that, watch as the dollar takes off as markets sniff out that another major dollar squeeze is imminent. And since this will accelerate the liquidity crunch, one way or another, the coming $1.6 trillion in Treasury issuance – which has already been generously greenlighted by Congress – will serve as a trigger for the next market shock, one which the Fed will quickly reverse by expanding the already unlimited QE by trillions on very short notice.

      The only question we have is whether this will be the market crash that the Fed uses to unveil it will also buy equity ETfs next, or if Powell will save this final bullet in its ammo for whatever comes next. 

      Finally, it’s not just us reaching this conclusion: yesterday – one day after our dire assessment – Bloomberg reached the same conclusion, and in “An $8 Trillion Spree Sets Clock Ticking for Bonds’ Judgment Day” in which it wrote that “investors are mopping up the sales as long as central banks engage in so-called quantitative easing, buying an unlimited amount of debt to counter the ravages of the pandemic. But at the first whiff of a recovery, or a pullback from policy makers, all bets may be off. Throw in the threat of inflation amid a global fiscal splurge exceeding $8 trillion, and bond investors look set for a toxic cocktail of risks in the not-too-distant future.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Well, today we got another pullback when the Fed tapered its weekly QE to just $30BN from $35BN last week, and a record $75 billion per day two months ago.

      “Given the massive central bank easing, which includes a lot of bond-buying QE in many places, there will be a lot of demand right now to buy government bonds,” said Eric Stein, co-director of global income at Eaton Vance Management, effectively describing what can simply be called “frontrunning” the Fed, a strategy that even BlackRock said is the only one left in this idiotic market.

      “However, if it was a year or two from now and the economy was picking up and inflation had started to pick up, the story could be different.”

      Actually, the economy doesn’t even have to be picking up: an unexpected – and unexplained – slowdown in the pace of the Fed’s “unlimited QE” purchases would be sufficient to throw the bond market into unprecedented turmoil as all those socialists who pretend that MMT makes sense, realize that the only thing permitting their idiotic “theory” to persist is the Fed’s money printer.

      Yet while the Fed’s QE expansion is just a matter of time, whether catalyzed by another market crash or not, the bigger question is what happens after that?

      “Can governments continue to borrow at such record levels? No,” said George Boubouras, head of research at hedge fund K2 Asset Management. “Central-bank support is key in the massive bond buying we’ve seen for now. But if they blink then at some point, in the medium term, it will all likely unravel – with unforgiving consequences for some countries.”

      Ironically, this also means that an end to the coronavirus crisis is the worst possible thing that could happen to a world that is now habituated to helicopter money and virtually unlimited handouts, which however need a state of perpetual crisis.

      “Once there is an end to the crisis in sight, they will be less and less willing to provide support and it will fall more on the street to absorb paper,” said Mediolanum money manager Charles Diebel, who’s adding bond steepeners in anticipation of a coming inflationary supernova.

      That, incidentally, would be the endgame for the current monetary regime, which is why anyone hoping that officials, policymakers and the establishment in general, will allow the coronavirus crisis to simply fade away, is in for the shock of a lifetime.

    • Here's 5 Reasons Why Gold Miners Have Massive Outperformance In The Tank
      Here’s 5 Reasons Why Gold Miners Have Massive Outperformance In The Tank

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 20:30

      Authored by Bryce Coward via Knowledge Leaders Capital blog,

      As I write this note on a dreary Friday afternoon from Boulder, CO, I am reminded of my town’s origin. Its first non-native settlers established the town 1858 as a base camp for gold and silver miners. Nestled literally at the foot of the Rockies, its location was ideal for supplying the Colorado mining boom at that time and by 1871 a railroad had been built to connect Denver, Golden, Boulder and the mining operations directly to the West of Boulder. One such mining operation was in what is still known as Gold Hill, which I highly recommend visiting for a live music and BBQ event the next time you are in Colorado (COVID permitting).

      Today we may be in the early days of a different kind of gold boom. This time the boom isn’t because there are new gold reserves to be dug out of the ground. Rather, the steady supply of gold compared to the extraordinary growth of new money requires that the dollar value of the former must rise to keep parity with the latter. Indeed, the US money supply has grown by approximately 23% over the last 65 days, or about a 90% annualized rate.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      No wonder the price of gold is sitting near a cycle high of $1743/oz as of this writing. But even as the price of gold has risen in recent months, the gold miners themselves may be even larger beneficiaries of the US dollar supply shock.

      Below, we’ll list 5 simple reasons the gold miners could be in for a period of massive outperformance.

      The price of gold miners relative to the price of gold is basically at a 25 year low.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      This implies quite a catch up trade if the price of the commodity produced by the miners remains at elevated levels or even rises from here. The price performance of the miners would have to outperform the price of gold by 500% to reach the old 2011 highs in relative performance.

      The relative performance of gold miners relative to the S&P 500 remains at near a 25 year low.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Gold miners would have to outperform the S&P 500 by 400% to get back to the 2011 highs in relative performance.

      Valuation.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Based on the price to EBITDA ratio (and about all the other valuation ratios), gold miners are cheaper than the overall market. From 2005-2016 gold miners pretty much always traded at a premium to the S&P 500, but now the miners are trading at a 15% discount.

      Liquidity.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      In the age of COVID, stocks with the ability to service their debt obligations should arguably trade at a premium to the market. The gold miners have a current ratio (current assets/current liabilities) nearly twice that of the S&P 500 as a whioe (2.06 vs 1.28).

      Solvency.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      In the age of COVID, stocks with balance sheets in line with their income statements should arguably trade at a premium to the market. The gold miners have debt to EBITDA about 75% lower than the overall market (1.16 vs 4.69).

      Bonus chart. The global aggregate market value of gold miners is $260bn.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      This compares to the aggregate market value of the FAAMG (Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Google) stocks of $5.4tn and the market value of US Treasury debt outstanding of $25tn. So the gold miners, in aggregate, are worth about 5% of the value of just those 5 FAAMG stocks and 1% of the value of all the Treasury debt outstanding.

      What do you think would happen to the price of the gold miners if some of that capital left the FAAMGs or Treasury bonds and flowed into the gold miners?

    • Joe Rogan 'Might Move To Texas' Over California's Oppressive COVID-19 Lockdown And 'Ridiculous Taxes'
      Joe Rogan ‘Might Move To Texas’ Over California’s Oppressive COVID-19 Lockdown And ‘Ridiculous Taxes’

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 20:00

      Joe Rogan says he might leave California and move to Texas over what he says are excessive COVID-19 restrictions in a state that’s already “extremely expensive” with “ridiculous” taxes.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      In comments following an interview with Elon Musk, the 52-year-old Rogan – who The Hill reports earned an estimated $30 million in revenue in 2019, said “I might move to Texas. … If California continues to be this restrictive I don’t know if this is a good place to live,” adding “First of all, it’s extremely expensive. The taxes are ridiculous.”

      And if they really say that we can’t do stand-up until 2022, or some shit like that, I might jet. I’m not kidding. This is silly. I don’t need to be here,” said Rogan – a popular comic and podcaster with over 190 million downloads per month of the “Joe Rogan Experience.”

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti received blowback for his comments to ABC’s George Stephanopolous earlier this week after stating the city will never be “fully opened” until “we have a cure.”

      We’ve never been fully closed; we’ll never be completely open until we have cure,” Garcetti said.

      Health experts have said a vaccine won’t likely be available until 2021 at the earliest.

      I like Austin a lot, I like Dallas a lot, I like Houston,” Rogan continued, naming possible Texas cities to live in. “I don’t know if I would live in Houston. The summer is a motherf—er.” –The Hill

      Musk, meanwhile, opened his Alameda County, CA Tesla plant earlier this month in defiance of the state’s stay-at-home order. The state eventually caved last week, telling him that he can open the plant as long as he only conducts “minimum business operations.”

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    • The School Closures Are A Big Threat To The Power Of Public Education
      The School Closures Are A Big Threat To The Power Of Public Education

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 19:30

      Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

      Twenty twenty is likely to be a watershed year in the history of public schooling. And things aren’t looking good for the public schools.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      For decades, we’ve been fed a near-daily diet of claims that public schooling is one of the most important—if not the most important—institutions in America. We’re also told that there’s not nearly enough of it, and this leads to demands for longer school hours, longer school years, and ever larger amounts of money spent on more facilities and more tech.

      And then, all of sudden, with the panic over COVID-19, it was gone.

      It turns out that public schooling wasn’t actually all that important after all, and that extending the lives of the over-seventy demographic takes precedence.

      Yes, the schools have tried to keep up the ruse that students are all diligently doing their school work at home, but by late April it was already apparent that the old model of “doing public school” via internet isn’t working. In some places, class participation has collapsed by 60 percent, as students simply aren’t showing up for the virtual lessons.

      The political repercussions of all this will be sizable.

      Changing Attitudes among the Middle Classes

      Ironically, public schools have essentially ditched lower-income families almost completely even though school district bureaucrats have long based the political legitimacy of public schools on the idea that they are an essential resource for low-income students. So as long as the physical schools remain closed, this claim will become increasingly unconvincing. After all, “virtual” public schooling simply doesn’t work for these families, since lower-income households are more likely to depend on both parents’ incomes and parents may have less flexible job schedules. This means less time for parents to make sure little Sally logs on to her virtual classes. Many lower-income households don’t even have internet access or computing equipment beyond their smartphones. Only 56 percent of households with incomes under $30,000 have access to broadband internet.

      Nonetheless, working-class and lower-income parents are likely to return their children to the schools when they open again. Many believe they have no other choice.

      Attitudes among the middle classes will be a little different, however, and may be more politically damaging to the future of the public schools.

      Like their lower-income counterparts, middle class parents have long been happy to take advantage of the schools as a child-care service. But the non-educational amenities didn’t stop there. Middle-class parents especially have long  embraced the idea that billions of dollars spent on school music programs, school sports, and other extracurriculars were all absolutely essential to student success. Sports provided an important social function for both the students and the larger community.

      But as the list of amenities we once associated with schooling gets shorter and shorter, households at all income levels will start to wonder what exactly they’re paying for.

      Stripped of the non-academic side of things,  public schools now must sell themselves only as providers of academic skills. Many parents are likely to be left unimpressed, and this will be all the more true for middle class families where the parents are able to readily adopt homeschooling as a real substitute. The households that do have the infrastructure to do this are now far more likely to conclude that they simply don’t need the public schools much of the time. There are now so many resources provided for free outside the schools—such as Khan Academy, to just name one—that those who are already savvy with online informational resources will quickly understand that the schools aren’t essential.

      In addition to this, many parents who were on autopilot in terms of assuming they were getting their money’s worth may suddenly be realizing that public schools—even when they were physically open—weren’t that much of a bargain after all. As Gary North recently observed,

      For the first time, parents can see exactly what is being taught to their children. They can see the quality of the teachers. They can learn about the content of the educational materials.

      Many parents may not like what they see, and as many increasingly take on the job of providing in-person instruction, school teachers won’t look quite like the highly trained heroes they have long claimed to be.

      Budget Cuts

      With the image of schools as indispensable social institutions quickly fading, the political advantage they have long enjoyed will rapidly disappear as well. It wasn’t long ago that schools could go back to the taxpayers again and again with with demands for more money, more resources, and higher salaries. Teacher unions endlessly lectured the taxpayers about how getting your child into a classroom with one of their teachers was of the utmost importance. Voters, regardless of political ideology or party, were often amendable to the idea.

      That narrative is already greatly in danger, and the longer the COVID-19 panic ensures that schools remain closed, the more distant the memory of the old narrative will become. As school budgets contract, school districts from Las Vegas to Denver and across the nation are bracing for furloughs and layoffs.

      With smaller staff, fewer teachers, and smaller budgets, expect virtual public learning to become even more bare bones, and less rewarding and engaging for students.

      What Will Things Look like This Fall?

      Even if schools open this fall, the reforms currently being pushed will ensure that schools continue to lack many of the amenities many have come to expect. If these reforms are adopted, students can forget about social events. They can expect shorter school days, and an ongoing role for online schooling. Team sports will be gone. Old notions of universal mandatory attendance and long days will seem increasingly quaint and old fashioned—or possibly even dangerous.

      For many parents, this will just reinforce their growing suspicions that public schools just aren’t worth it anymore. Maybe they never were.

    • Global COVID-19 Cases Top 4.5 Million As Italy Sees Deaths Fall To 10-Week Low: Virus Updates
      Global COVID-19 Cases Top 4.5 Million As Italy Sees Deaths Fall To 10-Week Low: Virus Updates

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 19:07

      Summary:

      • Italy reports lowest death toll in 69 days
      • Nepal reports first coronavirus death
      • Germany’s Bundesliga re-starts play
      • FinMin Scholz mulls rescue package for towns, cities
      • Hungary ends Budapest lockdown
      • Global case total passes 4.5M, deaths top 300k
      • UK death toll nears 35k
      • Trump says US will restore some WHO funding
      • American soup kitchens see 70% spike in traffic
      • Cambodia claims it’s officially “virus free”
      • Mexico reports record jump in cases
      • Wuhan tests 100k+ during first day of mass-testing drive

      * * *

      Update (1230ET): Nepal, the mountainous southwest Asian state that borders China-controlled Tibet, just reported its first coronavirus-linked death.

      Meanwhile, in Italy, the Civil Protection Service reported just 153 deaths on Saturday – the lowest daily number in 69 days  – just as the government announced plans to loosen some travel restrictions early next month.

      * * *

      Despite a few close calls, it appears Germany is pushing ahead with its reopening. And in a major symbol of Europe’s “return to normalcy” (as the first stirrings of a second wave of SARS-Cov-2 have emerged in mainland China, South Korea & Singapore), Germany’s Bundesliga, the German Federation’s top-flight soccer league, is holding its first round of games since the outbreak began on Saturday.

      Five matches including a derby between Borussia Dortmund and Schalke 04 mark the restart of the league, though they are taking place under strict health and hygiene protocols. Stadiums are empty, coaches are wearing face masks and handshakes are banned.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Here’s the schedule, for any Europeans – or sports-deprived Americans – interested in watching (times all ET):

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Additionally, German Finance Minister Olaf Scholz is reportedly working on an aid package worth €57 billion ($61.65 billion) to help towns and cities cope with a plunge in tax revenues caused by the coronavirus crisis. Dems in the US have argued that states need more aid to deal with their own drop in tax revenue, which is part of the reason they’re pushing for another relief bill (though the $3 trillion price tag they’re currently pushing is widely considered DOA).

      As more European countries ease their lockdowns, Hungary PM Viktor Orban said Saturday he would gradually lift lockdown restrictions in Budapest beginning Monday, two weeks after it ended the lockdown in the rest of the country.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The biggest news Saturday morning is that the global number of coronavirus cases passed 4.5 million, according to data from Johns Hopkins University.

      Unfortunately, as the outbreaks in Russia and Brazil flare out of control and testing ramps up for the first time, the number of new cases reported globally climbed to its highest level since late April, with 97,500 new cases (More than 1/4 were from Russia and Brazil alone).

      Meanwhile, the global death toll from the virus has topped 300k.

      On Saturday morning, Russia confirmed 9,200 new coronavirus infections, bringing the country’s official number of cases to 272,043.

      While many places are unwinding their lockdowns – including countries like Brazil, which has seen the outbreak explode as its president has continued to resist any actions to suppress the outbreak even as health-care systems in the Amazon are overwhelmed – others are tightening restrictions. In Chile, the capital city Santiago is imposing a lockdown to keep people from entering as Brazil’s neighbors increasingly fear the outbreak in that country will make things worse for the entire continent.

      Moving on to the UK, the Department of Health and Social Care reported the latest batch of new figures Saturday morning. The UK’s confirmed deaths are now just a hair below 35k.

      In the US, President Trump announced Saturday morning that he planned to restore 10% of the US’s funding for the WHO, putting the US on an even footing with China.

      • Trump Says U.S. Considering Restoring Partial Funding to World Health Organization
      • Trump Says U.S. Could Provide 10% of What It Previously Sent to WHO
      • Trump: New U.S. Contribution Would Match Amount China Is Giving to The Group

      While many younger, single Americans are enjoying the enhanced unemployment benefits (indeed, many American workers are earning more per week via the combination of unemployment and additional relief than they would have working, according to data shared by the Wall Street Journal) others with families to feed are turning to food banks in unprecedented numbers. As the FT reported Saturday, “America’s food banks are being pressed into service as never before” as unemployment surges forcing many working-class and middle-class families to visit food banks for the first time.

      Feeding America, the largest organization representing food banks in the US (it represents 200+ individual charities across the country), says it has experienced a 70% increase in the number of people seeking food assistance since the crisis began. Of the newcomers, ~40% say they’re visiting for the first time.

      While this all might sound pretty dire for the world’s largest economy, a team of Goldman analysts has stumbled upon another potential complication. After rectifying America’s Treasury issuance with the Fed’s balance-sheet expansion, it appears that individual investors might be left with a $1.6 trillion wad of paper, ready to monkeyhammer interest rates higher. Keeping in mind the market’s reaction to Fed Chairman Powell on Wednesday, we suspect the Fed will be looking for any pretext to further accelerate its already-unprecedented balance sheet expansion.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Cambodia on Saturday reported that all of its confirmed coronavirus patients have now recovered from the disease, and the southeast Asian country hasn’t reported a single new case for weeks. Joining the growing number of European countries that are easing travel restrictions (but typically only for select nations within the Schengen zone), the Italian government passed a new decree to allow travel across the country, as well as to and from other European countries starting on June 3, Al Jazeera reports.

      Mexico’s health ministry confirmed 290 additional coronavirus deaths on Saturday and 2,437 new infections, the largest jump in new cases since the start of the pandemic. The new infections brought confirmed coronavirus cases to 45,032 and 4,767 deaths in total, according to the official tally, though many suspect the true number of infections is  much higher due to the number of deaths recorded (evidence that the government has deliberately undercounted has also sowed widespread doubt). Mexico’s previous highest daily confirmed cases total was a day earlier on Thursday, when authorities reported 2,409 new infections.

      Finally, the city of Wuhan has succeeded in conducting 113,609 nucleic acid tests on May 15, according to local health authorities. That’s approxmiately 1/10th of the number of daily tests they will need to carry out to hit their goal of testing 11 million ppl in 10 days.

      As we have reported, Wuhan has launched a city-wide testing campaign after confirming its first cluster of COVID-19 infections since the end of the citywide lockdown that made the city’s residents prisoners inside their own homes.

      The number of tests administered on May 15 in the city of 11 million residents marked a new record. But still, officials are nowhere near hitting their unrealistically ambitious targets.

       

    • Trump: "I'm Not Running Against Sleepy Joe Biden…Not Even A Factor"
      Trump: “I’m Not Running Against Sleepy Joe Biden…Not Even A Factor”

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 19:00

      The Hill points out that “While polling consistently puts Biden in the lead, Trump maintains a sizeable financial advantage and a sharp digital strategy, while the former vice president remains relegated to his home in Delaware to follow social distancing guidelines amid the coronavirus pandemic.”

      But there’s actually a bigger factor: not only a decades-long history of bizarre Biden gaffes, exaggerations, lies and awkward “touching”, as well as moments he’s even caught berating and belittling people within his own party — all caught on video — but the now more immediately pressing problem of the presumptive 2020 Democratic presidential candidate’s ongoing obvious difficulty in communicating simple stances and policies without quickly getting bewildered and confused while shuffling hand-written notes, leading to glaring errors over basic facts, or increasingly frequent momentary inability to articulate coherent sentences for that matter, as we’ve highlighted many times. 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      President Trump again picked up on both themes, tweeting Saturday morning that “Sleepy Joe Biden” is “not even a factor”, posting video of the infamous 1987 interaction where Senator Biden bragged about having three degrees and being at the top of his law school class, all proven false even in reports at the time.

      “I’m not running against Sleepy Joe Biden. He is not even a factor. Never was, remember 1% Joe?” Trump tweeted. The reference was to past White House bids which ended in utter failure and barely a blip in terms of national traction.

      “I’m running against the Radical Left, Do Nothing Democrats & their partner, the real opposition party, the Lamestream Fake News Media! They are vicious & crazy, but we will WIN!” the president added. 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      On Friday Biden’s campaign rolled out its battleground map while announcing key states the former vice president intends to gain upset victories in includes Texas, Arizona, and Georgia.

      Between now and November Trump will have what seems an endless supply of embarrassing Biden clips he can rely on for ammo. So grab your popcorn.

    • Bipartisan Beijing Bashing: College Dems & Reps Demand Closure Of All Chinese "Propaganda" Centers
      Bipartisan Beijing Bashing: College Dems & Reps Demand Closure Of All Chinese “Propaganda” Centers

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 18:30

      Authored by Celine Ryan via Campus Reform,

      In a rare cross-party coalition, the National College Republicans and College Democrats came together Monday to demand that American universities take a stand against the Chinese Communist Party’s “long-term campaign” against academic freedom in the U.S. by closing all Confucius Institutes.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      In a statement released Wednesday titled “CONCERNING THE THREAT OF AUTHORITARIAN INFLUENCE AND THE DEFENSE OF PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS,” the two national student political organizations united against the presence of the known propaganda centers on campus, calling for American universities to put an end to “the Chinese government’s flagrant attempts to coerce and control discourse at universities in the United States.”

      “We are compelled to voice our concerns over the present state of academic freedom, and bring to light the continued exploitation of liberal, democratic academic institutions by authoritarians,” reads the statement.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      “We further recommend that colleges, universities, non-governmental organizations, and representatives of vulnerable groups implement practices and policies to protect academic freedom from authoritarian interference in any form,” the statement continues. 

      The organizations outline various aspects of the “long-term campaign undeniably aimed at expanding the reach and power of the Chinese state’s apparatus of oppression,” beginning with specifically calling out Confucius Institutes.

      “The Chinese Communist Party has established programs at universities, especially Confucius Institutes, which are proprietary outlets of soft power that promote self-censorship, arbitrarily censor discussion of issues “sensitive” to the Chinese Communist Party, utilize discriminatory hiring practices, and propagate blatant disinformation.,” reads the statement.

      Campus Reform recently reported that dozens of such centers, deemed “propaganda” cells by intelligence officials still operate on American campuses.

      They also agree that the CCP “has undermined the integrity of higher-learning institutions by seeking to bribe and intimidate academics.”

      “The Chinese Communist Party’s actions pose an immense threat to academic freedom and to human dignity,” the statement continues, adding that “It is imperative that we distinguish this totalitarian regime from the Chinese people, whom we must steadfastly defend from abhorrent acts of xenophobia, racism, and hatred. We must act to give voice to the long-oppressed, be they Chinese, Hong Konger, Mongolian, Taiwanese, Tibetan or Uyghur.”

      The groups also note that although “concerns over these matters have been raised through legitimate means for over two decades,” the CCP “and its proxies” have only responded via propaganda and by “ambiguously using the threat of financial pressure against universities.”

      In light of this, the coalition issued a list of demands, beginning with “the immediate and permanent closure of all Confucius Institutes in the United States.”

      The groups are also demanding “the revocation of any organizational and/or club status afforded to the Chinese Students and Scholars Association” and a ban of “all funding from all proxies and agencies of the Chinese state or the Chinese Communist Party without explicit university approval.”

      The coalition also demands complete public disclosure of any and all ties, “both financial and academic” between American colleges and any Chinese “state agencies and proxies,” and that schools create systems by which students can report violations of these rules and other “general encroachments upon academic freedom.”

      “Let this action be the start of a broader, independent effort by academic institutions to counter wherever it arises,” the statement concludes. “In the fight against authoritarianism, universities can continue to benefit from the largesse of an emboldened authoritarian state, or they can stand on the right side of history. They cannot do both. The world is watching, and the fate of liberal democracy–based on the fundamental dignity of the human person–depends on our success.”

    • Meet Barbara Ferrer, The Social Justice Warrior With No Medical Background Leading LA's COVID Response
      Meet Barbara Ferrer, The Social Justice Warrior With No Medical Background Leading LA’s COVID Response

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 18:00

      At this point, most market participants outside California know LA County Public Health Director Dr. Barbara Ferrer as the public servant whose “miscommunication” Tuesday afternoon about a three-month extension to her county’s stay at home order was blamed for reviving anxieties about the economic reopening in the US that helped hammer stocks lower last week. The good doctor – who, as it so happens, isn’t a medical doctor, but the owner of a Ph.D in “Social Welfare” (whatever the f**k that means) – would like you to know she is truly sorry for the error, and the ensuing public furor she accidentally unleashed.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      LA County Public Health Director Dr. Barbara Ferrer

      As we have been saying since the beginning of this outbreak, many of the public servants revered as virtually infallible by the “stay home, save lives” crowd (overly Democratic in political orientation) actually have few real qualifications. Dr. Ferrer isn’t a scientist, or a medical doctor, and people who argue that we should simply stay inside forever because science often have little, or no, understanding of the current state of research concerning the virus. Because if they did, they would understand that not even the scientists have a great grasp of how to handle this. Given the far-reaching ramifications for society, it shouldn’t be an extreme opinion to suggest that tackling this requires a multidisciplinary approach, because small oversights can have major consequences.

      As for Dr. Ferrer, after apologizing for her “miscommunication” on Wednesday, she went on to reveal that, actually, the order would be expanded (though certain businesses are still being allowed to reopen) offering a seemingly contradictory explanation of the local guidelines and planned path forward that has left the entire county wondering what the hell is going on.

      As KABC’s John Phillips shared on his radio show Wednesday, the good doctor’s educational resume, according to a bio published at USC, where she was recently a panelist at a “Safe Schools” symposium, reveals she received her Ph.D. in Social Welfare from Brandeis University, a Master of Arts in Public Health from Boston University, a Master of Arts in Education from the University of Massachusetts, and a Bachelor of Arts in Community Studies from UC Santa Cruz.

      None of these disciplines are rooted in the sciences – rather, it appears the good doctor’s “public health” background doesn’t include any specialization in actual medical care, or epidemiology. This woman probably knows about as much as the discipline as the average Californian who has spent the last couple of months on Wikipedia.

      However, as the LA Times reports, Ferrer has somehow found her way into a role where she is the top public health officer in a county of 10 million people. Keep in mind, she has no actual medical background, but despite this, she’s found herself in the middle of “every tough conversation about which businesses and institutions have to shut down, whether public and private hospitals are equipped and prepared to handle a possible surge” and what precautions individuals can take to protect their health.

      Her role for the county is essentially equivalent to that of Dr. Fauci at the White house. Except Dr. Ferrer isn’t a doctor, she’s a professional social justice warrior.

      As Red State points out, when Dr. Ferrer was put in charge of solving the homelessness epidemic in LA County, her game plan 100% focused on “community outreach”. “We need to start this work by speaking directly with those experiencing homelessness to better understand how to align our support,” she said.

      That’s right: Dr. Ferrer’s one-size-fits-all plan for solving homelessness started with talking to a demographic group where those with severe mental health disorders and substance-abuse problems represent an overwhelming share of the population. Dr. Ferrer’s approach to help improve the lives of the homeless was to talk to a bunch of schizophrenics and drug addicts about government policy, as Red State pointed out.

      Does this woman sound qualified to be one of a handful of people in the room making decisions that will impact the livelihoods and health of millions of people? If we lived in LA County, we certainly wouldn’t be comfortable with that.

    • A Look At The Great Depression Through The Sears Catalog
      A Look At The Great Depression Through The Sears Catalog

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 17:30

      Submitted by Nicholas Colas of DataTrek Research

      The slide, and recovery, from the depths of the Great Depression is on full display in the once iconic Sears catalog. But what really stands out is the increasing presence of modern appliances like blenders, vacuums and washing machines. Rural electrification was one of the Depression’s big infrastructure projects, a good reminder of what is possible even in hard times.

      Stay at home life in New York City is getting pretty old and dull after 8 weeks confined to an apartment. My wife Misty and I took a walk around the block this morning and stopped in at CVS to buy a few things. It felt like a big outing…

      At least the mail still brings some novelty, and yesterday I received fresh from an eBay seller an original 1938 Sears Roebuck catalog. It adds to the small collection of Great Depression ephemera we have discussed with you in prior Story Time Thursdays. Last week we compared the 1929 and 1932 editions of these time capsules of the American consumer experience to show you how much things changed from the top of the Roaring 20s to the depths of the Great Depression.

      With the 1938 catalog we can now examine the changes that occurred from the bottom of the Depression in 1932 through the recovery as the decade progressed. We’ll take a few detours to highlight notable shifts in merchandising/ consumer behavior.

      #1: Page count as a proxy for US economic growth. Sears, like so many large companies, did much better in the Great Depression than smaller operations. Yes, exactly like Amazon today… But printing and mailing large catalogs to a third of American households (Sears’ market share at the time) still cost real money so page count mattered to the bottom line. Here is the history of total Sears catalog pages from high to low to high again:

      • 1929: 1,104

      • 1932: 974

      • 1938: 1,172

      Takeaway: it took 10 years for the Sears catalog to bulk back up to its 1929 heft, just as it took the American economy the same time to recover back to its old levels of GDP.

      #2: Demand for different sorts of merchandise shows where consumer attention shifted between 1932 and 1938; here is the change in category page count over those 6 years:

      • Women’s/children’s apparel & fabric: +58%

      • Shoes: +39%

      • Men’s apparel: -18%

      • Household: +26%

      • Automotive: +4%

      • Radio: +70%

      • Watches/jewelry: -7%

      • Furniture: +38%

      • Heaters, stoves and home appliances: +62%

      • Farm supply/Home repairs & maintenance: -10%

      Takeaway: put aside the obvious cyclicality of categories like household durable goods, and the 1930s technological disruption of mass electrification is the other notable if hidden force behind these page category variations. During the decade of the 1930s the percent of American households with electricity went from barely half (58%) to a large majority (80%). That not only explains the 62% increase in home appliance page count, but also the first category, which includes fabric. Electric sewing machines dramatically decreased the time required to make one’s own garments. The Greatest Generation was famously parsimonious, but they still adopted new technologies just as we do today.

      #3: As far as how prices changed from 1932 to 1938, let’s look at the apparel featured in each catalog:

      Here are women’s day wear dresses, from the first page of each catalog’s selection. Note that every dress in 1938 has an elaborate story around it while 1932 offers more affordable options and less flowery descriptions:

      1932 and 1938:

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      In men’s suits, Sears’ approach to merchandising changed dramatically from 1932 to 1938. In the depths of the Depression they started the catalog’s section with a price-leading product. In 1938, the first page of the section showed a suit costing 2x as much, even though there were more affordable options listed on subsequent pages.

      1932 and 1938:

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Takeaway: the Great Depression is synonymous with deflation, but the examples here are a good reminder of how difficult it is to measure inflation when spending patterns shift dramatically. Consumers substitute quite readily between options as they manage expenses. Did men’s apparel really see 100% inflation in 6 years? No… It’s just that Sears was confident enough in the economy to lead with a more expensive offering in 1938. That’s “sort of” inflation, but does it count? To an economist doing hedonic adjustments the answer is “No”. To a consumer, it feels more like “Maybe”.

      #4: The coolest thing about the 1938 catalog is that it features “Version 1.0” of many now-ubiquitous household appliances. The reason they appear at this time: the combination of electrification (the Great Depression’s biggest infrastructure program) and rising personal incomes after the 1932 lows for the US economy.

      Three examples:

      A washing machine ($60 is about $1,100 today)

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      A vacuum cleaner ($32 is $581 today)

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      And a kitchen mixer with the most explicit substitution of capital for labor pitch you’ll ever see.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      #5: We’ll wrap up with a look at the back cover of the 1938 catalog, the most prime piece of real estate in any mailer. The 1932 edition featured just one item: a plain white wood-fueled kitchen stove for $62 ($1,200 today), with ad copy that literally said, “The price is down to where you can afford it”.

      By 1938 Sears had lowered their ambitions, putting a variety of stylish women’s shoes on the back cover at the low, low price of $1.60/pair ($30 today), but they also changed the tenor of their messaging as well. A product could be affordable, but also fun and even playful. A good reminder that whatever comes next for the US economy, business can adapt and even thrive.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    • Here's What Would Happen If The Fed Launched Negative Rates
      Here’s What Would Happen If The Fed Launched Negative Rates

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 17:00

      On Thursday, May 7, an unprecedented event took place: after a violent repricing in Eurodollar contracts as near as November 2020, for the first time ever the market was pricing in that negative interest rates are not only coming to the US, but would arrive sometime around the presidential election.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      This move prompted a barrage of Fed speakers, including the Fed chair, to remind the public that the Fed really, really, really does not believe in negative rates (but never say never), even though one could say the same thing for the BOJ, the ECB and the SNB… and look at them now. In fact, in a world where growth is only possible with trillions in new debt injections – and with debt already at crushing levels, interest rates have to be as close to zero if not below it – the Fed has emerged as the “rational” outlier that refuses to take rates negative.

      And yet, in a world where the economy was already sinking ahead of the catastrophic collapse spawned by the coronavirus, there is only so much the Fed can do before it took is dragged into the NIRP vortex.

      To be sure, in many ways the market’s expectation for negative rates is rational. As we pointed out overnight, even Goldman is concerned that the Fed is simply not doing enough QE to monetize the massive upcoming treasury flood let along stimulate a global reflationary wave, which leaves it with just one other option: negative rates. Nordea’s Andreas Steno Larsen looked at this dynamic and reached a similar conclusion: “the Fed is still not buying enough to fully re-ignite the global credit cycle. We find that the Fed needs to buy a lot of bonds compared to issuance before USD scarcity is finally fully eased in the system, leading to easier financial conditions in EM and ultimately global growth prospects being repriced positively” In other words, “the Fed will have to buy more than currently. This speaks in favour of even LOWER long USD bond yields, not higher.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The market may also be taking hints from former Minneapolis Fed president, Narayana Kocherlakota who argued in an op-ed that the Fed should take interest rates below zero for the first time ever. To use his words, “unprecedented situations require unprecedented actions”.

      On the other hand, there may simply be something in the Minneapolis water that makes local Fed president raving monetary lunatics (here we envision not only Kocherlakota but his successor, former Goldman banker and TARP author, Neel Kashkari), because while it is quite simple to extrapolate the catastrophic experience the Japanese and European financial sectors have had with NIRP to the US, the truth is that the Fed has rarely this unified in any view, and as former Fed staffer and current BofA rates strategist, Mark Cabana writes, “US negative rates are not an attractive monetary policy tool” and Powell was very clear in this view during his videoconference last Wednesday.

      As an alternative to negative rates Chair Powell has indicated the Fed can ease through forward guidance, UST & agency MBS asset purchases, or “13-3” extraordinary market programs, although here again we run into the “huge problem” we observed yesterday facing the Fed, that the most likely alternative to NIRP would be a massive expansion in QE (one which Deutsche Bank calculated at over $3 trillion in more QE), yet such a dramatic move would also require – most likely – some sort of market event to give the Fed the cover to take Unlimited QE to a truly unprecedented level. It remains unclear how the Fed will square those two constraints.

      And while Cabana expects Fed official to “overweight” the abovementioned tools in support of expansive fiscal policies “but not shift their thinking on negative interest rates in the near term.” As an aside, for those who have missed the recent “Fed talk”, below is a summary of the uniform and widespread opposition to negative rates from a range of Fed officials.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Of the above, the most striking rebuke of negative rates came from the October 2019 FOMC meeting minutes when “all participants judged that negative interest rates currently did not appear to be an attractive monetary policy tool in the United States”. It is very unusual to see this type of broad based agreement on any potential policy stance, and as BofA concludes, “in order to see a material change in thinking on negative rates it would likely require a leadership change and large scale Fed turnover.” While neither of these is likely in the near term, Trump recent endorsement of negative rates leaves open the door that the president may appoint an even more dovish Fed president in his second term (we are confident that Kashkari would be delighted to be considered for the post of the man who destroys the dollar as the world’s reserve currency).

      Operational hurdles: IOER Legality

      To be sure, in addition to the Fed’s own preference – which as events in the past two years have shown can change on a dime, especially once a “shock” triggers a violent market meltdown – there are countless operational hurdles, starting with the question of whether negative rates are even legal.

      Consider, that in the Federal Reserve Act, it is specifically stated that banks can “receive” interest on reserves. There is no specification for banks paying interest or how negative rates could be implemented in this context.

      In her 2016 Semiannual Monetary Policy Report to the House, former Fed Chair Yellen noted that the legality of negative rates “remains a question that we still would need to investigate more thoroughly.” This question has not been definitively answered and it is not clear whether the Fed would actually charge negative interest or implement a fee for holding reserves. Indeed, the fact that the Fed has not ruled out negative rates suggests the Fed likely has adequate legal cover to implement such a regime. Furthermore, while just two months ago one would have argued that it is illegal for the Fed to buy corporate bonds, a quick meeting between Powell and Mnuchin which led to a bizarre joint venture between the Fed and the Treasury changed all that in the blink of an eye. In short, as Cabana writes, “if the Fed wanted to implement negative rates they could find a way to do so but could face pushback. We see this as an important but surmountable hurdle for the Fed to clear before implementing negative rates.”

      Treasury auction obstacles

      NIRP legality aside, treasury auctions provide another obstacle for bills & nominal coupons.

      Treasury nominal coupons and bills: Treasury auction regulations via the “Uniform Offering Circular” state that nominal coupons & bills are permitted only to have a bid rate that is “a positive number or zero”. This is striking since in August 2012 Treasury announced it was in the process of building the operational capabilities to allow for negative rate bidding in Treasury bill auctions. It is thus safe to assume that the Treasury has subsequently built the operational capacity to auction bills and nominal coupons with negative rate bidding but is unwilling to take this capacity live. It is unclear why Treasury might be reluctant to take this step but it could be (1) Treasury is worried about sending a signal about the economic or monetary policy outlook (2) there may be legal or accounting hurdles that need to be cleared up.

      Treasury’s inability to auction bills or nominal coupon securities with negative rates results in an inefficient primary issuance process when secondary market rates are negative. Treasury offers securities at par but bidders can then sell these securities into the secondary market at a premium. This essentially results in a subsidy to the primary dealer or Treasury bidder community that should be captured by the Treasury (we described this in “Here Is The Treasury’s (Not So) Secret Trade Printing Millions In Guaranteed, Risk-Free Profits Every Day“) . Treasury auction rules suggest that when a security is auctioned at par the bidders have their allocations determined on a proportional basis to their auction offers. This is why bid-to-covers spike when secondary market levels are below zero at auction.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      TIPS & floating rate notes: Treasury rules state that among fixed rate debt only TIPS can have a negative bid rate. Treasury floating rate debt can be auctioned with a discount margin that may be positive, negative, or zero but there is a 0% minimum on interest accrual. Treasury rules ensure that an investor is never required to pay the US Treasury during a period of CPI deflation or during any future period in which bills might be auctioned at negative rates.

      That said, just like the legality issue, BofA does not see Treasury auction limitations as a material constraint to adopting negative rates “since we assume operational hurdles can easily be overcome. However, allowing negative UST bidding for bills and nominal coupons is another important operational hurdle that will need to be addressed before negative rates can be more widely adopted.”

      Money Market Funds in a negative rate environment

      Ass Cabana continues, a key concern around negative rates in the US is the viability of money market funds (MMFs). MMF AUM total $4.8tn with the vast majority in government funds. MMFs also play an important role in funding, making up ~25% of all cash lending in repo markets.

      Negative rates are particularly problematic for stable NAV MMF. Recall, 2a-7 MMF reform requires institutional prime & municipal have floating NAV while government and retail prime + muni funds have $1 stable NAVs. Negative rates are an issue for stable NAV funds because the fund value will decline by virtue of investing in negative yielding assets. To address this NAV stability in a negative rate environment MMFs in the US would need to move to a floating NAV regime, potentially increase customer fees, or use a share cancellation regime. The latter two options as more likely given that changes in the stable NAV structure could potentially cause sudden changes in fund allocation as we saw during the 2016 MMF reform

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Increased MMF customer fees or a share cancellation regime are more likely in a negative rate environment vs a shift to floating NAV for all funds. In a regime with higher MMF customer fees the stable $1 NAV could still be retained but the principal invested in the fund would gradually be reduced by the fees charges to compensate the fund for the negative yielding securities. In a share cancellation regime a MMF would retain the $1 stable NAV but gradually reduce the number of shares an investor is entitled to at redemption. For example, an investor that deposits $100 and receives 100 MMF shares in a -1% negative rate environment would see their shares gradually cancelled; 1Y later they would receive $99 in cash at redemption.

      Depending on the implementation of negative rates in the US, MMFs may also face competition with deposits. If the Fed sets IOER negative this will immediately impact market rates, but may not be passed onto consumers. Banks may charge fees or other service costs in order to offset their negative IOER rate. This could prompt outflows from MMFs into deposits, which are often considered close alternatives. As a result, tetail MMF investors would be the most likely to shift to bank deposits given reluctance in the banking industry to charge negative deposit rates for retail consumers.

      BofA’s bottom line is that the US MMF industry would likely be able to adapt to a regime of negative yielding interest rates if given enough time to prepare. That said, MMFs and front end investors would likely need at least 6m to 1Y worth of notification from the Fed that negative rates should be prepared for so that they could properly adjust their systems. Ominously, Cabana says that his “sense is that several MMF are already preparing for the possibility of negative rates.”

      Other issues: systems & repo

      The take home from the above, is that if the Fed were to take rates negative, Cabana is confident that it would need to provide ample lead time to the market to prepare financial systems for such a change. Market participants would also need to adjust trading, settlement, accounting, tax, and legal systems or procedures to prepare for negative rate trading. While some of these operational hurdles have already been cleared for large global firms given the periodic negative rate trading of US Treasuries and other developed market sovereign bonds, more time would be needed to prepare for domestically oriented firms. Furthermore, the Fed would likely prefer that firms focus their operational resources on preparing for the transition away from LIBOR rather than on negative rates, which may further limit the Fed’s willingness to take rates negative in the near term.

      One area where Cabana does have serious questions on the operational readiness for negative rates is in the repo market. This is not an issue for specific issue UST collateral, which has frequently traded at negative rates post UST fails charge in 2009, but rather is a question centered on the tri-party repo market where it is unclear if there is operational capacity for rates to trade at negative levels. Questions emerged given that in late March the 1st percentile of the SOFR rates traded in negative territory while the 1st percentile of tri-party general collateral repo rate (TGCR) remained at zero. This was the first time this segment of low-rate TGCR trades exceeded SOFR

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      If this is correct, and there are operational issues with taking tri-party GC repo into negative territory, then this is a material operational impediment, and as Cabana writes, “we cannot envision the Fed moving into negative territory until the tri-party repo market can easily follow suit.”

      Negative rates can hamper financial intermediation

      The biggest problem, however, is that the scope of negative rates is ultimately limited. As a reminder, in a 2010 Federal Reserve memo, it was noted that setting IOER lower than about -35bps would likely cause banks to reduce their reserve holdings and hold currency instead. However, other central banks such as the SNB and ECB have taken rates more deeply negative, suggesting that -35bp is not a firm floor.

      Meanwhile, as rates become negative there are also other behavioral shifts that could arise, according to BofA, which notes that if banks begin to charge depositors, it is possible that cash vault holdings would increase or that special banks could be formed to store physical currency. Consumers and businesses might also seek to pre-pay credit card, account payable, or tax bills in order to reduce their cash holdings. Similarly, those who are expecting payments from creditworthy entities might prefer to defer them while those receiving checks might wait longer periods before depositing them. It is unlikely that the Fed would find such behavioral shifts productive and might view them as an additional cost to negative interest rates.

      On top of all that, negative rates would serve to impede key financial intermediation functions for banks, pensions, & insurers. As we have observed in Europe and Japan, negative interest rates would hurt bank profitability and potentially make them less willing lenders due to lower capital cushions.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Virtually every strategist has warned of significant downside to bank earnings in a negative rate environment and noted lower margins result in reduced capacity for a bank to absorb losses. Pensions & insurers would also struggle with larger liabilities to manage. Financial intermediation complications likely reduce the attractiveness of negative US rates for the Fed.

      Overall, Fed officials have suggested that financial intermediation issues are a meaningful constraint on their willingness to consider negative rates. Financial intermediation + operational challenges likely reinforce the Fed’s poor cost/benefit assessment of negative rates.

      * * *

      Aside from Bank of America’s near universal panning of negative rates, JPMorgan’s Nick Panigirtzoglou is similarly damning of what the financial system would look like if the Fed shifts to a negative rate.

      Starting with the negative impacts first, JPMorgan’s strategist has “little doubt” that US interbank markets and repo markets would suffer if the Fed cuts its policy rate to negative. Given money market funds are important participants in repo markets, overall repo market activity could decline. This is also because narrowing spreads in the repo market are likely to induce some lenders of collateral to pull back from the market, on the grounds that returns from securities lending are no longer adequate. That would impair bond market liquidity, by making it more difficult to cover short positions in repo.

      Incentives to cover shorts are also reduced at zero rates, which can result in higher fail volumes than seen before,  hampering liquidity and volumes even further. Finally, and echoing Cabana’s concerns above, some US counterparties (mainly US real money investors) may not be able to trade repo at negative levels (operational, legal, economic reasons etc.) which will again likely reduce repo market volume/activity.

      Separately, similar to what happened after the ECB depo rate cut in June 2014, mildly negative US rates coupled with a natural aversion to negative rates will likely reduce the incentive of healthier banks to trade with each other and increase their incentive to trade with less healthy banks including US subsidiaries of foreign banks. That is, even if US interbank market volumes decline, a greater portion of the interbank volume is likely to involve less healthy banks. Similarly a greater portion of US repo markets should involve higher yielding non-government collateral. That is, interbank markets, both unsecured and secured, will likely become less fragmented as it happened in the euro area post June 2014.

      The search for yield will likely also spread from money markets to bond markets. As the US money market fund industry gets hurt, the main beneficiary would be US bond funds, i.e. investors would replace money funds with bond funds as savings vehicles. And as, following a Fed policy rate cut to negative, the short end of the US government bond market collapses  towards zero, this would force bond investors towards higher maturity and lower-quality debt instruments.

      Negative rates would also result in an even bigger bond bubble, as corporate and mortgage bonds would be the biggest beneficiaries of this intense search for yield given their relatively low risk weighting and given that banks with large reserve deposits at the Fed would likely face intense pressure to avoid the capital erosion from negative deposit rates.

      While negative interest rates on deposits would incentivize banks to “get rid” of their excess deposits rather than suffer an erosion of capital, the amount of reserves in the system can only be reduced if the Fed starts reducing its bond holdings, something unthinkable in the current conjuncture. If a commercial bank makes a loan or buys a bond to avoid negative rates, they simply pass reserves on to another bank, which ultimately end up back at the Fed. As such, excess reserves would become something of a ‘hot potato’, with no bank wanting to hold lots of them at the end of the day. And this “hot potato” effect would be even more intense in the current backdrop of central bank balance sheet expansion and higher liquidity.

      The likely damage to the profitability of banks and the risk that banks could actually increase lending rates to protect their interest rate margins. That is, assuming that banks will be reluctant to pass negative rates to retail or corporate depositors, they might increase lending rates to offset the decline in their profitability. Effectively, a decline in the deposit rate to negative could actually cause a tightening in financial conditions in the real economy and a contraction in bank lending rather than easing.

    • 3 Trillion Reasons Why Pelosi Just Sparked The Nationwide Battle For The 'Tax Producers'
      3 Trillion Reasons Why Pelosi Just Sparked The Nationwide Battle For The ‘Tax Producers’

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 16:30

      Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, ‘n Guns blog,

      The great Murray Rothbard cut through the fog of modern class warfare with his observation that in a place with governments issuing edicts the citizenry breaks down into two classes – tax producers and tax consumers.

      And if you want to know which group you belong to just ask yourself two simple questions, “Where’s the gun? And is it pointed at you?”

      Most of us don’t even think to ask those questions because it’s the world we live in. Government jobs are safe jobs. They’re part of the landscape and dominant economic theory holds that the government can be a source of stability when the free market fails, whatever the hell that’s supposed to mean.

      The truth is most of us hate to ask these questions because it forces us to be honest about where we earn our living. No one likes looking in the mirror and asking hard questions about whether the job they perform is truly useful to someone else.

      No one wants to believe they’re a leech upon the riches conferred to society through voluntary exchange between the truly productive and its transformative ability to better people’s lives.

      With governments in control of the production of money and so deeply intertwined with our lives, the lines between tax consumers and producers has blurred a bit. But, as I said at the outset of this, in the end, if your salary depends on you or someone else acting on your behalf pointing a gun at someone else then you’re one of the bad guys.

      When times are good the private sector can afford to outsource some basic functions of society to the government because it may feel like it’s worth the loss due to the inefficiency. But when times are bad, like now, I think it’s important to get back to basics and remind us where civilization comes from and why government handouts are not the cure for what ails us.

      We’re looking at 35 million people out of work. And …

      Outside of education, only 332,000 jobs have been cut around the country. That number needs to rise by a factor of 10 to alleviate the burden on what’s left of the private sector. When more than 25% of GDP — pre-crisis — was government spending and the economy is shrinking by a projected 20% or more in Q2, how is it even reasonable in anyone’s mind that governments have cut so little?

      The smart ones are facing up to this reality now. They have bills to pay and services not being used.

      The fundamental problem now is that the pols in D.C. are now positioning themselves to be the saviors, even though they could truly care less about any of us in the real world unless we’re willing to vote for them this fall.

      The House, under the baleful eye of Chief Witch Nancy Pelosijust passed a $3 trillion ‘support’ bill which is the height of the worst kind of pandering and virtue signaling.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Because she knows the Republicans in the Senate will vote it down as a matter of principle.

      Forget the fact that the government doesn’t have $3 trillion dollars. The Federal government doesn’t have $1 at this point. The budget deficit for 2020 will be north of 20% of GDP.

      Pelosi only put this bill together to make it unpalatable to even the odious Republicans so her people will have something to campaign against them on this fall.

      This isn’t the basis for a new negotiation. Pelosi et.al. are arguing at the state level and lower to extend the lock downs into the fall to ensure maximal damage is done to the domestic economy.

      This is all about how many tax producers can they turn against Trump before November.

      That’s it. Power, votes, money from the future till from the Magic Money Tree that is the lifeblood of all political vampires, of whom desiccated Nancy is the Queen of the Damned.

      What’s worse is that Pelosi couldn’t even whip all her people to back this thing, because some of them actually believe they can do some good by just printing money. They don’t understand that they are forestalling the reorganization of capital away from the tax consumers and back towards the tax producers which is what contractions in output do when free from their greedy hands.

      But, the reality is that Pelosi isn’t the problem, she’s just its most apropos symbol. The Republicans are no better, President Trump included. They’ve already pushed through the CARES Act which was an abomination, with almost zero actual help for the engine of the country, small businesses.

      He wants negative interest rates because he thinks like a real estate developer and that floating infrastructure loans at -1% is getting a rebate on the money like points on a credit card for pity’s sake.

      Now it isn’t all terrible news because Trump’s Chief Economic Adviser Larry Kudlow was out making the rounds offering up a 50% cut in the corporate tax rate for companies that onshore production back here at home.

      This is grist for Pelosi’s ‘eat the rich’ rhetoric but it is actually perfectly reasonable suggestion because we pay corporate taxes anyway, folks. You can shift which ledger the money is accounted on but the costs are still there.

      Taxes are terrible. They are always net capital destructive. Some taxes are worse than others but all taxes are terrible. All taxes are theft.

      Kudlow is simply the conduit for adding to Trump’s New Cold War with China. Trump wants the U.S. decoupled from China economically as much as possible. This economic nationalism sounds good in an election year where 35 million people have lost their jobs.

      It’s a good start but it will be the first thing horse-traded away with The Stretched One.

      But Trump isn’t stupid either.

      Trump has demanded a payroll tax cut for workers, although that idea has received a chilly reception from congressional Republicans. White House officials are also pushing cuts to capital gains taxes paid by investors; expanding a deduction for meals and expenses; and extending a deduction for new investments as part of their demands for the next stimulus package.

      See what I mean about the Republicans being just as bad as the Democrats? The one single thing that would be of the most use to what’s left of the middle class, lowering payroll taxes, is the one thing they will not countenance.

      Payroll taxes lowered, corporate taxes lowered, useless regulations cut, these are all good starts. But the real problem is the multi-trillion dollar elephant in the room, the cost of all levels of government that are a net drain on the real economy.

      But, like all insolvable problems, there is no easy solution when the tax consumers can vote themselves a job and their representatives can print the money at will to pay for it all.

      The irony is that Pelosi just wants to spend money and repeal the SALT deduction cap, even though guess who’s helped the most by that? Big earners in big blue states. It’s a direct sop to the rich that’s far bigger than lowering the corporate tax rate would be.

      The reality is the real second wave we’re about to fight is the collapse of state and local governments because they don’t have Magic Money Trees. They only have local tax revenues and the, now anachronistic, municipal bond market.

      And while they may be responding quicker than in depressions past, it won’t be fast enough because of the dysfunction in D.C. and because we refuse to look in the mirror and be honest with ourselves.

      So, the battle lines are drawn between Trump and the Democrats for this fall. The prize, as always, is the majority of the middle class tax producer.

      • Trump has to make the argument that he believes in them and will get out of their way while they rebuild their lives.

      • Pelosi has to sell those same people, whom she has done nothing but berate, belittle and blaspheme, that she’s now got their backs with a few thousand bucks worth of fake money.

      I know who I’m betting on to win that fight.

      *  *  *

      Join My Patreon if you are a tax producer. Install the Brave Browser to keep Google from denying you from speaking

    • United Airlines Only Needs 3,000 Of Its 25,000 Flight Attendants
      United Airlines Only Needs 3,000 Of Its 25,000 Flight Attendants

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 16:00

      Nothing paints a better picture of how bad things have gotten for the airline industry – and for its working class – than the fact that United Airlines is barely using over 10% of its flight attendant staff. 

      The airline said this week it only has work for 3,000 of its 25,000 flight attendants in June and said that job losses could be next if demand doesn’t recover by the time the government ends its payroll aid, according to Reuters

      United still intends to pay its flight attendants until September 30 thanks to $5 billion in aid the airline got from the taxpayer’s purchasing power government. The CARES Act prohibits layoffs or pay cuts before October.

      United is just one of many airlines feeling the pain of the coronavirus lockdown. Its flight schedule is down by an astonishing 90% and it has – along with other airlines – significantly cut the number of flights it is making on a daily basis. Major airlines are burning about $10 billion in cash per month. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      United’s managing director of inflight crew resourcing, Michael Sasse, said: “If you just look at a way in which our network is flying we’d need about 3,000 flight attendants to fly our schedule for June.”

      United says they will keep their flying schedule at about 10% of normal until demand starts to tick back up. 

      United President Scott Kirby said: “But if demand remains significantly diminished on Oct. 1, we simply won’t be able to endure this crisis … without implementing some of the more difficult and painful actions.”

      United is burning about $40 million in cash per day and executives have said they want to be up front with employees about potential cuts. The airline has warned that its administrative staff will be about 30% smaller by the time Fall comes around. 

      Delta, meanwhile, has said that it has 7,000 more pilots than it expects to need in the fall. All major airlines have asked employees to volunteer for temporary unpaid leave or early retirement.  

    Digest powered by RSS Digest

    Today’s News 16th May 2020

    • It Wasn't The "Virus" That Crashed The Economy, It Was The People Who Obeyed
      It Wasn’t The “Virus” That Crashed The Economy, It Was The People Who Obeyed

      Tyler Durden

      Sat, 05/16/2020 – 00:10

      Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

      Most atrocities in human history have all been committed by individuals and agents of government who were “just following orders” or “just obeying the law.”  The virus didn’t give any orders. It was the people who obeyed the commands of tyrants that crashed the economy and ruined the livelihoods of others.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Most human beings still think like slaves.  Instead of asking questions or using critical thinking skills to ask if something is right before doing it, they simply obey perceived “authority”.  The truth is, this lockdown is the fault of everyone who complied and everyone who used forced to exact revenge on those who disobeyed.  It was the same in all tyrannical takeovers in history.

      The mainstream media keeps blaming the economic devastation on the coronavirus, but it wasn’t the fault of a virus.  It was the fault of the government and the slave mentality of the police and the public willingly obeying their commands.

      Mainstream media outlets are still trying desperately to spin the narrative and fault the “invisible enemy” for the very real toll on human life the government’s overreaction has already caused.  This is nothing more than propaganda, and once you pick it up, you’ll be able to see it.  The media doesn’t want you to put the blame where it belongs and figure things out for yourself, so they hide behind deception headlines that will keep you in fear of COVID-19 as long as possible.

      This is all a part of the larger plan to keep the public panicked about a virus and looking the other way when the tyrannical boots of the state come down on them.  We know this is what the media does, and we know they are doing it to keep the ruling class in power and the public panicked and in a constant state of fear so they will comply with any and all enslavement measures.

      Larken Rose, the author of Most Dangerous Superstition, lays out just how horrifyingly devastating it is for humans to remain unevolved to the point that they will not say “no” to an immoral command. The primary threat to freedom and justice is not greed, or hatred, or any of the other emotions or human flaws usually blamed for such things. Instead, it is one ubiquitous superstition that infects the minds of people of all races, religions, and nationalities, which deceives decent, well-intentioned people into supporting and advocating violence and oppression. Even without making human beings one bit more wise or virtuous, removing that one superstition would remove the vast majority of injustice and suffering from the world.

      Instead of just blindly obeying the commands, think about it and ask if what you are doing is right. Do you have the moral right to take the rights of others? Applying even the most minimal amount of critical thinking to something can usually get people to what is right.  But you have to do be willing to take a look at yourself, and correct your mistakes yourself, and take responsibility for your own actions. Which is exactly why most Americans won’t.  Blaming a virus and blindly obeying the ruling class and it’s foot soldiers is much easier than critical thinking.

      The police state and tyranny is brought to you by those willing to follow commands, regardless of the morality of the command.  Tyrants can’t have power without people willing to enforce the tyranny.  If there are no order followers, there are no orders.

    • Nevada: The Real 'Golden' State
      Nevada: The Real ‘Golden’ State

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 23:50

      Thanks to the world famous silver discoveries of the 19th century that unveiled Nevada’s precious metal potential, the state today is known by many as “The Silver State”.

      However, as Visual Capitalist’s Nichaolas LePan notes, it’s possible that nickname may need to be updated. In the last few decades, Nevada has become a prolific gold producer, accounting for 84% of total U.S. gold production each year.

      Today’s infographic from Corvus Gold showcases why Nevada may have a better case for deserving California’s nickname of the “Golden State”: we look at the state’s gold production, exploration potential, and even its rich history.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      A Defining Era for the American West

      The discovery of the Comstock silver lode in 1859 sparked a silver rush of prospectors to Nevada, scrambling to stake their claims. News of the discovery spread quickly throughout the United States, drawing thousands into Nevada for one of the largest rushes since the California Gold Rush in 1849. Mining camps soon thrived and eventually became towns, a catalyst that helped turn the territory into an official state by 1864.

      Interestingly, many of the early mines also produced considerable quantities of gold, indicating there was more to the state than just silver.

      1. The Comstock Lode: 8,600,000 troy ounces (270t) of gold until 1959

      2. The Eureka district: 1,200,000 troy ounces (37t) of gold

      3. The Robinson copper mine: 2,700,000 troy ounces (84t) of gold

      The Comstock Lode is notable not just for the immense fortunes it generated but also the large role those fortunes had in the growth of Nevada and San Francisco.

      In fact, there was so much gold and silver flowing into San Francisco, the U.S. Mint opened a branch in the city to safely store it all. Within the first year of its operation, the San Francisco Mint turned $4 million of gold bullion into coins for circulation.

      While California gold rushes became history, Nevada mining was just beginning and would spur the development of modern industry. In 2018, California produced 140,000 troy ounces of gold, just a fraction of the 5.58 million oz coming out of Nevada’s ground.

      Nevada Gold Mining Geology: Following the Trends

      There are three key geological trends from where the majority of Nevada’s gold comes from.

      1. Cortez Trend

      2. Carlin Trend

      3. Walker Lane Trend

      Together these trends contributed nearly 170 million ounces of gold produced in Nevada between 1835 and 2018, making it the United States’ most productive gold jurisdiction, if not the world’s.

      The bulk of production comes from the Cortez and Carlin Trends, where mines extract low grade gold from a particular type of mineral deposit, the Carlin Type Gold deposit. It was the discovery and technology used for processing these “invisible” deposits that would turn Nevada into the golden powerhouse of production.

      Today, the world’s largest gold mining complex, Nevada Gold Mines, is located on the Carlin Trend. The joint venture between Barrick and Newmont comprises eight mines, along with their infrastructure and processing facilities.

      Despite the prolific production of modern mines in the state, more discoveries will be needed to feed this production pipeline—and discoveries are on the decline in Nevada.

      Looking to the Future Through the Past: The Walker Lane Trend

      The future for gold mining in Nevada may lie in the Walker Lane Trend. This trend is host to some of the most recent gold discoveries, and has attracted the interest of major mining companies looking to conduct exploration, and eventually, production.

      Walker Lane stands out with exceptional high-grades, growing reserves, and massive discovery potential. It also played an integral role in the history of the state beginning with the 1859 discovery of the Comstock Lode, and it seems likely to continue doing so in the future.

    • China Has Jailed Hundreds Of People For Questioning Official COVID-19 Narrative, Report
      China Has Jailed Hundreds Of People For Questioning Official COVID-19 Narrative, Report

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 23:30

      Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

      China has arrested and imprisoned hundreds of people for merely discussing the coronavirus outbreak in any context that strays from the communist party narrative on the epidemic, according to a report from a US based Chinese organisation.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Fox News pointed to the report by China Digital Times containing statistics that show between Jan. 1 and April 4, nearly 500 people were arrested and charged, merely for talking about the virus.

      The indiscretions levelled at those jailed include criticism of the response to the outbreak by the Chinese government, and questioning the number of deaths.

      In some cases, people were arrested for pointing out that the seven funeral homes in Wuhan were overwhelmingly busy.

      Others were targeted by the CCP for “referring to someone who has already been censored or arrested.”

      In one instance, lawyer Zhang Xuezhong was arrested for suggesting that “the government’s long-term tight control over society and people has almost completely destroyed the organization and self-help capabilities of Chinese society.”

      Xuezhong was detained after he wrote that “The best way to fight for freedom of expression is for everyone to speak as if we already have freedom of speech,” in a WeChat post that was seen by the authorities.

      The South China Morning Post has since reported that Xuezhong was released after “questioning”, and hasn’t responded to requests for comment about his arrest.

      The censorship report also notes how doctors trying to warn the rest of the world about the severity of the outbreak were silenced.

      Fox News notes that Dr. Li Wenliang, a 34-year-old ophthalmologist at Wuhan Central Hospital in China’s Hubei Province was “reprimanded by authorities for trying to warn others about the disease in late December.”

      “Li was “summoned” by police and forced to sign a letter stating that he made false comments about the virus. His ironic death from the virus at a hospital in Wuhan – where he treated patients and likely contracted the virus – renewed longstanding anger about the communist party’s alleged lies and suppression of information in the country,” the report states.

      As we have previously noted, many doctors and researchers were silenced early on during the outbreak by the communist state.

      Their warnings could have spared 95% of the globe from the consequences of the virus, according to research.

      The censorship report from China Digital Times also notes that “Even entertainment shows that have nothing to do with politics are being rigorously scrutinized and censored for political content.”

      While the west is yet to go so far as imprisonment for those questioning the coronavirus fallout, Big tech is actively silencing any dissenting voices on the matter, claiming that questions and theorising on the origins of the outbreak, the motives behind the responses of our governments, and the true scale of the pandemic are all potentially “harmful.”

    • ​​​​​​​Second COVID-19 Wave Hits USS Theodore Roosevelt
      ​​​​​​​Second COVID-19 Wave Hits USS Theodore Roosevelt

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 23:10

      A second coronavirus has reportedly hit the USS Theodore Roosevelt after five sailors who had returned retested positive for the virus. 

      In March, as many as 1,000 of the vessel’s 4,900 crew tested positive and were evacuated to shore. The Navy quickly implemented screening procedures to allow those who had recovered to return if they tested negative.

      The New York Times first reported the emergence of the virus outbreak on Wednesday. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Commander Myers Vasquez, a Navy spokesman, told CNN in a statement Thursday that “five TR Sailors who previously tested COVID positive and met rigorous recovery criteria have retested positive. The Navy recovery criteria exceed all CDC guidelines.”

      “The five Sailors developed influenza-like illness symptoms and executed their personal responsibility by reporting to medical for evaluation,” Vasquez said. “The Sailors were immediately removed from the ship and placed back in isolation, their close contacts were mapped, and they are receiving the required medical care.”

      The vessel is currently docked in Guam. The sailors, who have been reinfected, were removed from the ship. An additional 18 crew members were also removed due to their close proximity to the infected sailors.

      A US defense official told CNN that the “flare-up” in cases could be the result of a testing issue than a renewed outbreak. 

      The Navy said Thursday, following the outbreak in March, more than 2,900 sailors have returned to the ship. 

      The outbreak on the aircraft carrier led to the firing of the ship’s commanding officer, and the resignation of the acting Navy secretary.

      The Navy launched an investigation into the events that led up to the outbreak on the ship, which effectively rendered the vessel inoperable. There were additional reports that the USS Ronald Reagan aircraft carrier also saw confirmed virus cases in late March. 

      While the Navy was bogged down by virus spreading in March/April, China found the opportunity to launch major war exercises in the South China Sea during this time.   

    • The Complete "Collusion Against Trump" Timeline
      The Complete “Collusion Against Trump” Timeline

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 22:50

      Via SharylAttkisson.com,

      It’s easy to find timelines that detail Trump-Russia collusion developments. Here are links to two of them I recommend:

      On the other side, evidence has emerged that makes it clear there were organized efforts to collude against candidate Donald Trump – and then President Trump. For example:

      • Anti-Russian Ukrainians allegedly helped coordinate and execute a campaign against Trump in partnership with the Democratic National Committee and news reporters.

      • A Yemen-born ex-British spy reportedly delivered political opposition research against Trump to reporters, Sen. John McCain, and the FBI; the latter of which used the material–in part–to obtain wiretaps against one or more Trump-related associates.

      • There were orchestrated leaks of anti-Trump information and allegations to the press, including by ex-FBI Director James Comey.

      • The U.S. intel community allegedly engaged in questionable surveillance practices and politially-motivated “unmaskings” of U.S. citizens, including Trump officials.

      • Alleged conflicts of interests have surfaced regarding FBI officials who cleared Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information and who investigated Trump’s alleged Russia ties.

      But it’s not so easy to find a timeline pertinent to the investigations into these events.

      Related: Obama Era Surveillance Timeline

      Here’s a work in progress…

      (Please note that nobody cited has been charged with wrongdoing or crimes, unless the charge is specifically referenced. Temporal relationships are not necessarily evidence of a correlation.)

      “Collusion against Trump” Timeline

      2011

      U.S. intel community vastly expands its surveillance authority, giving itself permission to spy on Americans who do nothing more than “mention a foreign target in a single, discrete communication.” Intel officials also begin storing and entering into a searchable database sensitive intelligence on U.S. citizens whose communications are accidentally or “incidentally” captured during surveillance of foreign targets. Prior to this point, such intelligence was supposed to be destroyed to protect the constitutional privacy rights the U.S. citizens. However, it’s required that names U.S. citizens be hidden or “masked” –even inside U.S. intel agencies –to prevent abuse.

      Click here to read “Timeline of alleged sabotage of Trump in 2016 by Democrats and Ukraine.”

      2012

      July 1, 2012: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton improperly uses unsecured, personal email domain to email President Obama from Russia.

      2013

      June 2013: FBI interviews U.S. businessman Carter Page, who’s lived and worked in Russia, regarding his ongoing contacts with Russians. Page reportedly tells FBI agents their time would be better spent investigating Boston Marathon bombing (which the FBI’s Andrew McCabe helped lead). Page later claims his remark prompts FBI retaliatory campaign against him. The FBI, under McCabe, will later wiretap Page after Page becomes a Donald Trump campaign adviser.

      FBI secretly records suspected Russian industrial spy Evgeny Buryakov. It’s later reported that Page helped FBI build the case.

      Sept. 4, 2013: James Comey becomes FBI Director, succeeding Robert Mueller.

      2014

      Russia invades Ukraine. Ukraine steps up hiring of U.S. lobbyists to make its case against Russia and obtain U.S. aid. Russia also continues its practice of using U.S. lobbyists.

      Ukraine forms National Anti-Corruption Bureau as a condition to receive U.S. aid. The National Anti-Corruption Bureau later signs evidence-sharing agreement with FBI related to Trump-Russia probe.

      Ukrainian-American Alexandra Chalupa, a paid consultant for the Democratic National Committee (DNC), begins researching lobbyist Paul Manafort’s Russia ties.

      FBI investigates, and then wiretaps, Paul Manafort for allegedly not properly disclosing Russia-related work. FBI fails to make a case, according to CNN, and discontinues wiretap.

      August 2014: State Dept. turns over 15,000 pages of documents to Congressional Benghazi committee, revealing former secretary of state Hillary Clinton used private server for government email. Her mishandling of classified info on this private system becomes subject of FBI probe.

      2015

      FBI opens investigation into Virginia governor Terry McAuliffe, including for donations from a Chinese businessman and Clinton Foundation donor.

      FBI official Andrew McCabe meets with Gov. McAuliffe, a close Clinton ally. Afterwards, “McAuliffe-aligned political groups donated about $700,000 to Mr. McCabe’s wife for her campaign to become a Democrat state Senator in Virginia.” The fact of the McAuliffe-related donations to wife of FBI’s McCabe, while FBI was investigating McAuliffe and Clinton later becomes the subject of conflict of interest inquiry by Inspector General.

      Feb. 9, 2015: U.S. Senate forms Ukrainian caucus to further Ukrainian interests. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) is a member.

      March 4, 2015: New York Times breaks news about Clinton’s improper handling of classified email as secretary of state.

      In internal emails, Clinton campaign chairman (and former Obama adviser) John Podesta suggests Obama withhold Clinton’s emails from Congressional Benghazi committee under executive privilege.

      March 2015: Attorney General Loretta Lynch privately directs FBI Director James Comey to call FBI Clinton probe a “matter” rather than an “investigation.” Comey follows the instruction, though he later testifies that it made him “queasy.”

      March 7, 2015: President Obama says he first learned of Clinton’s improper email practices “through news reports.” Clinton campaign staffers privately contradict that claim emailing: “it looks like [President Obama] just said he found out [Hillary Clinton] was using her personal email when he saw it on the news.” Clinton aide Cheryl Mills responds, “We need to clean this up, [President Obama] has emails from” Clinton’s personal account.

      May 19, 2015: Justice Dept. Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs Peter Kadzik emails Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta from a private Gmail account to give him a “heads ups” involving Congressional questions about Clinton email.

      Summer 2015: Democratic National Committee computers are hacked.

      Sept. 2015: Glenn Simpson, co-founder of political opposition research firm Fusion GPS, is hired by conservative website Washington Free Beacon to compile negative research on presidential candidate Donald Trump and other Republicans.

      Oct. 2015: President Obama uses a “confidentiality tradition” to keep his Benghazi emails with Hillary Clinton secret.

      Oct. 12, 2015: FBI Director Comey replaces head of FBI Counterintelligence Division at New York Field Office with Louis Bladel.

      Oct. 22, 2015: Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) publicly states that Clinton is “not under criminal investigation.”

      Clinton testifies to House Benghazi committee.

      Oct. 23, 2015: Clinton campaign chair John Podesta meets for dinner with small group of friends including a top Justice Dept. official Peter Kadzik.

      Late 2015: Democratic operative Chalupa expands her political opposition research about Paul Manafort to include Trump’s ties to Russia. She “occasionally shares her findings with officials from the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign.”

      Dec. 4, 2015: Donald Trump is beating his nearest Republican presidential competitor by 20 points in latest CNN poll.

      Dec. 9, 2015: FBI Director Comey replaces head of FBI Counterintelligence Division at Washington Field Office with Charles Kable.

      Dec. 23, 2015: FBI Director Comey names Bill Priestap as assistant director of Counterintelligence Division.

      2016

      Obama officials vastly expand their searches through NSA database for Americans and the content of their communications. In 2013, there were 9,600 searches involving 195 Americans. But in 2016, there are 30,355 searches of 5,288 Americans.

      Justice Dept. associate deputy attorney general Bruce Ohr meets with Fusion GPS’ Christopher Steele, the Yemen-born ex-British spy leading anti-Trump political opposition research project.

      January 2016: Democratic operative Ukrainian-American Chalupa tells a senior Democratic National Committee official that she feels there’s a Russia connection with Trump.

      Jan. 29, 2016: FBI Director Comey promotes Andrew McCabe to FBI Deputy Director.

      McCabe takes lead on Clinton probe even though his wife received nearly $700,000 in campaign donations through Clinton ally Terry McAuliffe, who’s also under FBI investigation.

      March 2016: Clinton campaign chair John Podesta’s email gets hacked.

      FBI interviews Carter Page again.

      Carter Page is named as one of the Trump campaign’s foreign policy advisers.

      March 2, 2016: FBI Director Comey replaces head of Intelligence Division of Washington Field Office with Gerald Roberts, Jr.

      March 11, 2016: Russian Evgeny Buryakovwhich pleads guilty to spying in FBI case that Carter Page reportedly assisted with.

      March 25, 2016: Ukrainian-American operative for Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chalupa meets with top Ukrainian officials at Ukrainian Embassy in Washington D.C. to “expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia,” according to Politico. Chalupa previously worked for the Clinton administration.

      Ukrainian embassy proceeds to work “directly with reporters researching Trump, Manafort and Russia to point them in the right directions,” according to an embassy official (though other officials later deny engaging in election-related activities.)

      March 29, 2016: Trump campaign hires Paul Manafort as manager of July Republican convention.

      March 30, 2016: Ukrainian-American Democratic operative Alexandra Chalupa briefs Democratic National Committee (DNC) staff on Russia ties to Paul Manafort and Trump.

      With “DNC’s encouragement,” Chalupa asks Ukrainian embassy to arrange meeting with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to discuss Manafort’s lobbying for Ukraine’s former president Viktor Yanukovych. The embassy declines to arrange meeting but becomes “helpful” in trading info and leads.

      Ukrainian embassy officials and Democratic operative Chalupa “coordinat[e] an investigation with the Hillary team” into Paul Manafort, according to a source in Politico. This effort reportedly includes working with U.S. media.

      April 2016: There’s a second breach of Democratic National Committee computers.

      Washington Free Beacon breaks off deal with Glenn Simpson’s Fusion GPS for political opposition research against Trump.

      Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee lawyer Mark Elias and his law firm, Perkins Coie, hire Fusion GPS for anti-Trump political research project.

      Ukrainian member of parliament Olga Bielkova reportedly seeks meetings with five dozen members of U.S. Congress and reporters including former New York Times reporter Judy Miller, David Sanger of New York Times, David Ignatius of Washington Post, and Washington Post editorial page editor Fred Hiatt.

      April 5, 2016: Convicted spy Buryakov is turned over to Russia.

      Week of April 6, 2016: Ukrainian-American Democratic operative Chalupa and office of Rep. Mary Kaptur (D-Ohio), co-chair of Congressional Ukrainian Caucus, discuss possible congressional investigation or hearing on Paul Manafort-Russia “by September.”

      Chalupa begins working with investigative reporter Michael Isikoff, according to her later account.

      April 10, 2016: In national TV interview, President Obama states that Clinton did not intend to harm national security when she mishandled classified emails. FBI Director James Comey later concludes that Clinton should not face charges because she did not intend to harm national security.

      Around this time, the FBI begins drafting Comey’s remarks closing Clinton email investigation, though Clinton had not yet been interviewed.

      April 12, 2016:”Ukrainian parliament member Olga Bielkova and a colleague meet” with Sen. John McCain associate David Kramer with the McCain Institute. Bielkova also meets with Liz Zentos of Obama’s National Security Council, and State Department official Michael Kimmage.

      April 26, 2016: Investigative reporter Michael Isikoff publishes story on Yahoo News about Paul Manafort’s business dealings with a Russian oligarch.

      April 27, 2016: The BBC publishes an article titled, “Why Russians Love Donald Trump.”

      April 28, 2016: Ukrainian-American Democratic operative Chalupa is invited to discuss her research about Paul Manafort with 68 investigative journalists from Ukraine at Library of Congress for Open World Leadership Center, a U.S. congressional agency. Chalupa invites investigative reporter Michael Isikoff to “connect(s) him to the Ukrainians.”

      After the event, reporter Isikoff accompanies Chalupa to Ukrainian embassy reception.

      May 3, 2016: Ukrainian-American Democratic operative Chalupa emails Democratic National Committee (DNC) that she’ll share sensitive info about Paul Manafort “offline” including “a big Trump component that will hit in next few weeks.”

      May 4, 2016: Trump locks up Republican nomination.

      May 19, 2016: Paul Manafort is named Trump campaign chair.

      May 23, 2016: FBI probe into Virginia governor and Clinton ally Terry McAuliffe becomes public. (McAuliffe is ultimately not charged with a crime.)

      Justice Department Inspector General confirms it’s looking into FBI’s Andrew McCabe for alleged conflicts of interest in handling of Clinton and Gov. McAuliffe probes in light of McAuliffe directing campaign donations to McCabe’s wife.

      FBI officials Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, who are reportedly having an illicit affair, text each other that Trump’s ascension in the campaign will bring “pressure to finish” Clinton probe.

      Nellie Ohr, wife of Justice Dept. associate deputy attorney general Bruce Ohr and former CIA worker, goes on the payroll of Fusion GPS and assists with anti-Trump political opposition research. Her husband, Bruce, reportedly fails to disclose her specific employer and work in his Justice Dept. conflict of interest disclosures.

      Nellie Ohr applies for a ham radio license.

      June 2016: Fusion GPS’ Glenn Simpson “hires Yemen-born ex-British spy Christopher Steele for anti-Trump political opposition research project.”Steele uses info from Russian sources “close to Putin” to compile unverified “dossier” later provided to reporters and FBI, which the FBI uses to obtain secret wiretap.

      The Guardian and Heat Street report that the FBI applied for a FISA warrant in June 2016 to “monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials” but that the “initial request was denied.”

      June 7, 2016: Hillary Clinton locks up the Democrat nomination.

      June 9, 2016: Meeting in Trump Tower includes Donald Trump Jr., Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort and Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner with Russian lawyer who said he has political opposition research on Clinton. (No research was ultimately provided.) According to CNN, the FBI has not yet restarted a wiretap against Manafort but will soon do so.

      June 10, 2016: Democratic National Committee (DNC) tells employees that its computer system has been hacked. DNC blames Russia but refuses to let FBI examine its systems.

      June 15, 2016: “Guccifer 2.0” publishes first hacked document from Clinton campaign chair John Podesta.

      June 17, 2016: Washington Post publishes front page story linking Trump to Russia: “Inside Trump’s Financial Ties to Russia and His Unusual Flattery of Vladimir Putin.”

      June 20, 2016: Christopher Steele proposes taking some of Fusion GPS’ research about Trump to FBI.

      June 22, 2016: WikiLeaks begins publishing embarrassing, hacked emails from Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee.

      June 27, 2016: Attorney General Loretta Lynch meets privately with former President Bill Clinton on an airport tarmac in Phoenix, Arizona.

      Late June 2016: DCLeaks website begins publishing Democratic National Committee emails.

      The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine signs evidence-sharing agreement with FBI and will later publicly release a “ledger” implicating Paul Manafort in allegedly improper payments.

      June 30, 2016: FBI circulates internal draft of public remarks for FBI Director Comey to announce closing of Clinton investigation. It refers to Mrs. Clinton’s “extensive” use of her personal email, including “from the territory of sophisticated adversaries,” and a July 1, 2012 email to President Obama from Russia. The draft concludes it’s possible that hostile actors gained access to Clinton’s email account.

      Comey’s remarks are revised to replace reference to “the President” with the phrase: “another senior government official.” (That reference, too, is removed from the final draft.)

      Attorney General Lynch tells FBI she plans to publicly announce that she’ll accept whatever recommendation FBI Director Comey makes regarding charges against Clinton.

      July 2016: Ukraine minister of internal affairs Arsen Avakov attacks Trump and Trump campaign adviser Paul Manafort on Twitter and Facebook, calling Trump “an even bigger danger to the US than terrorism.”

      Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniuk writes on Facebook that Trump has “challenged the very values of the free world.”

      Carter Page travels to Russia to give a university commencement address. (Fusion GPS political opposition research would later quote Russian sources as saying Page met with Russian officials, which Page denies under oath and is not proven.)

      One-time CIA operative Stefan Halper reportedly begins meetings with Trump advisers Carter Page and George Papadopoulos, secretly gathering information for the FBI. These contacts begin “prior to the date FBI Director Comey later claimed the Russian investigation began.”

      July 1, 2016: Under fire for meeting with former President Clinton amid the probe into his wife, Attorney General Lynch publicly states she’ll “accept whatever FBI Director Comey recommends” without interfering.

      FBI official Lisa Page texts her boyfriend, FBI official Peter Strzok, sarcastically commenting that Lynch’s proclamation is “a real profile in courage, since she knows no charges will be brought.”

      Ex-British spy Christopher Steele writes Justice Department official Bruce Ohr that he wants to discuss “our favourite business tycoon!” (apparently referencing Trump.)

      July 2, 2016: FBI official Peter Strzok and other agents interview Clinton. They don’t record the interview. Two potential subjects of the investigation, Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson, are allowed to attend as Clinton’s lawyers.

      July 5, 2016: FBI Director Comey recommends no charges against Clinton, though he concludes she’s been extremely careless in mishandling of classified information. Comey claims he hasn’t coordinated or reviewed his statement in any way with Attorney General Lynch’s Justice Department or other government branches. “They do not know what I am about to say,” says Comey.

      Fusion GPS’ Steele, an ex-British spy, approaches FBI at an office in Rome with allegations against Trump, according to Congressional investigators. Justice Dept. official Bruce Ohr schedules a Skype conference call with Steele.

      Days after closing Clinton case, FBI official Peter Strzok signs document opening FBI probe into Trump-Russia collusion.

      July 10, 2016: Democratic National Committee (DNC) aide Seth Rich, reportedly a Bernie Sanders supporter, is shot twice in the back and killed. Police suspect a bungled robbery attempt, though nothing was apparently stolen. Conspiracy theorists speculate that Rich “not the Russians” had stolen DNC emails after he learned the DNC was unfairly favoring Clinton. The murder remains unsolved.

      July 2016: Trump adviser Carter Page makes a business trip to Russia.

      FISC (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court) rejects FBI request to wiretap Page.

      Obama national security adviser Susan Rice begins to show increased interest in National Security Agency (NSA) intelligence material including “unmasked Americans” identities, according to news reports referring to White House logs.

      July 18-21, 2016: Republican National Convention

      Late July 2016: FBI agent Peter Strzok opens counterintelligence investigation based on Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos.

      Democratic operative and Ukrainian-American Chalupa leaves the Democratic National Committee (DNC) to work full-time on her research into Manafort, Trump and Russia; and provides off-the-record guidance to “a lot of journalists.”

      July 22, 2016: WikiLeaks begins publishing hacked Democratic National Committee emails. WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange denies the email source is Russian.

      July 25-28, 2016: Democratic National Convention

      July 30, 2016Justice Dept. official Bruce Ohr meets with ex-British spy Christopher Steele at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington. Ohr brings his wife, Nellie, who — like Steele — works at Fusion GPS on the Trump-Russia oppo research project. Ohr calls FBI Deputy Director McCabe.

      July 31, 2016: FBI’s Peter Strzok formally begins counterintelligence investigation regarding Russia and Trump. It’s dubbed “Crossfire Hurricane.”

      Aug. 3, 2016: Ohr reportedly meets with McCabe and FBI lawyer Lisa Page to discuss Russia-Trump collusion allegations relayed by ex-British spy Steele. Ohr will later testify to Congress that he considered Steele’s information uncorroborated hearsay and that he told FBI agents Steele appeared motivated by a “desperate” desire to keep Trump from becoming president.

      Aug. 4, 2016: Ukrainian ambassador to U.S. writes op-ed against Trump.

      Aug. 8, 2016: FBI attorney Lisa Page texts her lover, FBI’s head of Counterespionage Peter Strzok,”[Trump is] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Strzok replies,”No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it.”

      Aug. 14, 2016: New York Times breaks story about cash payments made a decade ago to Paul Manafort by pro-Russia interests in Ukraine. The ledger was released and publicized by the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine.

      Aug. 15, 2016: CNN reports the FBI is conducting an inquiry into Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort’s payments from pro-Russia interests in Ukraine in 2007 and 2009.

      After a meeting discussing the election in FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s office, FBI’s Counterespionage Chief Peter Strzok texts FBI attorney Lisa Page referring to the possibility of Trump getting elected. “We can’t take that risk,” he writes. And they speak of needing an “insurance policy.”

      Aug. 19, 2016: Paul Manafort resigns as Trump campaign chairman.

      Ukrainian parliament member Sergii Leshchenko holds news conference to draw attention to Paul Manafort and Trump’s “pro-Russia” ties.

      Aug. 22, 2016Justice Dept. official Bruce Ohr meets with Fusion GPS’ Glenn Simpson who identifies several “possible intermediaries” between the Trump campaign and Russia.

      Late August 2016:

      Reportedly working for the FBI, one-time CIA operative Professor Halper meets with Trump campaign co-chair Sam Clovis offering his services as a foreign-policy adviser, according to The Washington Post. Halper would later offer to hire Carter Page.

      Approx. Aug. 2016: FBI initiates a new wiretap against ex-Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort, according to CNN, which extends at least through early 2017.

      Sept. 2016: Fusion GPS’s Steele becomes FBI source and uses associate deputy attorney general Bruce Ohr as point of contact. Steele tells Ohr that he’s “desperate that Donald Trump not get elected.”

      President Obama warns Russia not to interfere in the U.S. election

      Sept. 2, 2016: FBI officials Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text that “[President Obama] wants to know everything we’re doing.”

      Sept. 13, 2016: The nonprofit First Draft, funded by Google, whose parent company is run by major Hillary Clinton supporter and donor Eric Schmidt, announces initiative to tackle “fake news.” It appears to be the first use of the phrase in its modern context.

      Sept. 15, 2016: Clinton computer manager Paul Combetta appears before House Oversight Committee but refuses to answer questions, invoking his Fifth Amendment rights.

      Sept. 19, 2016: At UN General Assembly meeting, Ukrainian President Poroshenko meets with Hillary Clinton.

      Mid-to-late Sept. 2016: Fusion GPS’s Christopher Steele’s FBI contact tells him the agency wants to see his opposition research “right away” and offers to pay him $50,000, according to the New York Times, for solid corroboration of his salacious, unverified claims. Steele flies to Rome, Italy to meet with FBI and provide a “full briefing.”

      Sept. 22, 2016: Clinton computer aide Brian Pagliano is held in contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with subpoena.

      Sept. 23, 2016: It’s revealed that Justice Department has granted five Clinton officials immunity from prosecution: former chief of staff Cheryl Mills, State Department staffers John Bentel and Heather Samuelson, and Clinton computer workers Paul Combetta and Brian Pagliano.

      Yahoo News publishes report by Michael Isikoff about Carter Page’s July 2016 trip to Moscow. (The article is apparently based on leaked info from Fusion GPS Steele anti-Trump “dossier” political opposition research.)

      Sept. 25, 2016: Trump associate Carter Page writes letter to FBI Comey objecting to the so-called “witch hunt” involving him.

      Sept. 26, 2016: Obama administration asks secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) court to allow National Counter Terrorism Center to access sensitive, “unmasked” intel on Americans acquired by FBI and NSA. (The Court later approves the request.)

      FBI head of counterespionage Peter Strzok emails his mistress FBI attorney Lisa Page that Carter Page’s letter (dated the day before) “…provides us a pretext to interview.”

      Sept. 27, 2016: Justice Department Assistant Attorney General of National Security Division John Carlin announces he’s stepping down. He was former chief of staff and senior counsel to former FBI director Robert Mueller.

      End of Sept. 2016: Fusion GPS’ Glenn Simpson and Christopher Steele meet with reporters, including New York Times, Washington Post, Yahoo News, the New Yorker and CNN or ABC. One meeting is at office of Democratic National Committee general counsel.

      Early October 2016: Fusion GPS’ Christopher Steele, the Yemen-born author of anti-Trump “dossier,” meets in New York with David Corn, Washington-bureau chief of Mother Jones.

      According to The Guardian, the FBI submits a more narrowly focused FISA wiretap request to replace one turned down in June to monitor four Trump associates.

      Oct. 3, 2016: FBI seizes computers belonging to Anthony Weiner, who is accused of sexually texting an underage girl. Weiner is married to top Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin. FBI learns there are Clinton emails on Weiner’s laptop but waits several weeks before notifying Congress and reopening investigation.

      Oct. 4, 2016: FBI Director Comey replaces head of Counterintelligence Division, New York Field Office with Charles McGonigal.

      Oct. 7, 2016: Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and Department of Homeland Security issue statement saying Russian government is responsible for hacking Democrat emails to disrupt 2016 election.

      Oct. 13, 2016: President Obama gives a speech in support of the crackdown on “fake news” by stating that somebody needs to step in and “curate” information in the “wild, wild West media environment.”

      Oct. 14, 2016: FBI head of counterespionage Peter Strzok emails his mistress FBI attorney Lisa Page discussing talking points to convince FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe to persuade a high-ranking Dept. of Justice official to sign a warrant to wiretap Trump associate Carter Page. The email subject line is “Crossfire FISA.” “Crossfire Hurricane” was one of the code names for four separate investigations the FBI conducted related to Russia matters in the 2016 election.

      “At a minimum, that keeps the hurry the F up pressure on him,” Strzok emailed Lisa Page less than four weeks before Election Day.

      Mid-Oct. 2016:  Fusion GPS’ Steele again briefs reporters about Trump political opposition research. The reporters are from the New York Times, the Washington Post, and Yahoo News.

      Oct. 16, 2016: Mary McCord is named Assistant Attorney General for Justice Department National Security Division.

      Oct. 18, 2016: President Obama advises Trump to “stop whining” after Trump tweeted the election could be rigged. “There is no serious person out there who would suggest somehow that you could even you could even rig America’s elections,” said Obama. He also calls Trump’s “flattery” of Russian president Putin “unprecedented.”

      In FBI emails, head of counterespionage Peter Strzok and his mistress FBI lawyer Lisa Page discuss rushing approval for a FISA warrant for a Russia-related investigation code-named “Dragon.”

      Oct. 19, 2016: Ex-British spy Christopher Steele writes his last memo for anti-Trump “dossier” political opposition research provided to FBI. The FBI reportedly authorizes payment to Steele. Fusion GPS has reportedly paid him $160,000.

      Approx. Oct. 21, 2016: For the second time in several months, Justice Department and FBI apply to wiretap former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates sign the application. This time, the request is approved based on new FBI “evidence”  including parts of Fusion GPS’ “Steele dossier” and Michael Isikoff Yahoo article. The FBI doesn’t tell the court that Trump’s political opponent, the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, funded the “evidence.”

      Oct. 24, 2016: Benjamin Wittes, confidant of FBI Director James Comey and editor-in-chief of the blog Lawfare, writes of the need for an “insurance policy” in case Trump wins. It’s the same phrase FBI officials Lisa Page and Peter Strzok had used when discussing the possibility of a Trump win.

      Obama intel officials orally inform Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of an earlier Inspector General review uncovering their “significant noncompliance” in following proper “702” procedures safeguarding the National Security Agency (NSA) intelligence database with sensitive info on US citizens.

      Late Oct. 2016: Fusion GPS’ Steele again briefs reporter from Mother Jones by Skype about Trump political opposition research.

      Oct. 26, 2016: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court holds hearing with Obama intel officials over their “702” surveillance violations. The judge criticizes NSA for “institutional lack of candor” and states “this is a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.”

      Oct. 28, 2016: FBI Director Comey notifies Congress that he’s reopening Clinton probe due to Clinton emails found on Anthony Wiener laptop several weeks earlier.

      Oct. 30, 2016: Mother Jones writer David Corn is first to report on the anti-Trump “dossier,” quoting unidentified former spy, presumed to be Christopher Steele. FBI general counsel James Baker had reportedly been in touch with Corn but Corn later denies Baker was the leaker.

      FBI terminates its relationship with Steele because Steele had leaked his FBI involvement in Mother Jones article.

      Steele reportedly maintains backchannel contact with Justice Dept. through Deputy Associate Attorney General Bruce Ohr.

      Oct. 31, 2016: New York Times reports FBI is investigating Trump and found no illicit connections to Russia.

      Nov. 1, 2016: FBI concludes ex-British spy Christopher Steele, who compiled anti-Trump “dossier” using Russian sources, leaked to press and is not suitable for use as a confidential source. However, Steele continues to “help,” according to Jan. 31, 2017 texts to Justice Dept. official Bruce Ohr.

      Nov. 3, 2016: FBI Attorney Lisa Page texts FBI’s Peter Strzok about her concerns that Clinton might lose and Trump would become president: “The [New York Times] probability numbers are dropping every day. I’m scared for our organization.”

      Nov. 6, 2016: FBI Director Comey tells Congress that Clinton emails on Anthony Weiner computer do not change earlier conclusion: she should not be charged.

      Nov. 8, 2016: Trump is elected president.

      Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice’s interest in NSA materials accelerates, according to later news reports.

      Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr meets with Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson shortly after election.

      The FBI interviews Ohr about his ongoing contacts with Fusion GPS.

      Nov. 9, 2016: An unnamed FBI attorney (later quoted in Dept. of Justice Inspector General probe) texts another FBI employee, “I’m just devastated…I just can’t imagine the systematic disassembly of the progress we made over the last 8 years. ACA is gone. Who knows if the rhetoric about deporting people, walls, and crap is true. I honestly feel like there is going to be a lot more gun issues, too, the crazies won finally. This is the tea party on steroids. And the GOP is going to be lost, they have to deal with an incumbent in 4 years. We have to fight this again. Also Pence is stupid….Plus, my god damned name is all over the legal documents investigating [Trump’s] staff.”

      Nov. 10, 2016: Emails imply top FBI officials, including Peter Strzok, Andrew McCabe and Bill Priestap engaged in a new mission to “scrub” or research lists of associates of President-elect Trump, looking for potential “derogatory” information. 

      President Obama meets with President-elect Trump in the White House and reportedly advises Trump not to hire Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.

      Nov. 2016: National Security Agency Mike Rogers meets with president-elect Trump and is criticized for “not telling the Obama administration.”

      Nov. 17, 2016: Trump moves his Friday presidential team meetings out of Trump Tower.

      Nov. 18, 2016: Trump names Flynn his national security adviser. Over the next few weeks, Flynn communicates with numerous international leaders.

      Nov. 18-20, 2016: Sen. John McCain and his longtime adviser, David Kramer–an ex-U.S. State Dept. official–attend a security conference in Halifax, Nova Scotia where former UK ambassador to Russia Sir Andrew Wood tells them about the Fusion GPS anti-Trump dossier. (Kramer is affiliated with the anti-Russia “Ukraine Today” media organization). They discuss confirming the info has reached top levels of FBI for action.

      Nov. 21, 2016Justice Dept. official Bruce Ohr, works for Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, meets with FBI officials including Peter Strzok, Strzok’s girlfriend–FBI attorney Lisa Page, and another agent. Ohr’s notes indicate the FBI “may go back to [ex-British spy] Chris Steele” of Fusion GPS just 20 days after dismissing him.

      Nov. 28, 2016: Sen. McCain associate David Kramer flies to London to meet Christopher Steele for a briefing on the anti-Trump research. Afterward, Fusion GPS’ Glenn Simpson gives Sen. McCain a copy of the “dossier.” Steele also passes anti-Trump info to top UK government official in charge of national security. Sen. McCain soon arranges a meeting with FBI Director Comey.

      Late Nov. 2016: Justice Dept. official Bruce Ohr officially tells FBI about his contacts with Fusion GPS’ Christopher Steele and about Ohr’s wife’s contract work for Fusion GPS.

      Nov. 30, 2016: UN Ambassador Samantha Power makes request to unmask the name of Trump National Security Adviser Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, who was “incidentally” captured by intel surveillance.

      Dec. 2016: Text messages between FBI officials Strzok and Page are later said to be “lost” due to a technical glitch beginning at this point.

      Dec. 2, 2016: UN Ambassador Samantha Power and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper request to unmask the name of Trump National Security Adviser Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, who was “incidentally” captured by intel surveillance.

      Dec. 6, 2016: Two more Obama administration officials request to unmask the name of  Flynn.

      Dec. 7, 2016: Power makes another Flynn unmasking request.

      Dec. 8 or 9, 2016: Sen. John McCain meets with FBI Director Comey at FBI headquarters and hands over Fusion GPS anti-Trump research, elevating the FBI’s investigation into the matter. The FBI compiles a classified two-page summary and attaches it to intel briefing note on Russian cyber-interference in election for President Obama.

      Hillary Clinton makes a public appearance denouncing “fake news.”

      Hillary Clinton and Democratic operative David Brock of Media Matters announces he’s leaving board of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), one of his many propaganda and liberal advocacy groups, to focus on “fake news” effort.

      Brock later claims credit, privately to donors, for convincing Facebook to crack down on conservative fake news.

      Dec. 14, 2017: There are 10 more requests to unmask Flynn’s name in intelligence, including two by Power, CIA Director Brennan, and six officials from the Treasury Dept.

      Dec. 15, 2016: Obama intel officials “incidentally” spy on Trump officials meeting with the United Arab Emirates crown prince in Trump Tower. This is taken to mean the government was wiretapping the prince and “happened to capture” Trump officials communicating with him at Trump Tower. Identities of Americans accidentally captured in such surveillance are strictly protected or “masked” inside intel agencies for constitutional privacy reasons.

      Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice secretly “unmasks” names of the Trump officials, officially revealing their identities. They reportedly include: Steve Bannon, Jared Kushner and Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.

      Director of National Intelligence Clapper expands rules to allow the National Security Agency (NSA) to widely disseminate classified surveillance material within the government. The same day, 17 Obama officials request the unmasking of Lt. Gen. Flynn in intelligence.

      Dec. 16, 2016: Five more Obama officials request unmasking of intelligence materials regarding Lt. Gen. Flynn.

      Dec. 23, 2016: Power request another Flynn unmasking.

      Dec. 28, 2016:

      Lt. Gen. Flynn speaks with Russia ambassador.

      Clapper and the U.S. Ambassador to Turkey request Flynn unmasking.

      Dec. 29, 2016: President Obama imposes sanctions against Russia for its alleged election interference.

      President-elect Trump national security adviser Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn speaks with Russian Ambassador to U.S. Sergey Kislyak. The calls are wiretapped by U.S. intelligence and later leaked to the press.

      State Department releases 2,800 work-related emails from Huma Abedin, a top aide to Hillary Clinton, found by FBI on laptop computer of Abedin’s husband, former Rep. Anthony Weiner.

      2017

      Jan. 2017: According to CNN: a wiretap reportedly continues against former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort, including times he speaks to Trump, meaning U.S. intel officials could have “accidentally” captured Trump’s communications.

      Justice Dept. Inspector General confirms it’s investigating several aspects of FBI and Justice Department actions during Clinton probe.

      Director of National Intelligence James Clapper testifies to Congress that Russia interfered in U.S. elections by spreading fake news on social media.

      Justice Dept. official Peter Kadzik, who “tipped off” Hillary Clinton campaign regarding Congressional questions about Clinton’s email, leaves government work for private practice.

      The FBI interviews a main source of Christopher Steele’s “dossier” and learns the information was merely bar room gossip and rumor never meant to be taken as fact or submitted to the FBI and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to wiretap Carter Page. (The FBI does not notify the court and applies for, and receives, another wiretap against Page).

      Early Jan. 2017: FBI renews wiretap against Carter Page. FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates again sign the application.

      Jan. 3, 2017: Obama Attorney General Lynch signs rules Director of National Intelligence Clapper expanded Dec. 15 allowing the National Security Agency (NSA) to widely disseminate surveillance within the government.

      Jan. 5, 2017: Intelligence Community leadership including FBI Director Comey, Yates, CIA Director John Brennan and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, provides classified briefing to President Obama, Vice President Biden and National Security Adviser Susan Rice on alleged Russia hacking during 2016 campaign, according to notes later written by national security adviser Susan Rice.

      After briefing, according notes made later by Rice, President Obama convenes Oval Office meeting with her, FBI Director Comey, Vice President Biden and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates. The “Steele dossier” is reportedly discussed. Also reportedly discussed: Trump National Security Adviser Flynn’s talks with Russia’s ambassador. 

      Jan. 6, 2017: FBI Director Comey and other Intel leaders meet with President-Elect Trump and his national security team at Trump Tower in New York to brief them on alleged Russian efforts to interfere in the election.

      Later, Obama national security adviser Susan Rice would write herself an email stating that President Obama suggested they hold back on providing Trump officials with certain info for national security reasons.

      After Trump team briefing, FBI Director Comey meets alone with Trump to “brief him” on Fusion GPS Steele allegations “to alert the incoming President to the existence of this material,” even though it was salacious and unverified. Comey later says Director of National Intelligence Clapper asked him (Comey) to do the briefing personally.

      Jan. 7, 2017: Clapper and two other Obama administration officials request Flynn unmasking.

      Jan. 10, 2017: The 35-page Fusion GPS anti-Trump “dossier” is leaked to the media and published. It reveals that sources of the unverified info are Russians close to President Putin.

      Email written by FBI head of counterespionage Peter Strzok indicates the FBI has been given the anti-Trump “dossier” by at least 3 different anti-Trump sources.

      A CIA official makes a Flynn unmasking request.

      Jan. 11, 2017: Power makes another Flynn unmasking request.

      Jan. 12, 2017: Obama administration finalizes new rules allowing NSA to spread “certain intel to” other U.S. intel agencies without normal privacy protections.

      Justice Dept. inspector general announces review of alleged misconduct by FBI Director Comey and other matters related to FBI’s Clinton probe as well as FBI leaks.

      Vice President Joe Biden and the Treasury Secretary request the unmasking of Flynn in intelligence communications.

      Someone leaks to to David Ignatius of the Washington Post that Trump National Security Adviser Flynn had called Russia’s ambassador. “What did Flynn say, and did it undercut the US sanctions?” asked Ignatius in the article.

      Jan. 13, 2017: Senate Intelligence Committee opens investigation into Russia and U.S. political campaign officials.

      Jan. 15, 2017: After leaks about Flynn’s call with Russia’s ambassador, Vice President-elect Mike Pence tells the press that Flynn did not discuss U.S. sanctions on the call.

      Jan. 20, 2017: Trump becomes president.

      Fifteen minutes after Trump becomes president, former National Security Adviser Susan Rice emails memo to herself purporting to summarize the Jan. 5 Oval Office meeting with President Obama and other top officials. She states that Obama instructed the group to investigate “by the book” and asked them to be mindful whether there were certain things that “could not be fully shared with the incoming administration.”

      Jan. 22, 2017: Intel info leaks to Wall Street Journal which reports “US counterintelligence agents have investigated communications” between Trump aide Gen. Michael Flynn and Russia ambassador to the U.S. Kislyak to determine if any laws were violated.

      Jan. 23, 2017: Leak to Washington Post falsely claims Trump National Security Adviser Flynn is not the subject of an investigation.

      Jan. 24, 2017: Acting Attorney General Sally Yates sends two FBI agents, including Peter Strzok, to the White House to question Gen. Flynn. FBI Director Comey later takes credit for “sending a couple of guys” to interview Flynn, circumventing normal processes.

      Notes kept hidden until May 2020 show FBI officials discussing whether the goal of the meeting with Flynn was to “get him to lie” so that he would be fired or prosecuted.

      Jan. 26, 2017: Acting Attorney General Sally Yates and a high-ranking colleague go to White House to tell counsel Don McGahn that Flynn had lied to Pence about the content of his talks with Russian ambassador and “the underlying conduct that Gen. Flynn had engaged in was problematic in and of itself.”

      Jan. 27, 2017: Acting Attorney General Sally Yates again visits the White House.

      Jan. 31, 2017: President Trump fires Acting Attorney General Sally Yates after she refuses to enforce his temporary travel ban on Muslims coming into U.S. from certain countries.

      Ex-British spy Christopher Steele texts Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr who worked for Yates: “B, doubtless a sad and crazy day for you re- SY.”

      Dana Boente becomes Acting Attorney General. (It’s later revealed that Boente signed at least one wiretap application against former Trump adviser Carter Page.)

      Feb. 2, 2017: It’s reported that five men employed by House of Representatives Democrats, including leader Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Florida), are under criminal investigation for allegedly “accessing House IT systems without lawmakers’ knowledge.” Suspects include three Awan brothers “who managed office information technology for members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and other lawmakers.”

      Feb. 3, 2017: A Russian tech mogul named in the Steele “dossier” files defamation lawsuits against BuzzFeed in the U.S. and Christopher Steele in the U.K. over the dossier’s claims he interfered in U.S. elections.

      Feb. 8, 2017: Jeff Sessions becomes Attorney General and Dana Boente moves to Deputy Attorney General.

      Feb. 9, 2017: News of FBI wiretaps capturing Trump national security adviser Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn speaking with Russia’s ambassador is leaked to the press. New York Times and Washington Post report Flynn discussed U.S. sanctions, despite his earlier denials. The Post also reports the FBI “found nothing illicit” in the talks. The Post headline in an article by Greg Miller, Adam Entous and Ellen Nakashima reads, “National Security Adviser Flynn Discussed Sanctions with Russian Ambassador, Despite Denials, Officials Say.” 

      Feb. 13, 2017: Washington Post reports Justice Dept. has opened a “Logan Act” violation investigation against Trump national security adviser Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.

      Feb. 14, 2017: New York Times reports that FBI had told Obama officials there was no “quid pro quo” (promise of a deal in exchange for some action) discussed between Gen. Flynn and Russian ambassador Kislyak.

      Gen. Flynn resigns, allegedly acknowledging he misled vice president Mike Pence about the content of his discussions with Russia.

      Comey says that, in a meeting, Trump states, “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.” Comey says he replies “he is a good guy.” Trump later takes issue with Comey’s characterization of the meeting.

      Feb. 15, 2017: NPR reports on “official transcripts of Flynn’s calls” (saying they show no wrongdoing but that doesn’t rule out illegal activity).

      Feb. 17, 2017: Washington Post reports that “Flynn told FBI he did not discuss sanctions” with Russia ambassador and that “Lying to the FBI is a felony offense.”

      Feb. 24, 2017: FBI interviews Flynn, according to later testimony from Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates.

      March 1, 2017: Washington Post reports Attorney General Jeff Sessions has met with Russian ambassador twice in the recent past (as did many Democrat and Republican officials). His critics say that contradicts his earlier testimony to Congress. The article by Adam Entous, Ellen Nakashima and Greg Miller raises the idea of a special counsel to investigate. 

      March 2017: FBI Director James Comey gives private briefings to members of Congress and reportedly says he does not believe Gen. Flynn lied to FBI.

      House Intelligence Committee requests list of unmasking requests Obama officials made. The intel agencies do not provide the information, prompting a June 1 subpoena.

      March 2, 2017: Attorney General Jeff Sessions recuses himself from Russia-linked investigations.

      Rod Rosenstein, the Deputy Attorney General, becomes Acting Attorney General for Russia Probe. It’s later revealed that Rosenstein singed at least one wiretap application against former Trump adviser Carter Page.

      March 4, 2017: President Trump tweets: “Is it legal for a sitting President to be ‘wire tapping’ a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!” and “How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!”

      March 10, 2017: Former Congressman Dennis Kucinich, a Democrat, steps forward to support Trump’s wiretapping claim, revealing that the Obama administration intel officials recorded his own communications with a Libyan official in Spring 2011.

      March 14, 2017: FBI Attorney Lisa Page texts FBI official Peter Strzok: “Finally two pages away from finishing [All the President’s Men]. Did you know the president resigns in the end?!” Strzok replies, “What?!?! God, that we should be so lucky. [smiley face emoji]”

      March 20, 2017: FBI Director Comey tells House Intelligence Committee he has “no information that supports” the President’s tweets about alleged wiretapping directed at him by the prior administration. “We have looked carefully inside the FBI,” Comey says. “(T)he answer is the same for the Department of Justice and all its components.”

      FBI Director Comey tells Congress there is “salacious and unverified” material in the Fusion GPS dossier used by FBI, in part, to obtain Carter Page wiretap. (Under FBI “Woods Procedures,” only facts carefully verified by the FBI are allowed to be presented to court to obtain wiretaps.)

      March 22, 2017: Chairman of House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) publicly announces he’s seen evidence of Trump associates being “incidentally” surveilled by Obama intel officials; and their names being “unmasked” and illegally leaked. Nunes briefs President Trump and holds a news conference. He’s criticized for doing so. An ethics investigation is opened into his actions but later clears him of wrongdoing.

      In an interview on PBS, former Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice responds to Nunes allegations by stating: “I know nothing about this, I really don’t know to what Chairman Nunes was referring.” (She later acknowledges unmasking names of Trump associates.)

      March 2017: Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) writes Justice Dept. accusing Fusion GPS of acting as an agent for Russia “without properly registering” due to its pro-Russia effort to kill a law allowing sanctions against foreign human rights violators. Fusion GPS denies the allegations.

      March 24, 2017: Fusion GPS declines to answer Sen. Grassley’s questions or document requests.

      March 27, 2017: Former Deputy Asst. Secretary of Defense Evelyn Farkas admits she encouraged Obama and Congressional officials to “get as much information as they can” about Russia and Trump officials before inauguration. “That’s why you have the leaking,” she told MSNBC.

      Early April, 2017: A third FBI wiretap on former Trump campaign aide Carter Page is approved. Again, FBI Director James Comey, and acting attorney general Dana Boente sign the application. Trump officials including Mike Pompeo at the CIA are now leading the intel agencies during the wiretap.

      April 3, 2017: Multiple news reports state that Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice had requested and reviewed “unmasked” intelligence on Trump associates whose information was “incidentally”  collected by intel agencies.

      April 4, 2017: Obama former National Security Adviser Rice admits, in an interview, that she asked to reveal names of U.S. citizens previously masked in intel reports. She says her motivations were not political. When asked if she leaked names, Rice states, “I leaked nothing to nobody.”

      April 6, 2017: House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes recuses himself from Russia part of his committee’s investigation.

      April 11, 2017: FBI Director Comey appoints Stephen Laycock as special agent in charge of Counterintelligence Division for Washington Field Office.

      Washington Post reports FBI secretly obtained wiretap against Trump campaign associate Carter Page last summer. (Later, it’s revealed the summer wiretap had been turned down, but a subsequent application was approved in October.)

      April 20, 2017: Acting Assistant Attorney General Mary McCord resigns as acting head of Justice Dept. National Security Division. She’d led probes of Russia interference in election and Trump-Russia ties.

      April 28, 2017: Dana Boente is appointed acting assistant attorney general for national security division to replace Mary McCord. (Boente has signed one of the questioned wiretap applications for Carter Page.)

      National Security Agency (NSA) submits remedies for its egregious surveillance violations (revealed last October) to Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court promising to “no longer collect certain internet communications that merely mention a foreign intelligence target.” The NSA also begins deleting collected data on U.S. citizens it had been storing.

      May 3, 2017: FBI Director Comey testifies he’s “mildly nauseous” at the idea he might have affected election with the 11th hour Clinton email notifications to Congress.

      Comey also testifies he’s “never” been an anonymous news source on “matters relating to” investigating the Trump campaign.

      Obama’s former national security adviser Susan Rice declines Republican Congressional request to testify at a hearing about unmaskings and surveillance.

      May 8, 2017: Former acting Attorney General Sally Yates and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper testify to Congress. They admit having reviewed “classified documents in which Mr. Trump, his associates or members of Congress had been unmasked,” and possibly discussing it with others under the Obama administration.

      May 9, 2017: President Trump fires FBI Director James Comey. Andrew McCabe becomes acting FBI Director.

      May 12, 2017: Benjamin Wittes, confidant of ex-FBI Director James Comey and editor in chief of Lawfare, contacts New York Times reporter Mike Schmidt to leak conversations he’d had with Comey as FBI Director that are critical of President Trump.

      May 16, 2017: New York Times publishes leaked account of FBI memoranda recorded by former FBI Director James Comey. Comey later acknowledges engineering the leak of the FBI material through his friend, Columbia Law School professor Daniel Richman, to spur appointment of special counsel to investigate President Trump.

      Trump reportedly interviews, but passes over, former FBI Director Robert Mueller for position of FBI Director.

      May 17, 2017: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appoints Robert Mueller as Special Counsel, Russia-Trump probe. Mueller and former FBI Director Comey are friends and worked closely together in previous Justice Dept. and FBI positions.

      The gap of missing text messages between FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page ends. The couple is soon assigned to the Mueller team investigating Trump.

      May 19, 2017: Anthony Wiener, former Congressman and husband of Hillary Clinton confidant Huma Abedin, turns himself in to FBI in case of underage sexting; his third major kerfuffle over sexting in six years.

      May 22, 2017FBI Counterespionage Chief Peter Strzok texts FBI Attorney Lisa Page about whether Strzok should join Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation of Trump-Russia collusion. Strzok spoke of “unfinished business” that he “unleashed” with the Clinton classified email probe and stated: “Now I need to fix it and finish it.” He also referred to the Special Counsel probe, which hadn’t yet begun in earnest, as an “investigation leading to impeachment.” But he also stated he had a “gut sense and concern there’s no big there there.”

      June 1, 2017: House Intelligence Committee issues 7 subpoenas, including for information related to unmaskings requested by ex-Obama officials national security adviser Susan Rice, former CIA Director John Brennan, and former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Samantha Power.

      June 8, 2017: Former FBI Director James Comey admits having engineered leak of his own memo to New York Times to spur appointment of a special counsel to investigate President Trump.

      June 20, 2017: Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe names Philip Celestini as Special Agent in Charge of the Intelligence Division, Washington Field Office.

      Late June, 2017: FBI renews wiretap against Carter Page for the fourth and final time that we know of. It lasts through late Sept. 2017. (Page is never ultimately charged with a crime.) FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein sign the renewal application.

      Late July, 2017: FBI reportedly searches Paul Manafort’s Alexandria, Virginia home.

      Summer 2017: FBI lawyer Lisa Page is reassigned from Mueller investigation. Her boyfriend, FBI official Peter Strzok is removed from Mueller investigation after the Inspector General discovers compromising texts between Strzok and Page. Congress is not notified of the developments.

      Aug. 2, 2017: Christopher Wray is named FBI Director.

      August 2017: Ex-FBI Director Comey signs a book deal for a reported $2 million.

      Sept. 13, 2017: Under questioning from Congress, Obama’s former National Security Adviser Susan Rice reportedly admits having requested to see the protected identities of Trump transition officials “incidentally” captured by government surveillance.

      Approx. Oct. 10, 2017: Former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos pleads guilty to lying to FBI about his unsuccessful efforts during the campaign to facilitate meetings between Trump officials and Russian officials.

      Oct. 17, 2017: Obama’s former U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power reportedly tells Congressional investigators that many of the hundreds of “unmasking” requests in her name during the election year were not made by her.

      Oct. 24, 2017: Congressional Republicans announce new investigations into a 2010 acquisition that gave Russia control of 20% of U.S. uranium supply while Clinton was secretary of state; and FBI decision not to charge Clinton in classified info probe.

      Oct. 30, 2017: Special Counsel Mueller charges ex-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort and business associate Rick Gates with tax and money laundering crimes related to their foreign work. The charges do not appear related to Trump.

      Nov. 2, 2017: Carter Page testifies to House Intelligence committee under oath without an attorney and asks to have the testimony published. He denies ever meeting the Russian official that Fusion GPS claimed he’d met with in July 2016.

      Nov. 5, 2017: Special Counsel Robert Mueller files charges against ex-Trump national security adviser Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn for allegedly lying to FBI official Peter Strzok about contacts with Russian ambassador during presidential transition.

      Dec. 1, 2017: Former national security adviser Gen. Flynn pleads guilty of lying to the FBI. Prosecutors recommend no prison time (but later reverse their recommendation).

      James Rybicki steps down as chief of staff to FBI Director.

      Dec. 6, 2017: Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr is reportedly stripped of one of his positions at Justice Dept. amid controversy over his and his wife’s role in anti-Trump political opposition research.

      Dec. 7, 2017: FBI Director Wray incorrectly testifies that there have been no “702” surveillance abuses by the government.

      Dec. 19, 2017: FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe repeatedly testifies that the wiretap against Trump campaign official Carter Page would not have been approved without the Fusion GPS info. FBI general counsel James Baker, who is himself subject of an Inspector General probe over his alleged leaks to the press, attends as McCabe’s attorney. McCabe acknowledges that if Baker had met with Mother Jones reporter David Corn, it would have been inappropriate.

      FBI general counsel James Baker is reassigned amid investigation into his alleged anti-Trump related contacts with media.

      2018

      Jan. 4, 2018: Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) refer criminal charges against Christopher Steele to the FBI for investigation. There’s an apparent conflict of interest with the FBI being asked to investigate Steele since the FBI has used Steele’s controversial political opposition research to obtain wiretaps.

      Jan. 8, 2018: Justice Dept. official Bruce Ohr loses his second title at the agency.

      Jan. 10, 2018: Donald Trump lawyer Michael Cohen files defamation suits against Fusion GPS and BuzzFeed News for publishing the “Steele dossier,” which he says falsely claimed he met Russian government officials in Prague, Czech Republic, in August of 2016.

      Jan. 11, 2018: House of Representatives approves government’s controversial “702” wireless surveillance authority. The Senate follows suit.

      Jan. 19, 2018: Justice Dept. produces to Congress some text messages between FBI officials Lisa Page and Peter Strzok but states that FBI lost texts between December 14, 2016 and May 17, 2017 due to a technical glitch.

      President Trump signs six-year extension of “702” wireless surveillance authority.

      Jan. 23, 2018: Former FBI Director Comey friend who leaked on behalf of Comey to New York Times to spur appointment of special counsel is now Comey’s attorney.

      Jan. 25, 2018: Justice Dept. Inspector General notifies Congress it has recovered missing text messages between FBI officials Lisa Page and Peter Strzok.

      Jan. 27, 2018: Edward O’Callaghan is named Acting Assistant Attorney General, National Security Division.

      Jan. 29, 2018: Andrew McCabe steps down as Deputy FBI Director ahead of his March retirement.

      Jan. 30, 2018: News reports allege that Justice Department Inspector General is looking into why FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe appeared to wait three weeks before acting on new Clinton emails found right before the election.

      Feb. 2, 2018: House Intelligence Committee (Nunes) Republican memo is released. It summarizes classified documents revealing for the first time that Fusion GPS political opposition research was used, in part, to justify Carter Page wiretap; along with Michael Isikoff Yahoo News article based on the same opposition research.

      Memo also states that Fusion GPS set up back channel to FBI through Nellie Ohr, who conducted opposition research on Trump and passed it to her husband, associate deputy attorney general Bruce Ohr.

      Feb. 7, 2018: Justice Department official David Laufman, who helped oversee the Clinton and Russia probes, steps down as chief of National Security Division’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section.

      Feb. 9, 2018: Former FBI Director Comey assistant Josh Campbell leaves FBI for job at CNN.

      Justice Department Associate Attorney General, Office of Legal Policy, Rachel Brand, resigns.

      Feb. 16, 2018: Special counsel Mueller obtains guilty plea from a Dutch attorney for lying to federal investigators about the last time he spoke to Rick Gates regarding a 2012 project related to Ukraine. The plea does not appear to relate to 2016 campaign or Trump. The Dutch attorney is married to the daughter of a Russian oligarch who’s suing Buzzfeed and Christopher Steele for alleged defamation in the “dossier.”

      Feb. 22, 2018: Former State Dept. official and Sen. John McCain associate David Kramer invokes his Fifth Amendment right not to testify before House Intelligence Committee. Kramer reportedly picked up the anti-Trump political opposition research in London and delivered it to Sen. McCain who delivered it to the FBI.

      Special counsel Mueller files new charges against former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort and former campaign aide Rick Gates, accusing them of additional tax and bank fraud crimes. The allegations appear to be unrelated to Trump.

      Fri. Feb. 23, 2018: Former Trump campaign aide Rick Gates, pleads guilty to conspiracy and lying to investigators (though he issues a statement saying he’s innocent of the indictment charges). The allegations and plea have no apparent link to Trump-Russia campaign collusion.

      Sat. Feb. 24, 2018: Democrats on House Intel Committee release their rebuttal memo to the Republican version that summarized alleged FBI misconduct re: using the GPS Fusion opposition research to get wiretap against Carter Page.

      March 12, 2018House Intelligence Committee closes Russia-Trump investigation with no evidence of collusion.

      Fri. March 16, 2018: Attorney General Jeff Sessions fires Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, based on recommendation from FBI ethics investigators.

      Thurs. March 22, 2018President Trump announces plans to replace National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster with former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton.

      House Judiciary Committee issues subpoenas to Department of Justice after Department failed to produce documents.

      May 4, 2018: Amid allegations that he was responsible for improper leaks, FBI attorney James Baker resigns and joins the Brookings Institution, writing for the anti-Trump blog “Lawfare” that first discussed the need for an “insurance policy” in case Trump got elected.

      2019

      March 2019: Special Counsel Robert Mueller signs off on his final report stating that there was no collusion or coordination between Trump — or any American — and Russia. He leaves as an open question the issue of whether Trump took any actions that could be considered obstruction. No new charges are recommended or filed with the issuance of the report.

      June 2019: Former Trump National Security Adviser Flynn fire his defense attorneys and hires Sidney Powell.

      Oct. 25, 2019: Flynn files a motion to dismiss the case against him due to prosecutorial misconduct. Among other claims, Flynn says prosecutors failed to turn over exculpatory material tending to show his innocence. Prosecutors claim they were not required to turn over the information.

      Dec. 19, 2019: An investigation by Inspector General Michael Horowitz finds egregious abuses by FBI and Justice Department officials in obtaining wiretaps of former Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page. The report also says an FBI attorney doctored a document, providing false information to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, to get the wiretaps.

      2020

      Jan. 7, 2020: Prosecutors reverse their earlier recommendation for no prison time, and ask for up to six months in prison for Flynn.

      Jan. 16, 2020: Flynn files a motion to withdraw his guilty plea.

      Jan. 23, 2020: The Dept. of Justice finds that two of its wiretaps against former Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page were improperly obtained and are therefore invalid.

      Feb. 10, 2020: The Dept. of Justice asks a judge to sentence Trump associate Roger Stone to 7 to 9 years in prison for lying about his communications with WikiLeaks.

      Feb. 11, 2020: The Dept. of Justice reduces its recommendation for prison time for Stone after President Trump and others criticized the initial representation as excessive. Stone receives three years and four months in prison.

      Feb. 20, 2020: President Trump appoints Richard Grenell as acting Director of National Intelligence. Grenell begins facilitating the release of long withheld documents regarding FBI actions against Trump campaign associates.

      March 31, 2020: A Justice Dept. Inspector General’s analysis of more than two dozen wiretap applications from eight FBI field offices over two months finds  “we do not have confidence” that the bureau followed standards to ensure the accuracy of the wiretap requests.

      April 3, 2020: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court asks FBI to review whether it wiretaps are valid in light of information about problems and abuses.

      April 29, 2020: Newly-released documents show FBI officials, prior to their original interview with Flynn, discussing whether the goal was to try to get him to lie to get him fired or so that he could be prosecuted.

      May 7, 2020: The Department of Justice announces a decision to drop the case against Flynn.

      *  *  *

      Order “Slanted: How the News Media Taught Us to Love Censorship and Hate Journalism” by Sharyl Attkisson at Harper CollinsAmazonBarnes & NobleBooks a MillionIndieBoundBookshop!

    • Economic Virus Shock Crushes America's Working Poor, Fed Finds 
      Economic Virus Shock Crushes America’s Working Poor, Fed Finds 

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 22:30

      The Federal Reserve on Thursday published a new survey of how virus-related lockdowns disproportionately affected Americans, suggesting the working-poor has been crushed under the weight of high unemployment and economic distress. 

      The new survey, titled “Report on the Economic Well-Being of U.S. Households in 2019, Featuring Supplemental Data from April 2020,” provides further clarity into the upcoming social-economic challenges of widening wealth inequality as a result of the economic devastation triggered by lockdowns. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      It said 40% of respondents earning less than $40,000 per year reported a job loss in March. The Fed’s report concentrated on the economic conditions of households at the end of 2019, which was then supplemented with employment data from the start of March through early April, capturing the first several weeks of unprecedented job loss. 

      “Thirty-nine percent of people working in February with a household income below $40,000 reported a job loss in March. Another 6 percent of all adults had their hours reduced or took unpaid leave. Taken together, 19 percent of all adults reported either losing a job or experiencing a reduction in work hours in March,” the report said. 

      Fed Chairman Jerome Powell outlined in a webcast to Congress this week that severe economic impacts related to virus shutdowns were mostly seen for lower-income Americans: 

      “The numbers show clearly that it’s more recent hires and lower-paid people who are bearing the brunt of this, although people are suffering all across the income spectrum,” Powell said. 

      Powell urged Congress to do more to prevent long-lasting economic damage from the virus. 

      The Fed’s survey doesn’t capture the millions more that were laid off since early April. At the moment, current figures show 36 million Americans have applied for unemployment benefits since early March. The unemployment rate jumped to 15% this week, the highest since the Great Depression.  

      Most of the job loss has been concreted in the leisure and hospitality industry, which is an industry where many low-income folks have been working over the prior expansion. Many of these folks are stuck in a renting society, gig-economy, insurmountable debts, and limited savings, some, as we’ve noted, are now financially doomed. They will be pushed onto the government welfare system, with an increasing possibility that universal basic income will become a more permanent program. 

      The collapse in employment has substantially affected the financial well-being of families; many of these households may never recover. We recently noted, “42% of the layoffs seen over the last several months would result in permanent job loss.” Talk about a shell shocker for when all these folks try to find a job when states reopen. The worst part is that an economic recovery could take 2-4 years, with unemployment staying at elevated levels as the country must restructure the economy. This virus-induced downturn is already fundamentally altering the lives of tens of millions of folks, who even before the virus, were not prepared for financial Armageddon. 

      Back to the Fed survey, of the respondents that lost their jobs or had hours reduced, 70% reported an income decline, impacting their ability to service debt. 

      About 64% of those with a job loss or decline in weekly hours worked were able to pay bills in full, compared with 85% of those who continued to work. 

      At least half of the respondents said they would have trouble covering a $400 expense. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The survey offers a unique perspective into the economic devastation that has already crushed the lower tier of society and the challenges that could develop as wealth inequality is pushed to extremes. 

    • Newly Released Incident Reports Detail US Navy's "UFO" Encounters
      Newly Released Incident Reports Detail US Navy’s “UFO” Encounters

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 22:10

      Via The Epoch Times,

      Newly released “hazard reports” detailing encounters between US Navy aircraft and “unidentified aerial phenomena” reveal details about incidents that were thrust into the spotlight when the Pentagon officially declassified and released videos of three encounters late last month.

      “The unknown aircraft appeared to be small in size, approximately the size of a suitcase, and silver in color,” one report describing an incident from March 26, 2014, said.

      During that encounter one of the Navy F/A-18 jets “passed within 1000′ of the object, but was unable to positively determine the identity of the aircraft,” the report added, saying the US Navy pilot “attempted to regain visual contact with the aircraft, but was unable.”

      CNN on May 13 obtained the Navy Safety Center documents, which were previously labeled “For Official Use Only.” They follow the Pentagon’s official release late last month of three short videos showing “unidentified aerial phenomena” that had previously been made public by a private company.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The reports were first published by the Drive, a website covering auto news and military issues, which obtained the documents through a Freedom of Information Act request.

      The videos show what appear to be unidentified flying objects rapidly moving while recorded by infrared cameras. Two of the videos contain Naval aviators reacting in awe at how quickly the objects are moving. One voice speculates that it could be a drone.

      Objects Could Be Drones

      The newly released reports appear to share this assessment, describing many of the unidentified aircraft as “Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS),” the Pentagon’s official name for drone aircraft.

      According to another incident report from November 2013 a Navy F/A-18 pilot “was able to visually acquire a small aircraft. The aircraft had an approximately 5 foot wingspan and was colored white with no other distinguishable features.”

      “Due to the small size, the aircraft was determined to be a UAS,” the report said.

      Another incident from June 27, 2013, said the encountered “aircraft was white in color and approximately the size and shape of a drone or missile,” according to the report.

      But the reports say that even when the unidentified flying objects are assessed to be drones the military was unable to identify who was operating the drone, presenting a major safety and security challenge to the Navy jets training in the area which are restricted military training airspace ranges off the east coast of Virginia.

      “Post flight, the controlling agency contacted numerous local UAS operators, but none claimed knowledge of” the unidentified aircraft, the November report said.

      “I feel it may only be a matter of time before one of our F/A-18 aircraft has a mid-air collision with an unidentified UAS,” one of the authors of a report warned.

      “In many ways” drones “pose a greater midair risk than manned aircraft. They are often less visually significant and less radar apparent than manned aircraft,” the report said.

      There is also the possibility that the drones could be operated by an adversary such as Russia or China who may have been seeking to collect information about U.S. military’s operations.

      The Navy now has formal guidelines for how its pilots can report when they believe they have seen possible UFOs.

      The videos of the encounters were first released between December 2017 and March 2018 by To The Stars Academy of Arts & Sciences, a company co-founded by former Blink-182 musician Tom DeLonge that says it studies information about unidentified aerial phenomena.

      The Truth Is Out There

      The Pentagon has previously studied recordings of aerial encounters with unknown objects as part of a since-shuttered classified program that was launched at the behest of former Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada. The program was launched in 2007 and ended in 2012, according to the Pentagon, because they assessed that there were higher priorities that needed funding.

      Nevertheless, Luis Elizondo, the former head of the classified program, told CNN in 2017 that he personally believes “there is very compelling evidence that we may not be alone.”

      “These aircraft—we’ll call them aircraft—are displaying characteristics that are not currently within the US inventory nor in any foreign inventory that we are aware of,” Elizondo said of objects they researched. He says he resigned from the Defense Department in 2017 in protest over the secrecy surrounding the program and the internal opposition to funding it.

      President Donald Trump called the recently officially released Pentagon footage a “hell of a video” and told Reuters he wonders “if it’s real.”

      “I just wonder if it’s real,” Trump said of the videos. “That’s a hell of a video.”

    • 1 Million Students At California Universities To Stay Home Next Fall As Campuses Go 'Online Only'
      1 Million Students At California Universities To Stay Home Next Fall As Campuses Go ‘Online Only’

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 21:50

      The California State University system, commonly recognized as the largest four-year university system in the country with 23 total campus, will not hold in-person classes through the fall semester for the majority of programs due to the coronavirus pandemic. 

      Chancellor Timothy White informed a board meeting on Tuesday that “nearly all in-person classes” will be canceled, meaning the current remote learning online format will continue. 

      And additionally concerning the other major system in the state, the University of California, a new statement this week said “it’s likely none of our campuses will fully re-open in fall,” according to a UC spokesman.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Getty Images.

      As multiple reports have underscored, this means a total of more than 770,000 students will not return to campus — which will no doubt be a huge blow to school finances, which often relies heavily for daily operations on campus-related fees such as housing, to say nothing of the coming likely massive drop in tuition and other crucial funds.

      Considering other public and private colleges and universities in California are now likely to also go on-line only, we’re now talking a whopping one million students expected to stay home.

      It further introduces the huge unknown of how many students will choose to forgo paying tuition for what many see as a sub-par online education as opposed to the holistic experience of a college campus. As we described before many especially incoming college freshmen are likely to take a ‘gap year’ as they’re not interested in dropping $50K plus for a semester sitting in their living room.

      A California State University statement this week said: “First and foremost is the health, safety and welfare of our students, faculty and staff, and the evolving data surrounding the progression of Covid-19  current and as forecast throughout the 2020-21 academic year,” according to CNN.

      And the University of California announcement said it “will be exploring a mixed approach with some material delivered in classroom and labs settings while other classes will continue to be online.”

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Apparently the few programs which will be deemed as essential to conduct in-person involve professions like nursing, bio-research, and medical related disciplines, where access to labs, medical equipment, and patient interaction are crucial. 

      Schools across the nation are already losing tens of millions in campus and summer fees given shutdowns, not to mention sports programs being shuttered, also as the the question of whether in-person instruction will even happen next Fall remains the biggest anxiety-inducing huge unknown, potentially delivering a financial fatal blow to a number of already struggling schools.

      Endowment values have plunged along with markets to boot. And then there’s a no doubt a greatly diminished incoming freshman class, and with that severely declining numbers of tuition checks coming in. Already faculty members are being furloughed in some cases, or salaries being cut.

    • How The COVID-19 Lockdowns Will Increase Resentment Of The Elderly
      How The COVID-19 Lockdowns Will Increase Resentment Of The Elderly

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 21:30

      Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

      In an article for the LA Times earlier this month, Laura Newberry contends that the COVID-19 panic has “amplified” ageism in the United States. This is likely true, yet the article completely misses the true cause.

      Certainly, ageism is a problem for many people. Reprehensible crimes such as elder abuse deserve our attention.  Thanks to our highly mobile society, fewer people spend time with their elderly parents or grandparents. This has in many cases reduced the degree to which the elderly are regarded as important members of society.

      But it’s unclear why the presence of COVID-19 should amplify any of this. The elderly have always been more susceptible to disease and disability. In bad flu years, do we claim that the additional deaths “amplify ageism”? That does not appear to be have been the case. 

      If we want to really understand how the COVID-19 panic will amplify ageism – assuming it does – we need look no further than the politics of the government-forced economic shutdowns.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      How do the shutdowns increase ageism? Because the extreme and damaging nature of the policy response could lead many to perceive the current economic crisis with record unemployment as the result of a set of policies designed to protect the elderly effectively at the expense of younger workers, parents, students, and families.

      After all, most people are aware that the elderly are at greatest risk to COVID-19.

      In many states, for example, 50 percent of deaths have occurred in nursing homes.

      Eighty percent of deaths occur among those over sixty-five.

      Yet instead of isolating these populations, and concentrating on targeting resources to help the most vulnerable, politicians have decided to throw millions out of work, destroy businesses, and close a multitude of social institutions such as schools and churches. Just to be on the safe side.

      But it’s only a “safe side” for some.

      Thanks to the shutdowns, child abuse has increased, drug abuse has surged, and unemployment will likely lead to more drug overdoses and more suicide.

      Under these conditions, many are more likely to come to the conclusion that this is a case of governments choosing winners and losers: the elderly know that the COVID-19 disease is most dangerous to them.

      Politicians in turn pander to the elderly, who are a powerful demographic which votes in higher proportions than any other age group. The winners here, therefore, are the elderly, who seem to have the government’s ear.

      The losers, meanwhile, are: family breadwinners who lose their jobs, twenty-somethings who can’t start a family, children who can’t attend school, college students who are paying thousands for third-rate Zoom classes, drug addicts cut off from the support they need, and everyone who needs now banned “elective”(but actually very important) medical services not related to COVID-19.

      It’s only natural that this perceived political battle over economic shutdowns would lead to a relative increase in resentment toward the elderly in some cases. And the larger the economic misery gets, the worse the ageism will get. April’s unemployment numbers were dismal. May’s may be even worse. The wave of evictions and foreclosures hasn’t yet had a chance to materialize. But it will.  In the minds of the newly homeless and unemployed, some are likely to conclude that they and their families are living out of their car because the economy was destroyed in the name of protecting people who no longer are responsible for keeping children fed and clothed.

      This won’t improve social cohesion.

      This would not occur to the same degree, however, had the matter not been politicized. Had social pressure and education been used—instead of heavy-handed coercive state methods—to enhance health measures for the elderly, there would be no reason to look at this as an “us vs. them” scenario. But this is what politics does. It employs the violence of the state to jail, fine, and impoverish many in the name of ostensibly benefiting some particular group of people.

      The result in this case will indeed be an amplification of ageism.  But these feelings are not completely unfounded. Politics is generally a game of one group using the coercive power of the state to extract benefits at the expense of others. If the elderly benefit from lockdowns (which may or may not even be the case), then these benefits are coming at the expense of others.

      Of course, not all elderly people want the lockdowns or ever asked for them. Many actively oppose them. But politics isn’t about nuance or evaluating individual cases. It’s about exploiting some groups in the name of helping others. In the end, the politicians benefit the most.

    • Jordan's King Warns "Massive Conflict" Coming If Israel Moves To Annex West Bank
      Jordan’s King Warns “Massive Conflict” Coming If Israel Moves To Annex West Bank

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 21:10

      With Washington’s backing, Israel is planning to move forward on controversial plans to annex a broad swath of the West Bank, particularly the Jordan Valley, as early as this summer. PM Netanyahu last month issued a likely time table of “within two months”.

      Arab nations, especially in the gulf, have remained uncharacteristically mum about the whole thing as they focus on countering Iran (which has, it should be noted, actually brought Saudi Arabia into a quiet ‘covert’ intelligence sharing relationship with Israel over the past couple years).

      But Jordan on Friday finally went on the offensive, with King Abdullah telling the German magazine Der Spiegel that Israeli annexation of parts of the West Bank “will lead to a massive conflict with Jordan”.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Jordanian King Abdullah II, AFP via Getty.

      The ‘warning’ was posted to the official website of the king’s Royal Hashemite Court on Friday:

      Asked about the impact of Israel potentially moving forward with the annexation of parts of the West Bank, the King said it could lead to a massive conflict with Jordan.

      “I don’t want to make threats and create an atmosphere of loggerheads, but we are considering all options. We agree with many countries in Europe and the international community that the law of strength should not apply in the Middle East,” His Majesty added.

      He further reaffirmed Jordan’s position that “the two-state solution is the only way for us to be able to move forward.” He at the same time urged the region to focus on collective efforts at fighting coronavirus instead of clashing with each other, as he said will happen if Israel initiates its provocative and ‘illegal’ expansionist plans.

      Abdullah, who maintains a close relationship with the United States and has long opened his country to CIA and US military presence especially during the early years of regime change efforts in Syria, also warned that “chaos and extremism in the region” would be unleashed if the Palestinian Authority collapsed.

      “Leaders who advocate a one-state solution do not understand what that would mean. What would happen if the Palestinian National Authority collapsed? There would be more chaos and extremism in the region,” he said.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Image via AFP

      Meanwhile, as mentioned the United States will soon approve Israel’s move to annex parts of the West Bank under Trump’s “deal of the century” peace plan. 

      “President Trump pledged to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Jewish communities there and in the Jordan Valley,” Netanyahu said last month.

      But should Israeli annexation indeed move forward by this summer, as Netanyahu envisions, it could potentially unleash protests and violence on the level of a third Intifiada. Palestinian Authority leaders as well as Hamas have vowed that such an extensive new Israeli land grab will be resisted by call costs. 

      And now it appears neighboring Jordan, long host to the largest Palestinian ‘permanent’ refugee community in the region, is ready to help stoke the flames of chaos and resistance to the US-Israeli plan. However, it also remains that Jordan has in the end proven itself a compliant puppet state of Washington and Israeli interests time and again.

    • COVID-19 Deaths & Pre-Existing Conditions. What Illinois' Data Says About Who's At Risk
      COVID-19 Deaths & Pre-Existing Conditions. What Illinois’ Data Says About Who’s At Risk

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 20:50

      Authored by Ted Dabrowski and John Klingner via Wirepoints.org,

      Wirepoints recently analyzed data from Cook County’s Medical Examiner and found that 92 percent of Cook County COVID-19 victims had pre-existing conditions. Those that died had comorbidities including diabetes, obesity, hypertension and heart disease.

      Many Americans have pre-existing conditions. Data from the CDC says that 45 percent of people have hypertension. Another 43 percent are obese. And another 10 percent have diabetes. 

      However, that doesn’t mean that all Americans with one or more pre-existing conditions are at serious risk of death from COVID-19. Illinois’ fatality data shows that the virus has had a limited impact on younger demographics.

      Below we focus on the impact of COVID-19 on the under-50 population for three key reasons.

      First, it’s important to determine whether it’s safe, in general, for the younger crowd to get back to school and college.

      Second, it’s vital to determine if it’s safe for workers to get back to their jobs – the under-50 demographic makes up nearly 70 percent of Illinois’ workforce.

      And third, it’s at age 50 where case-fatality numbers become more significant, in relative terms.

      The limited impact on under-50s

      If all Illinoisans with pre-existing conditions were at a similar risk of dying from COVID-19, then we’d expect to see a more even share of deaths across every age group. That’s not the case. The number of deaths in younger brackets are far outnumbered by those in older brackets. The number of deaths for those under 50 total just 200. In contrast, the virus has claimed 3,592 lives for those over 50.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The known-case fatality rates in Illinois (number of COVID-19 deaths divided by known cases) tell a similar story. The fatality rates go down dramatically as age decreases.

      In particular, for those younger than 50, the average fatality rate is just 0.4%. (We know the real case-fatality number will be much, much lower once testing reveals the true number of cases). If pre-existing conditions were a major factor across all age groups, the fatality rates would be much higher in the younger age groups. But they aren’t.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The data is even more clear when looking across the entire population. About 65% of Illinois’ population is younger than 50, yet they make up just 5% of all COVID-19 deaths. In contrast, those over age 50 make up just 35% of the population, but 95% of all deaths. The data shows that pre-existing conditions aren’t impacting younger brackets like they are the 50-plus age group.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      However, comorbidities are a key risk factor when combined with age and location (long-term care facilities). The elderly with pre-existing conditions and living in retirement homes are most at risk from COVID-19, according to the data.

      Illinois needs far stricter controls, testing and PPE for nursing homes. We need to reverse Pritzker’s refusal to employ antibody tests to try to identify workers who could more safely care for those who are at risk. Far more attention needs to go there and toward protecting the elderly in general. We must be certain they can stay at home by assuring delivery of necessities.

      Essential workers and younger people need to understand the importance of staying away from those at risk. Extended families need to be educated on how to physically distance within the same home, and perhaps offered assistance if they are in smaller homes where that is not possible.

      Going forward

      Reopening Illinois is important to limit the total deaths from this crisis: those stemming from COVID-19 as well as those from despair – residents who die from increased rates of poverty, suicide, domestic violence and drug abuse. In the longer run, depressions kill millions, and we do face a grave risk of a depression. Poorer economies have lower average lifespans because less money is available for health care, traffic safety, medical research, environmental advances, food safety and myriad other things that make life not only better but safer.

      We can reopen Illinois by targeting our resources on those truly at risk to not only saves lives now, but in the long run.

      *  *  *

      Read more about COVID-19 and the impact on Illinois:

    • "Bolsonaro Is A Virus" – Opposition Leader Calls For President's Impeachment As Brazil Reports Record 15k Cases In A Single Day
      “Bolsonaro Is A Virus” – Opposition Leader Calls For President’s Impeachment As Brazil Reports Record 15k Cases In A Single Day

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 20:30

      It’s become blindingly obvious that the coronavirus outbreak in Brazil has spiraled out of control, offering an example of the consequences of minimal containment efforts, and causing unease across Latin America, as Brazil’s neighbors move to close borders to ensure Brazilians don’t carry the virus across the border.

      As the situation spirals out of control, President Jair Bolsonaro is spending more time egging on his most radical supporters, who are now openly calling for a military takeover of the government, and a return to a military dictatorship with Bolsonaro at the head. Though, as the Washington Post was forced to admit, most Brazilians view the likelihood of a military intrusion into public life as remote.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Just hours after Brazil’s health minister resigned following less than a month on the job, the country’s public health officials reported a record 15,305 cases during the prior day. Before resigning, Health Minister Nelson Teich had criticized Bolsonaro’s presidential decree calling for beauty parlors and gyms to reopen. While Teich gave no reason for his resignation, his predecessor was sacked by Bolsonaro for disagreeing with the president’s opposition to lockdowns. Bolsonaro believes that the virus is nothing more than a “little flu” and that it will inevitably spread.

      Brazil’s Globo newspaper reported that Teich disagreed with Bolsonaro’s insistence on using hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine to treat the virus, and sources said this disagreement was the last straw.

      Military members of Bolsonaro’sn cabinet are pushing for deputy health minister Eduardo Pazuello, an army general on active duty, to become the new health minister, making his current “interim” position permanent, according to Reuters.

      Teich’s predecessor, Luiz Henrique Mandetta, was fired in April after he urged Brazilians to observe social distancing and stay indoors.

      Over the past week, Brazil has surged past Germany and France on the global coronavirus depth chart and, in terms of its coronavirus caseload, it has become arguably the world’s worst hotspot, since epidemiologists suspect that more than a million cases have probably gone diagnosed, along with tens of thousands of deaths.

      The record number of cases brought Brazil’s total north of 218,000 cases, and the 824 new deaths recorded in the last day brought Brazil’s death toll to 14,817.

      The governor of Sao Paolo state lashed out at Bolsonaro on Friday, comparing him to a virus: he said Brazil is suffering from two viruses right now. the coronavirus, and the Bolsonaro virus.

      While his supporters push a military takeover, Congressional opposition leader Alessandro Molon warned that Brazil was heading toward a public health catastrophe, and has started pushing for Bolsonaro to be impeached.

      “Bolsonaro does not want a technical minister, he wants someone who agrees with his ideological insanity, like ending social distancing and using chloroquine,” Molon, a lawmaker from the Brazilian Socialist Party, said in a statement.

      Bolsonaro’s handling of the coronavirus has been widely criticised globally as he has minimised the severity of the disease and told Brazilians to ignore quarantine restrictions.

      The most hard-hit areas of Brazil are in most cases also among the most remote. Yesterday, the Washington Post published a story about the crisis in Manaus, a city of 2 million people on the Amazon River deep in the rainforest. More than 2,000 people died in Manaus last month, more than 4x the normal rate.

      The city is rapidly running out of coffins, hundreds are dying at home – either because they can’t get treatment at the hospitals or because they fear they won’t – and ambulances race down streets with no clear destination, waiting for patients to die so more beds can open up.

      Dwindling supplies, deteriorating health systems, endemic corruption and mismanagement have all made it impossible for developing nations to muster the same response to the crisis that Spain, Italy and the US have. In Guayaquil, Ecuador, bodies have been left out in the streets. In Loreto, Peru, corpses have been stacked haphazardly in a small hospital room, and in Brazil, patients spend their last hours and days on this planet waiting in chairs in crowded hospital emergency rooms.

      After years of economic recession, Brazil has neither the money, tools or personnel to confront the problem as it stands.

      If there’s any major country that’s truly at risk for a complete unraveling of the social fabric, at this point, it’s probably Brazil.

    • Understanding The Mueller Lies About Michael Flynn
      Understanding The Mueller Lies About Michael Flynn

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 20:10

      Authored by Larry Johnson via Sic Semper Tyrannis blog,

      I want to help the average citizen understand how egregious and dishonest the Mueller team was in bringing charges against Michael Flynn for lying to FBI agents about what he said to Russia’s Ambassador in a telephone conversation, which was likely intercepted by the CIA.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Michael Flynn did not do a damn thing wrong in that conversation and the notes from FBI agents Strzok and Pientka, which Sidney Powell finally pried loose after more than two years of the prosecutors hiding exculpatory evidence, do not support the Statement of Offense.

      I suspect most of you reading this have never read the Statement of Offense. I am going to let you read for yourself the salient portions:

      b. On or about December 28, 2016, the Russian Ambassador contacted FLYNN.

      c. On or about December 29, 2016, FLYNN called a senior official of the Presidential Transition Team (“PTT official”), who was with other senior members of the Presidential Transition Team at the Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida, to discuss what, if anything, to communicate to the Russian Ambassador about the U.S. Sanctions. On that call, FLYNN and the PTT official discussed the U.S. Sanctions, including the potential impact of those sanctions on the incoming administration’s foreign policy goals. The PIT official and FLYNN also discussed that the members of the Presidential Transition Team at Mar-a-Lago did not want Russia to escalate the situation.

      d. Immediately after his phone call with the PIT official, FLYNN called the Russian Ambassador and requested that Russia not escalate the situation and only respond to the U.S. Sanctions in a reciprocal manner.

      e. Shortly after his phone call with the Russian Ambassador, FLYNN spoke with the PTT official to report on the substance of his call with the Russian Ambassador, including their discussion of the U.S. Sanctions.

      Got that?

      Michael Flynn acted professionally and followed protocol. The Russian Ambassador called him. General Flynn called K. T. McFarlane, who was at Mar a Lago with the Trump Transition Team and asked for guidance on whether or not to respond and, if he was going to respond, what to say.

      Michael Flynn’s communication with Ambassador Kislyak was appropriate and wise–he asked the Russian Ambassador not escalate the situation and only respond to the U.S. Sanctions in a reciprocal manner. Please tell me what the hell is wrong, nefarious or stupid about that? NOTHING. Michael Flynn could have told the Russian that Obama was a moron and could have promised, “we will eliminate those sanctions on day one.” He did not do either. Mike Flynn conducted himself with discretion and with professionalism.

      But there is one other important piece of news in this Statement of Offense. Someone in the Obama Administration INTERCEPTED Mike Flynn’s phone call to the Presidential Transition Team (aka PTT). Who did that? The NSA? The CIA? The FBI? That question needs to be answered because there was no legal basis to intercept this conversation.

      As I noted in my previous article (see here), this was the conversation that Jim Comey and Andrew McCabe wanted to use as the pretext and predicate for keeping the investigation of Michael Flynn open.

      Here is what Agents Strzok and Pientka wrote in one of their initial drafts of the 302 (i.e., the FBI record of their interview with Michael Flynn). Note–the original draft is still missing in action. The FBI is either incompetent or hiding it.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Michael Flynn said, according to Agents Strzok and Pientka, “I DON”T REMEMBER.”

      At no point did the Agents give him the chance to review the transcript, which they had in their hot little hands.

      And Peter Strzok, in a subsequent interview with FBI Agents working for the DOJ Inspector General, said this on July 19, 2017:

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The FBI Agents interviewing Strzok make it clear–“Strzok and Pientka both had the impression at the time that Flynn was not lying or did not think he was lying.”

      The record is very clear and you should now be able to understand why Michael Flynn’s attorney was so outraged and why the Department of Justice is dismissing charges against Michael Flynn.

      Robert Mueller and his prosecutors lied. Michael Flynn did not. It is that simple.

    • Goldman Spots A Huge Problem For The Fed
      Goldman Spots A Huge Problem For The Fed

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 19:45

      Last week, the Treasury shocked the world when it announced that in the current quarter (the 3rd of the fiscal year), the US will need to sell a mindblowing, record $3 trillion (pardon, $2.999 trillion) in Treasurys to finance the US money helicopter.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      This, after selling $807 billion in the first half of the fiscal year, and another $677 billion in the quarter ending Sept 30.

      And since it is just a matter of time before Congress has to pass yet another fiscal package which will be at least another trillion dollars, and up to $3 trillion if the Democrats get their wish, one can say that Guggenheim’s projection of over $5 trillion in debt issuance this calendar year will be wildly conservative.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Now here’s the thing: as Deutsche Bank recently showed, so far this new debt avalanche was entire monetized exclusively by the Fed, whose debt purchasing operations have been far greater than the net Treasury issuance.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      But this was only the case when the Fed was buying a massive $75 billion in TSYs per day in the late March crash, when Powell dumped a monetary nuclear bomb on the market to stabilize the biggest panic selling an entire generation of traders had ever seen, and nearly doubling the Fed’s balance – which is now just shy of $7 trillion, in a few months:

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Since then, however, the Fed’s daily and weekly POMO has shrunk substantially, and as discussed earlier, it is down to just $30BN in Treasury purchases per week as of next week, which amounts to around $1.5 trillion per year.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      There’s just one problem: $30BN per week in TSY monetization is nowhere near enough to consume the trillions in Treasury issuance that is about to hit. In fact, all else equal, the Fed will very soon have to find a pretext to aggressively ramp up its treasury purchases.

      As Goldman writes overnight, putting the problem in its proper context, “Central banks have been purchasing sovereign bonds at a rapid pace (Exhibit 1), faster than past QE programs in most cases. These purchases are occurring against a backdrop of a surge in fiscal deficits, which will require enormous amounts of additional sovereign supply to finance them.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Which makes sense, of course: after all helicopter money, which is what we have now that MMT (Magic Money Theory) has been shoved down everyone’s throat without any debate, only works when there is coordination between the Treasury and the central bank. And while until now Fed purchases have generally offset Treasury issuance, that coordination is about to end. As Goldman puts it, “Central bank buying should absorb a substantial amount of upcoming issuance, though we expect increases in “free float” across most markets, most notably in the US, which adds to the medium-term case for higher yields and steeper curves there.”

      Next, Goldman estimates this so-called free float, defined as the amount of sovereign debt outstanding less central bank and foreign official holdings, across major DM markets, and shows it in the chart below. Through the end of last year, free float was on a downward trend in Germany and Japan, as ECB and BoJ purchases absorbed the bulk of new supply. In contrast, free float had been trending higher for much of the year in the US and UK.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      So with record fiscal deficits and resumption of asset purchases in several markets, where is free float headed this year? In Exhibit 3, Goldman lays out its expectations for total purchase amounts on a net basis along with net supply. It finds the largest increase in free float in the US, as Fed purchases continue to slow; in fact according to Goldman calculations the US public (now that foreign investors have hit the breaks on US TSY purchases), will be on the hook to fund the $1.6 trillion needed to bridge the full amount of US funding needs.

      A similar picture emerges in the Euro area, where supply is also expected outpace ECB purchases, particularly in Italy, Spain and France (absent further increases in ECB purchases). Bizarrely, a similar picture emerges in Japan where even the always ravenous BoJ is expected to absorb a large portion (about ¥25tn) of incoming supply in the upcoming year as Japan is boosting its debt sales by 18.2 trillion yen ($170 billion) to fund a spending package equivalent to a fifth of its annual economic output; but according to Goldman, the scale of supply is likely to exceed even the BOJ’s QE purchases.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      It continues: foreign-ownership of New Zealand sovereign debt has fallen to 50% from 70% just five years ago as central bankers in Wellington snap up bonds as part of a quantitative-easing program.

      In short, even with central banks unleashing $7.9 trillion in QE so far in 2020 (according to Bank of America calculations) of which the Fed accounts for over $2.8 trillion in debt purchases alone, this won’t be enough to monetize the tsunami of debt that is coming to fund the biggest global rescue operation in history, and if investors find that suddenly the bond market has to clear without the only true backstop – the central bank – willing and able to mop up all the supply, a critical precondition for the continuation of “helicopter money”, the outcome could be disastrous.

      Incidentally, we first warned about the urgent need for the Fed to aggressively step up and boost its QE (instead of continuing to taper it by $1 billion week after week as it did again today) on Wednesday when we quoted Curvature Securities’ rates strategist and repo expert Scott Skyrm, who calculated that “there are $689 billion net new Treasurys settling during the month of May and $992 billion net new Treasurys settling between now and June 15. Yes, almost one trillion new Treasury securities hitting the market within the next month!”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      His conclusion: “That means the market needs to come up with about one trillion dollars to pay for those securities over the next month.” Which, of course, is a euphemism because we all know who in the market needs to come up with one trillion dollar – the only one who literally prints money: the Federal Reserve.

      Conveniently, Goldman’s argument allows us to recycle our conclusion from two days ago, in which we said that here is the layman’s version of what was just said: “the Fed has flooded the system with liquidity… and it is not enough, because the way helicopter money works, is that liquidity supply (the Fed), and liquidity demand (Treasury via debt issuance) go hand in hand, and periods of too much supply, as was the cash with the Fed’s massive QE in late March and early April, are promptly followed by periods of dramatic liquidity demand, such as the next month when $1 trillion in liquidity will be drained to fund the US government “money helicopter.”

      Goldman’s own calculations suggest that the shortfall net of the Fed’s ongoing QE tapering could be as much as $1.6 trillion.

      As a result, Powell faces a two-fold problem: since the Fed chair has taken negative rates off the table, Powell has no choice but too boost QE again, and unleash another firehose of debt monetizing liquidity in the financial system. However, any such reversal to the Fed’s current posture of shrinking QE will be met with howls of rage, especially among what’s left of the conservative political establishment. Which means that, just like in March when the Fed used the first pandemic-induced market crash to unleash unlimited QE, the Fed will soon have to go for round 2 and spark a new market crash, one which it then uses as an alibi for the next massive liquidity injection. Failing to do that, watch as the dollar takes off as markets sniff out that another major dollar squeeze is imminent. And since this will accelerate the liquidity crunch, one way or another, the coming $1.6 trillion in Treasury issuance – which has already been generously greenlighted by Congress – will serve as a trigger for the next market shock, one which the Fed will quickly reverse by expanding the already unlimited QE by trillions on very short notice.

      The only question we have is whether this will be the market crash that the Fed uses to unveil it will also buy equity ETfs next, or if Powell will save this final bullet in its ammo for whatever comes next. 

      Finally, it’s not just us reaching this conclusion: yesterday – one day after our dire assessment – Bloomberg reached the same conclusion, and in “An $8 Trillion Spree Sets Clock Ticking for Bonds’ Judgment Day” in which it wrote that “investors are mopping up the sales as long as central banks engage in so-called quantitative easing, buying an unlimited amount of debt to counter the ravages of the pandemic. But at the first whiff of a recovery, or a pullback from policy makers, all bets may be off. Throw in the threat of inflation amid a global fiscal splurge exceeding $8 trillion, and bond investors look set for a toxic cocktail of risks in the not-too-distant future.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Well, today we got another pullback when the Fed tapered its weekly QE to just $30BN from $35BN last week, and a record $75 billion per day two months ago.

      “Given the massive central bank easing, which includes a lot of bond-buying QE in many places, there will be a lot of demand right now to buy government bonds,” said Eric Stein, co-director of global income at Eaton Vance Management, effectively describing what can simply be called “frontrunning” the Fed, a strategy that even BlackRock said is the only one left in this idiotic market.

      “However, if it was a year or two from now and the economy was picking up and inflation had started to pick up, the story could be different.”

      Actually, the economy doesn’t even have to be picking up: an unexpected – and unexplained – slowdown in the pace of the Fed’s “unlimited QE” purchases would be sufficient to throw the bond market into unprecedented turmoil as all those socialists who pretend that MMT makes sense, realize that the only thing permitting their idiotic “theory” to persist is the Fed’s money printer.

      Yet while the Fed’s QE expansion is just a matter of time, whether catalyzed by another market crash or not, the bigger question is what happens after that?

      “Can governments continue to borrow at such record levels? No,” said George Boubouras, head of research at hedge fund K2 Asset Management. “Central-bank support is key in the massive bond buying we’ve seen for now. But if they blink then at some point, in the medium term, it will all likely unravel – with unforgiving consequences for some countries.”

      Ironically, this also means that an end to the coronavirus crisis is the worst possible thing that could happen to a world that is now habituated to helicopter money and virtually unlimited handouts, which however need a state of perpetual crisis.

      “Once there is an end to the crisis in sight, they will be less and less willing to provide support and it will fall more on the street to absorb paper,” said Mediolanum money manager Charles Diebel, who’s adding bond steepeners in anticipation of a coming inflationary supernova.

      That, incidentally, would be the endgame for the current monetary regime, which is why anyone hoping that officials, policymakers and the establishment in general, will allow the coronavirus crisis to simply fade away, is in for the shock of a lifetime.

    • Pompeo Was Right, China Admits It Ordered Early Virus Samples Destroyed
      Pompeo Was Right, China Admits It Ordered Early Virus Samples Destroyed

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 19:36

      While perhaps somewhat out of context, it appears US Secretary Of State Mike Pompeo was right when he accused Beijing of failing to provide, and in fact destroying, samples of the virus at the start of the outbreak.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The South China Morning Post reports that Liu Dengfeng, an official with the National Health Commission’s science and education department, confirmed China had ordered unauthorised laboratories to destroy samples of the new coronavirus in the early stage of the outbreak, but claimed these orders were given for biosafety reasons.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      “The remarks made by some US officials were taken out of context and intended to confuse,” Liu said at a briefing in Beijing.

      Liu claimed that when the illness was first reported in Wuhan, “national-level professional institutes” were working to identify the pathogen that was causing it:

      “Based on comprehensive research and expert opinion, we decided to temporarily manage the pathogen causing the pneumonia as Class II – highly pathogenic – and imposed biosafety requirements on sample collection, transport and experimental activities, as well as destroying the samples,” he said.

      However, SCMP reports that according to a provincial health commission notice issued in February, those handling virus samples were ordered not to provide them to any institutions or labs without approval. Unauthorised labs that obtained samples in the early stage of the outbreak had to destroy them or send them to a municipal center for disease control and prevention for storage.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Additionally, in what is an odd stream of admissions and clarifications, another senior official, Li Mingzhu, with the health commission’s international cooperation department, rejected other US claims about access early on, claiming that the WHO did not make any request to visit the lab during two trips to Wuhan, in January and February.

      “The WHO has never made a request to visit a certain laboratory, so the statement that the WHO was denied a visit to the Wuhan laboratory is untrue,” Li said.

      So one wonders what exactly WHO was doing there, if it went at all. Of course, we would expect Tedros to fully corroborate these reports.

      The odd timing of these ‘clarifications’ and simplicity of their claims makes one wonder why China had not simply announced this two or three months ago? What could they have had to hide if, as they said today, this was all “in line with Chinese standard practices”?

    • Global Cooling!! Low Solar Activity To Cause Temperatures To Plummet, Say Scientists
      Global Cooling!! Low Solar Activity To Cause Temperatures To Plummet, Say Scientists

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 19:30

      Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

      The Sun is entering a period of “solar minimum” that could cause temperatures to plummet by up to 2C over 20 years and trigger a global famine, according to experts.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Solar activity has entered a deep decline with scientists saying there have already been 100 days this year where the sun has displayed zero sunspots.

      NASA boffins say this means that the earth could be about to experience a new “Dalton Minimum,” the period between 1790 and 1830 which led to a severe prolonged cold snap and massive volcanic eruptions.

      “This means were could be entering one of the deepest period of sunshine recession which could trigger long periods of cold, famine and other issues,” reports the Daily Star.

      The Sun has now recorded two consecutive years of record setting spotlessness, being blank 77% of the time in 2019 and 76% of the time so far this year.

      This means a deep solar minimum is coming which will cause temperatures to drop drastically.

      This once again serves as a reminder that the Sun is by far the most influential driver of climate and makes the impact of so-called man-made climate change look tame in comparison.

      How are institutions of science, academia and media that have fully committed to the notion that anthropogenic global warming will cause environmental devastation going to react when the globe starts rapidly cooling?

      Meanwhile, Greta Thunberg has been noticeably quiet on the matter.

      *  *  *

      My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me. Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

    • Seventh Amazon Worker Dies Of COVID As Staff Scared To Return
      Seventh Amazon Worker Dies Of COVID As Staff Scared To Return

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 19:10

      While Amazon restores regular delivery times for most of its products and is set to reduce hazard pay for its warehouse workers, a new report this week indicates that the seventh warehouse employee recently died from COVID-19.

      The Verge reports, a warehouse worker at distribution center IND8, located in Indianapolis, Indiana, died on April 30 after contracting the disease. Several workers at the warehouse found out about the death and confronted management, who initially failed to inform staff about the passing. It was only after the confrontation that management became more transparent about the death: 

      “They weren’t going to say anything if it wasn’t for people asking questions,” an IND8 worker told The Verge, who asked to remain anonymous, considering Amazon has had a history of firing employees who speak up. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The death at IND8 is the second in the state. Virus-related deaths of Amazon warehouse employees have also been reported at Jeffersonville, Indiana; Staten Island and Bethpage, New York; Waukegan, Illinois; and Hawthorne and Tracy, California, which brings the total count to seven during the pandemic. 

      Amazon has quickly silenced workers and fired anyone who has voiced an opinion about workplace safety and or virus infections at warehouses. We noted this back in late March, a Staten Island warehouse employee organized a strike among colleagues, which was an attempt to force the company to disinfect the facility after a rash of virus cases. Days later the employee who organized the strike was fired

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Former Amazon employee Chris Smalls 

      A top engineer at Amazon Web Services quit his job in early May after he was fed up with the company silencing workers who spoke up about workplace safety at warehouses. 

      Another IND8 worker, who requested anonymity, said: “Before we had the unlimited UPT [unpaid time off] so if people didn’t feel safe, they didn’t have to come to work. “When that went away, we went from having one hundred twenty five people back to four to five hundred people per shift. It’s really crowded.”

      That worker and others are afraid the company is forcing people back to work who may be sick and could lead to a second virus wave at warehouses. Amazon offers paid leave for workers diagnosed with the virus, and partial pay for those who exhibit symptoms but do not test positive. The Verge noted this week (May 11-15), one shift of workers at IND8 were sent after someone tested positive for COVID-19. It was noted that the facility remained open for the next shift. 

      Despite the thermal monitoring of employees and rigorous disinfecting, IND8 workers are still terrified to come to work. One employee said: “We’re not essential,” said a worker. “Everyone’s like, why are we not shut down?”

      The Verge said workers have recently received “six notifications about positive cases” at IND8. 

      By mid-May, more than 800 Amazon workers across the country have been tested positive for COVID-19. 

    • JC Penney Files For Chapter 11 Bankruptcy
      JC Penney Files For Chapter 11 Bankruptcy

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 19:06

      In what may be one of the most bizarre bankruptcy filings, just hours after JCPenney stock was halted first thing in the morning when everyone was certain the company would announce its has filed its Chapter 11 petition only to read in a bizarre 8K that the company had instead made a $17 million interest payment due on its secured term loan during the 5-day grace period, the iconic retail giant (or maybe not so giant any more) and anchor mall tenant threw in the towel after all to what was a long, drawn out and painful period of fading into irrelevance, and just after 6pm announced it had filed for bankruptcy protection in the Southern District of Texas (docket #20-20182).

      JCPenney joins a parade of retailers including Neiman Marcus, J.Crew and Stage Stores, who have all filed for bankruptcy this month. Other chains like Gap Inc. and Nordstrom Inc. have recently raised billions of dollars in debt to ensure they have the cash to weather the crisis and reopen stores, although it is unclear if they will survive in a bitter war with off-price chains like T.J. Maxx and e-commerce giants such as Amazon.com Inc

      The company, founded by James Cash Penney in 1902, which was once a favorite of middle-class suburban consumers and which operated 846 department stores in 46 states as of Feb 1, had been seeking solutions to address billions of dollars in obligations after revenue evaporated amid government-imposed lockdowns to help stem the Covid-19 pandemic. Store shutdowns since March had choked off JCP’s revenue, putting even more pressure on the company’s massive debt load. After years of falling sales, red ink and failed turnaround efforts, the coronavirus pandemic hastened a reckoning with creditors over its $3.8 billion in debt.

      It failed to find a solution, and as a result it filed a prepackaged Chapter 11 restructuring with lenders holding approximately 70% of JCPenney’s first lien debt to reduce the Company’s outstanding debt and strengthen its financial position. From the press release:

      The RSA contemplates agreed-upon terms for a pre-arranged financial restructuring plan (the “Plan”) that is expected to reduce several billion dollars of indebtedness, provide increased financial flexibility to help navigate through the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, and better position JCPenney for the long-term. To implement the Plan, the Company today filed voluntary petitions for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, in Corpus Christi, TX (the “Court”).

      As part of the bankruptcy, JCP arranged a $900 million DIP loan which includes $450 million of fresh capital. It had been in discussions with some of its largest lenders, including Sixth Street Partners and KKR, Apollo Global and Ares Management, as well as H/2 Capital Partners, who will end up owning the post-reorg equity.

      The financing, combined with cash flow generated by the Company’s ongoing operations, is expected to be sufficient to meet JCPenney’s operational and restructuring needs. As part of the DIP commitment from its existing lenders, “JCPenney will explore additional opportunities to maximize value, including a third-party sale process.”

      JCPenney will also reduce its store footprint “to better align its business with the current operating environment. Stores will close in phases throughout the Chapter 11 process – and the first phase of closures, including specific store details and timing, will be disclosed in the coming weeks.”

      Kirkland & Ellis LLP is serving as legal advisor, Lazard is serving as financial advisor, and AlixPartners LLP is serving as restructuring advisor to the Company.

      The company listed between $1 and $10 billion in estimated assets, the same range of estimate liabilities, and over 100,000 creditors, most of whom are small vendors who hold trade claims against the company and will now have to get in line to get paid at some point in the coming months. In addition to the company’s bondholders, among the biggest trade creditors are Nike, Alfred Dunner and Byer California, with $32MM, $14MM and $12.6MM in claims, respectively.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Penney’s sales, which totaled $10.7 billion in the most recent fiscal year, have fallen each year since 2015, and it hasn’t made an annual profit in nearly a decade. The company skipped two interest payments in recent weeks, setting the clock on a bankruptcy filing.

      Department stores have hammered not only by the secular changes in the . Stage Stores, which operates the Gordmans, Bealls and Goody’s chains in mostly rural towns, is liquidating hundreds of stores when they reopen this month and looking for a buyer. Both Macy’s Inc. and Nordstrom are closing some of their flagship stores.

      Over the past decade, the company had been trying to attract younger shoppers, but it gave up on that goal to focus on winning back middle-aged moms. “They lost their core customer, and they have never been able to get her back,” said Chuck Grom, an analyst with Gordon Haskett Research Advisors. Jill Soltau, who has been CEO since 2018, refocused on apparel and launched a test store in Texas with a fitness studio and videogame lounge.

      Like its formerly largest rival Sears, JCP was for decades a one-stop shop for millions of middle-class families, offering clothes, appliances, gardening equipment, portrait studios and beauty salons. At one point, the WSJ reminds us, it owned a bank and the Eckerd drugstore chain. It was once fixture in American shopping malls and at its peak in the 1970s operated more than 1,600 stores; in a few years nobody will remember the name once all of its big box outlets are either converted into laser tag arcades or are acquired by Amazon.

      With JCPenney’s most liquid bonds trading at roughly 6 cents on the dollar Friday morning, the bankruptcy filling has been fully priced in.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The full bankruptcy filing is below:

    • How COVID-19 Is Forcing Americans Into Early Retirement
      How COVID-19 Is Forcing Americans Into Early Retirement

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 18:50

      Via Birch Gold Group,

      It goes without saying, the economy has been severely damaged as a result of various “stay-at-home” orders in response to COVID-19 (coronavirus).

      One of the emerging ripple effects is that more Americans close to retirement are now considering whether or not to retire early.

      In fact, due to prolonged business shutdowns, some may feel as though the decision is being made for them.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      According to Forbes, even before COVID-19, “More than half of workers will be forced out of the workforce earlier than expected and for reasons out of their control.”

      In light of current economic circumstances, “Will I be forced into early retirement?”may be a good question to ponder.

      The Forbes article also noted that, with more than 22 million people filing for unemployment in just the last few weeks, we may see a large portion of those folks leave the workforce for good.

      Once someone gets to retirement age, the desire to work longer to maintain income and lifestyle seems to dwindle a bit, according to the Forbes piece:

      Only 23% of retirees said they would rather work longer when asked to choose between retiring at age 55, with money just for basic expenses, or working to 75 and having an extravagant lifestyle.

      But even if a retirement saver doesn’t want to work longer, they may not enjoy a forced retirement if they aren’t prepared for it.

      study from Allianz found, “Six in 10 non-retirees said running out of money before they die is one of their biggest worries.” This is an even bigger worry in the aftermath of coronavirus.

      Most Americans are Still Unprepared to “Make the Leap”

      “When retirement starts” is a big concern for most people, according to the Allianz report. In fact, it may impact a retirement saver’s income during retirement, leaving them unprepared for what happens next:

      Lack of clarity about when retirement may start and how time will be spent could have a significant effect on retirement income and whether or not retirees’ money will last as long as they do. This is a concern shared by both pre- and near-retirees as more than half (55%) of non-retirees said they are worried they won’t have enough saved for retirement.

      In other words, more than half of people who are approaching retirement are not actually prepared to make the leap, even if a situation arose where they would be forced into making that decision.

      More disturbing, two-thirds of the study respondents were not saving enough for retirement, while almost 9 out of 10 didn’t have a financial plan:

      “When asked about the top financial choices they are making or planning to make, less than a third (32%) said saving enough in a retirement account, 12% said setting long-term financial goals and only 6% said making a formal financial plan[…]”

      Finally, since the coronavirus has taken hold, equity investments have become an increasingly risky choice. Kelly O’Donnell from Edelman Financial offered a suggestion in a piece on CNBC, focusing on the long-term and diversification:

      What investors need to do is make sure their actual allocations match their long-term goals, she said. “A long-term diversified portfolio has proven to be a great form of retirement savings for most Americans.”

      Certainly, times have changed and there is much to consider, especially if an accelerated retirement is in your future.

    Digest powered by RSS Digest

    Today’s News 15th May 2020

    • The History Of Vaccinations
      The History Of Vaccinations

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 02:45

      More than two centuries ago, on May 14, 1796, the English doctor Edward Jenner carried out what was later proven to have been the first modern-day vaccination, when he injected a young boy with pus from cow pox (or vaccinia virus) blisters on a milkmaid’s hands. This immunized him against smallpox and the virus’ name coined the term “vaccine.”

      Jenner was the first doctor to introduce and scientifically study the smallpox vaccine. But the concept of giving yourself a mild form of the disease to immunize against a harsher form existed as early as 16th century China or early 18th century India.

      With the progress of science in the 20th century, the development of vaccines was accelerating, but, as Statista’s Katharina Buchholz notes, the latter part of the century also gave rise to skepticism and conspiracy theories surrounding vaccines.

      While the disease targeted by the first modern-day vaccine, smallpox, has successfully been eradicated, that feat has not been accomplished for polio and tuberculosis yet…

      Infographic: The History of Vaccinations | Statista

      You will find more infographics at Statista

      WHO data on global vaccine coverage only goes back to 1980 despite humans having experimented with vaccines and inoculations (giving yourself a mild form of a disease to gain immunity) since the 16th century. But strides in global vaccine coverage – defined by the WHO as the share of one-year-olds having received a vaccine – have been made in the last 40 years as well.

      Infographic: The Global Triumph of Vaccines Through the Decades | Statista

      You will find more infographics at Statista

      In 1980 only around 20 percent of children in the world received the vaccines for tuberculosis, DTP (diphtheria/tetanus/whooping cough) and polio. While the former two were developed in the 1920s, the polio vaccine became commercially available in 1961.

      Coverage rates for the three diseases rose to approximately 80 percent in the ten years up until 1990.

      The immunization against hepatitis B, the world’s first genetically modified vaccine, was made available in the early 1980s and also reached a global coverage of 80 percent in 2012.

      Measles vaccinations, on the other hand, have been available since the 1960s but have only reached around 69 percent of children globally (two doses), comparable to the HIB vaccine against a virus causing meningitis, which is now reaching 72 percent of all children worldwide.

    • COVID-Kowtowing & How The EU Is Betraying Europe
      COVID-Kowtowing & How The EU Is Betraying Europe

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 02:00

      Authored by Con Coughlin via The Gatestone Institute,

      The latest capitulation by the European Union in the face of Chinese intimidation demonstrates that, when it comes to protecting the interests of member states, the Brussels bureaucracy is no match for Beijing’s new breed of warrior diplomats.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Since the start of the coronavirus pandemic, one of the more notable features of China’s response has been the willingness of senior Chinese diplomats to intervene forcibly in defence of China’s interests.

      The interventions of these “Wolf Warrior” diplomats, so-called after a series of iconic Chinese action movies in which Chinese special forces vanquish their American foes, take several forms.

      On one level, Chinese ambassadors, particularly those based in Western capitals, simply resort to blackmail, threatening to deny governments vital medical supplies to cope with the pandemic if they do not comply with Beijing’s wishes.

      On another level, they indulge in disseminating fake news, using social media platforms to propagate information that is patently false.

      To deal with the growing menace posed by China’s diplomatic community, it is vital, therefore, that the West take robust action to protect its interests, and to hold China to account for its role in causing the pandemic in the first place, and then trying to cover its culpability by launching a global campaign to conceal the origins of the outbreak.

      Unfortunately, so far as the EU is concerned, the Brussels establishment has proved itself to be little more than a paper tiger when it comes to dealing with China’s more aggressive diplomatic approach, as can be seen from the EU’s most recent act of appeasement towards Beijing. The latest controversy concerns an article written by Nicolas Chapuis, the EU’s ambassador to China, which was conceived to mark the 45th anniversary of EU-China diplomatic relations, and was also signed by all 27 EU country national ambassadors in Beijing.

      The article was written for publication in the state-owned China Daily newspaper, but ran into trouble when China’s foreign ministry objected to a reference in the article which suggested the coronavirus pandemic originated in China. The offending passage referred to the “outbreak of the coronavirus in China, and its subsequent spread to the rest of the world.”

      The article eventually appeared in print, but not before EU officials had agreed to remove this passage, prompting Mr Chapuis to remark, “It is of course regrettable to see that the sentence about the spread of the virus has been edited.”

      The EU’s willingness to concede to Beijing’s bully-boy tactics is not the first time in recent weeks that Brussels has been forced to capitulate to Chinese intimidation. Last month, the EU amended a report into China’s disinformation campaign in Europe following pressure from Chinese officials. This prompted one outraged EU official to complain that the EU was “self-censoring to appease the Chinese Communist Party.”

      In this latest example of Brussels kowtowing to Beijing, the EU only has itself to blame: by seeking to publish the article, it was deliberately seeking to pivot towards China in what appeared to be a European attempt to seize upon a perceived lack of U.S. leadership during the pandemic.

      Apart from making itself look weak and incompetent, the failure to publish the article in full has angered a number of European governments, who have themselves been targeted by Beijing’s aggressive diplomatic tactics. This resulted in the Beijing embassies of countries such as Germany, France and Italy publishing the letter in full, complete with the reference originating in China and spreading from there to the rest of the world.

      All these countries have good reason to want to stand their ground against Beijing. Italy has been the target of a skilful fake news campaign by Beijing with cleverly edited videos that show Italians showing their gratitude for China’s help in the pandemic when no such demonstrations took place.

      The French government was outraged after the Chinese embassy in Paris accused French care-workers of abandoning their posts, thereby causing elderly residents to die; while Germany has complained that Chinese diplomats tried to pressure officials to make positive statements on how Beijing was handling the coronavirus pandemic.

      As the EU, by constantly capitulating to Beijing’s demands, has shown it is totally incapable of protecting the interests of member states, the governments of Europe are finally waking up to the reality that, in order to defend themselves against China’s bully-boy tactics, they will have to look after themselves.

    • E-Democracy: The 2020 Presidential Election Gets More Bizarre
      E-Democracy: The 2020 Presidential Election Gets More Bizarre

      Tyler Durden

      Fri, 05/15/2020 – 00:05

      Authored by Tim Kirby via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

      The Covid-19 pandemic continues to dominate the news and life of the American Republic. With currently no end in sight it is not paranoid to wonder if and how the pandemic will affect the presidential elections coming up in November. Two World Wars, The Civil War, The Great Depression and the Spanish Flu were not enough to stop voting for some congressmen and the top executive of the United States as planned. Now for the first time there are rumors moving about that there could be a major delay for voting nationwide.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      On a state level delays have happened a few times in history but there is no precedent for this happening on a national scale. This lack of precedent in dealing with this sort of situation could create room for certain “opportunities” that will be mostly detrimental to the future of America.

      Manchurian vs. Muscovite Candidates in 2020

      Even without the Covid-19 issue, Trump was, and could be again, bogged down by accusations of ties to Russia or working in Russian interests in the run up to election night. This naive “the Russians are coming” narrative was very effectively sold onto the Democrats so much so that they all started to actually believe their own absurdity. In fact the Department of Homeland Security and Trump’s eternal antagonists in the FBI have put together a document titled “Possible Russian Tactics Ahead of 2020 US Election”. And when big government agencies write “possible” they mean “confirmed” especially when that is the desired reality that they want. The stage is being set for Russiagate 2.0. It sort of worked to a degree the first time so why not try it again?

      Now that Trump has experienced a delegitimization campaign via accusations from the Democrats the simplest defense would be to in turn accuse his opponent Biden and every other Democrat he has ever spoken to of being servants of China. Reason cannot triumph over madness, only more madness will do the trick.

      Mainstream News Media loves to draw charts and connections between politicians and Russia based on the fact that some people, at some time have spoken to each other and gone to the same cocktail parties – guilt by association. Furthermore for the racist MSM, all Russians count as being agents of Putin/The Kremlin. No Russian businessman every works in his own interests, somehow they are all hive minded agents. This means that Trump is very free to throw the same guilt by association tactics at the Democrats for their contact with any person even remotely connected to China. If you draw enough red lines on pretty graphics connecting people, that is good enough to get a conviction nowadays. Trump is very likely to use any connections between the Democrats and China benign or validly suspicious to his advantage. Fighting fire with fire actually works when running for office.

      In fact, this election cycle could very well cement a new wedge issue for American politics – whom our traitors serve, Russia or China? Or maybe more simply who is the big enemy, Russia or China? It will be very refreshing to finally get a new wedge issue, guns and abortion have gotten very repetitive.

      There is a certain danger in going into an election with both sides accusing the other of being traitors – it utterly delegitimizes the elections and could delegitimize the American establishment, killing the Golden Goose of Stability that continues to lay eggs. Will lobbing accusations of treason in Washington definitely cause a collapse of the system – probably not, but it does knock on the door of that possibility which is unacceptably dangerous. If we convince the American people and establishment that the elections are completely controlled by foreign powers that is bound to have an impact.

      Trump Must Go!?

      The presidential inauguration happening in January, 72-78 days after election night, seems like a very good amount of padding, even for “Democracy” in a pre-internet world, but the Coronavirus is holding put. In theory Trump would have to step down if his time runs out during an electoral delay and the Presidency would go down the line of succession until it hits a viable candidate. But what if Trump feels that something is afoot and maybe leaving without an election is not in his or America’s best interests?

      Of the U.S. presidents there is some debate as to whom among them is the most hated during their time in office by the other side. Lincoln made just a few enemies down south, Hoover got blamed for the economy collapsing, but the hatred for Trump is also top tier. If a delay happened during Reagan’s rule there would be no ramifications. The old actor staying in power two more months or so would be quickly forgotten, but Trump’s enemies despise him and will use any excuse to make sure he goes away forever.

      The elections being put off for months opens the door to the very worst of dynamics, one half of the population chanting “he must go” while the other half chants “he must stay”. These situations are what lead to Color Revolutions succeeding in poor weak nations. The elections must happen on time to completely eliminate any possibility of this situation arising.

      E-Democracy is the Worst Answer to the Problem

      The American electoral system with its Gerrymandering, Hanging Chads, Buttigieg’s “Shadow” over the Iowa Caucus, and Sanders’ mysteriously candidacy denial in 2016 has problems to say the least. The voting system we Americans “enjoy” is far from perfect, but the scary possible answer to America being locked down on election night is a form of “Electronic Democracy”, which due to its intangible and vulnerable nature would be manipulable on a scale not even Boss Hogg could dream of.

      The answer to 1776 is not 1984 and if anything needs to be protested it would be any efforts by the government to make elections “go digital”. Ironically such a move would actually be the way that the Chinese and Russians could actually get the guy they want in the Oval Office.

      The American electoral system could benefit from standardization, or at least fixing many of the problems on a state level, but any electronic “solution” will be a massive step in the wrong direction.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Vote Now Do Not Delay

      Although it technically risks lives, it is critical for real American security to get the election done on time. Any delay will open up lots of opportunities for something to ruin America’s long-term stability which is worth the cost of a potential handful of Covid casualties. The rhetoric between the Democrats and Republicans is dangerous with its growing narrative that America is being taken over foreign influence. Trump needs to either be re-elected or leave on time as to not spark some sort of need to overthrow him, or just revolt against him “holding onto power by delaying”. Furthermore, Electronic Democracy is a nightmarish farce that should not come to pass as it would actually make the quality of American elections go from problem ridden to worthless.

      The potential human losses that could be inflicted by voting on time are worth it.

    • 'Robot Bows, Customer Bows' – Sushi Bar Deploys Robotic Arm For Contactless Pickup Orders 
      ‘Robot Bows, Customer Bows’ – Sushi Bar Deploys Robotic Arm For Contactless Pickup Orders 

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 23:45

      OpenTable restaurant data continues to show most foot traffic at eateries across America at near zero. There are some signs of life in Naples, Tampa, Houston, and Dallas. But for most of the country, pickup or curbside delivery has been the norm for the last several months. 

      At Bleu Sushi in Philadelphia, those who are picking up delivery are now greeted with a robot arm that will hand them their order. This allows owner Hendra Yong and his staff to practice strict “safety protocols during the coronavirus pandemic while also having a little fun,” said Eater Philly

      “We wanted to keep serving customers, in a safe way. So we came up with this idea. I can see people’s surprise when they come because no one else is doing this,” Yong said. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Bleu Sushi owner Hendra Yong with his newest employee, Bleu Bot. h/t Eater Philly Rachel Vigoda 

      “When the robot bows, the customer bows,” he said. “It’s kind of funny to watch.”

      Yong ordered the robot from Japan with the purpose of contactless pickup. He said there are still many functions that he’s trying to figure out but says the robot is here to stay. 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      In the last month, we noted how a supermarket in the city took sanitizing to an entirely new level by dunking shopping carts into large vats of disinfectants to give customers the peace of mind that they won’t contract the deadly virus. Last week, another supermarket installed “tent-like plastic enclosures” around cashier booths to keep essential workers safe while interacting with customers at checkout lines. 

      It’s clear that a post-corona world is quickly changing the economy and how people interact with each other. It remains to be seen if social distancing will slow economic growth. 

    • New Facial Recognition Software Predicts You're A Criminal Based On Your Looks
      New Facial Recognition Software Predicts You’re A Criminal Based On Your Looks

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 23:25

      Authored by Alan Macleod via MintPressNews.com,

      A team from the University of Harrisburg, PA, has developed automated computer facial recognition software that they claim can predict with 80 percent accuracy and “no racial bias” whether a person is likely going to be a criminal, purely by looking at a picture of them.

      “By automating the identification of potential threats without bias, our aim is to produce tools for crime prevention, law enforcement, and military applications,” they said, declaring that they were looking for “strategic partners” to work with to implement their product.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      In a worrying use of words, the team in their own press release, move from referring to those the software recognizes as being “likely criminals” to “criminals” in the space of just one sentence, suggesting they are confident in the discredited racist pseudoscience of phrenology they appear to have updated for the 21st century.

      Public reaction to the project was less than enthusiastic, judging by comments left on Facebook, which included “Societies have been trying to push the idea of ‘born criminals’ for centuries,” “and this isn’t profiling because……?” and “20 percent getting tailed by police constantly because they have the ‘crime face.’” Indeed, the response was so negative that the university pulled the press release from the internet. However, it is still visible using the Internet Wayback Machine.

      While the research team claims to be removing bias and racism from decision making, leaving it up to a faceless algorithm, those who write the code, and those who get to decide who constitutes a criminal in the first place, certainly do have their own biases. Why are the homeless or people of color who “loiter” on sidewalks criminalized, but senators and congresspersons who vote for wars and regime change operations not? And who is more likely to be arrested? Wall Street executives doing cocaine in their offices or working-class people smoking marijuana or crack? The higher the level of a person in society, the more serious and harmful their crimes become, but the likelihood of an arrest and a custodial sentence decreases. Black people are more likely to be arrested for the same crime as white people and are sentenced to longer stays in prison, too. Furthermore, facial recognition software is notorious for being unable to tell people of color apart, raising further concerns.

      Crime figures are greatly swayed by whom the police choose to follow and what they decide to prioritize. For example, a recent study found 97.5 percent of Brooklyn residents arrested for breaking social distancing laws were people of color. Meanwhile, an analysis of 95 million traffic stops found that police officers were far more likely to stop black people during the daytime when their race could be determined from afar. As soon as dusk hit, the disparity greatly diminished, as a “veil of darkness” saved them from undue harassment, according to researchers. Thus, the population of people convicted of crimes does not necessarily correspond to the population that commits them.

      The 2002 hit movie Minority Report is set in a future world where the government’s pre-crime division stops all murders well before they happen, with future criminals locked up preemptively. Even if accurate, is an 80 percent accuracy rate worth risking the creation of a dystopian Minority Report-style society where people are monitored and arrested for pre-crimes?

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Phrenology, the long-abandoned study of the size and shape of the head, has a long and sordid history of dangerous racist and elitist pseudoscience. For instance, Cesare Lombroso’s 1876 book, Criminal Man, told students that large jaws and high cheekbones were a feature of “criminals, savages and apes,” and was a sure sign of the “love of orgies and the irresistible craving for evil for its own sake, the desire not only to extinguish life in the victim, but to mutilate the corpse, tear its flesh, and drink its blood.” Meanwhile, rapists nearly always have jug ears, delicate features, swollen lips, and hunchbacks. Lombroso himself was a professor in psychiatry and criminal anthropology and his book were taught in universities for decades. To Lombroso, it was almost impossible for a good-looking person to commit a serious crime.

      The latest technological development from the University of Harrisburg appears to be an updated, “algorithmic phrenology,” repackaging a dangerous idea for the 21st century, all the more noteworthy because they are trying to sell it to law enforcement as an unbiased tool helping society.

    • Restaurants Betting On Vaccine To Reopen Will Be Disappointed  
      Restaurants Betting On Vaccine To Reopen Will Be Disappointed  

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 23:05

      Some restaurateurs, those who are surviving the severe economic downturn, because as we’ve noted, restaurants are getting fried during lockdowns, have said they will reopen dining halls when a proven vaccine is mass-produced for the general population. Now the issue, there is no clear timetable on when a treatment or vaccine will be ready — an uncertainty that could prove disastrous industrywide. 

      Danny Meyer, a restaurateur in New York City with 19 eateries, said his dining halls would remain closed until a COVID-19 vaccine is seen. 

      Of the 19 restaurants, he owns Gramercy Tavern and Union Square Café, two pricey restaurants in Manhattan. He told Bloomberg that all of his eateries were shuttered in early March due to the public health crisis. 

      “We won’t be welcoming guests into our full-service restaurants for a very long time—probably not until there’s a vaccine,” Meyer said. “There is no interest or excitement on my part to having a half-full dining room while everyone is getting their temperature taken and wearing masks, for not much money.”

      “It’s very frustrating, but it’s the only safe way to go,” he adds. This gloomy outlook is also shared by fellow restaurateur Daniel Humm, who may permanently close Eleven Madison Park.

      With the restaurant industry on life-support, hopes for a vaccine were dashed on Wednesday when Dr. Anthony Fauci noted several caveats, one being that Gilead’s remdesivir has proven to be a “modest success” by the results so far – it’s not the ‘game-changer’ as Wall Street likes to believe. He said some of the vaccine trials could cause harm to test subjects while listing at least eight vaccines (including Moderna’s) in some stage of development.

      Dr. Fauci said more details about the trails would be known by late fall or early winter. 

      As for President Trump, he’s on Twitter Thursday morning trying to pump the stock market with tweets about “VERY promising” vaccines “before the end of the year.” 

      A proven vaccine by the fourth quarter is possibly the best and most optimistic scenario, though JPMorgan’s core assumption is that one “could take 12-16 months” — which would mean a vaccine could be seen in the back half of 2021. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Rick Bright, the top federal vaccine official who claims he was ousted for criticizing President Trump’s response to the virus pandemic, told a House hearing on Thursday that “2020 will be (the) darkest winter in modern history.” 

      What’s worse, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson recently warned treatment or vaccine might be more than a year away – and in fact, may never arrive. 

      “A mass vaccine or treatment may be more than a year away. Indeed, in a worst-case scenario, we may never find a vaccine,” said Johnson. “So our plan must countenance a situation where we are in this, together, for the long haul, even while doing all we can to avoid that outcome.”

      WHO’s Dr. Mike Ryan warned this week that the virus is bouncing around the population like HIV or a supercharged version of the common cold until a vaccine can be mass-produced.

      Restaurants are making a good call to exclude the opening of dining halls, and many have opted to rework their business models to include carryout. 

      For restaurants waiting for a COVID-19 vaccine to reopen, we note that seventeen years after the severe acute respiratory syndrome (Sars) outbreak and seven years since the first Middle East respiratory syndrome (Mers) case, there is still none. 

      What’s becoming clear is that a mass-produced vaccine is not a 2020 story. Bright told a House hearing on Thursday that a 12-18 month vaccine timeline is still very “aggressive.” Restaurants are doomed, and judging by the shockingly easy spread of viruses as we detailed earlier, it will be a long time before anything like ‘normal’ is back.

       

    • How New York Turned Nursing Homes Into 'Slaughter Houses'
      How New York Turned Nursing Homes Into ‘Slaughter Houses’

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 22:45

      Authored by Jon Miltimore via The Libertarian Institute/FEE,

      At an April 23 press conference, Gov. Andrew Cuomo sounded indignant when a reporter asked if anyone had objected to New York’s policy of forcing nursing homes to admit recently discharged COVID-19 patients.

      “They don’t have the right to object,” Cuomo answered before the reporter finished his question. “That is the rule, and that is the regulation, and they have to comply with it.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      New York isn’t the only state to adopt a policy ordering long-term care facilities to admit COVID-19-infected patients discharged from hospitals. New Jersey, Massachusetts, and California —three states also hit particularly hard by the novel coronavirus —passed similar policies to free up hospital beds to make room for sicker patients.

      The practice is coming under increased scrutiny by health experts and family members of deceased patients who say the orders needlessly put the most susceptible populations at risk.

      “The whole thing has just been handled awfully… by everybody in regard to nursing homes,” said Kathleen Cole, a nurse who recently lost her 89-year-old mother who lived at Ferncliff Nursing Home in Rhinebeck, New York: 

      “It’s like a slaughterhouse at these places.”

      Cole, who shared her story with the Bucks County Courier Timestold the paper her mother, Dolores McGoldrick, became infected with COVID-19 on April 2 after Ferncliff re-admitted a resident who had been discharged in late March. Two weeks later her mother, a former school teacher, was dead.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      McGoldrick is one of nearly five thousand COVID-19 victims who died in New York nursing homes, according to new figures from The New York Times. New York’s high nursing home death toll is not an outlier. California recently released data showing that some 40 percent of California’s COVID-19 fatalities have come from eldercare homes. In Pennsylvania, nursing homes account for 65 percent of COVID-19 deaths. Both states, like New York, had orders in place that required nursing homes to admit recently released COVID-19 patients.

      These results are not surprising to some. Health experts and trade associations had warned early on that forcing nursing homes to take on newly discharged COVID-19 patients was a recipe for disaster, noting that such facilities didn’t have the ability to properly quarantine the infected.

      “This approach will introduce the highly contagious virus into more nursing homes. There will be more hospitalizations for nursing home residents who need ventilator care and ultimately, a higher number of deaths. Issuing such an order is a mistake and there is a better solution,” American Health Care Association President and CEO Mark Parkinson announced in March after New York’s order went into effect.

      David Grabowski, a professor of health policy at Harvard Medical School, sounded incredulous when asked about the policy.

      “Nursing homes are working so hard to keep the virus out, and now we’re going to be introducing new COVID-positive patients?” Grabowski told NBC.

      Richard Mollot, executive director of the Long Term Care Community Coalition in New York, echoed that sentiment.

      “To have a mandate that nursing homes accept COVID-19 patients has put many people in grave danger,” Mollot told the Bucks County Courier Times.

      The question, of course, is why states began ordering nursing homes to take in COVID-19 infected residents. The one thing we know of COVID-19, and have known from the beginning, is that the virus is particularly deadly for the elderly and people with compromised immune systems.

      State leaders will have to answer that question themselves. But one answer might be that central planning is inherently irrational.

      The Nobel Prize-winning economist F.A. Hayek observed that the problem with trying to centrally plan economies and other complex social orders is that central planners cannot possibly access, comprehend, and weigh the vast amount of information relevant to their sweeping decisions.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      The only way to cope with this “knowledge problem” is by bringing to bear the special knowledge that each individual has about the matters he or she is intimately familiar with. And that can only happen through decentralized processes, like the market price system.

      This lesson has been lost on many, but particularly so on politicians and bureaucrats who imagine they possess the knowledge to design a more perfect social order. As Hayek famously explained in The Fatal Conceit:

      The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design. To the naive mind that can conceive of order only as the product of deliberate arrangement, it may seem absurd that in complex conditions order, and adaptation to the unknown, can be achieved more effectively by decentralizing decisions and that a division of authority will actually extend the possibility of overall order. Yet that decentralization actually leads to more information being taken into account.

      This is why individuals are more competent decision-makers about their own affairs than governments. For this reason, a society that removes decision-making from individuals and places it in the hands of central planners invites disorder and endangerment, the economist Thomas Sowell has observed.

      “It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong,” wrote Sowell.

      Media were quick to describe the nursing home tragedy as a “market failure,” pointing out that 70 percent of nursing homes in the US are for-profit. This is hardly a market failure, however. Long-term care facilities saw the danger and warned public officials what would happen.

      What were they told?

      “That is the rule, and that is the regulation,” Cuomo told them, “and they have to comply with it.”

      Gov. Cuomo and other officials responsible for these policies are guilty of Hayek’s fatal conceit. In their hubris, they presumed to know enough to centrally plan a complex society’s response to a complex pandemic, and to know more than individuals with local knowledge, industry expertise, and skin in the game, like the elder care experts and businesspeople who tried to warn policymakers about the disastrous effects the policy would have.

      This presumption may stem from another kind of conceit: the dictatorial arrogance on display when Cuomo indignantly insisted that unquestioning compliance was the only appropriate response to his mandate.

      Tragically, that conceit was quite literally fatal for many of the most vulnerable members of society.

    • Life After Lockdown – Get Ready For "Social Bubbles" 
      Life After Lockdown – Get Ready For “Social Bubbles” 

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 22:25

      Governments are preparing for a post-corona world. They are relaxing social distancing rules, and public health experts have been figuring out how people should proceed with socializing. One solution could be “social bubbles,” which means small groups of people will be allowed to socialize with each other outside their household regularly. 

      Europe could be the first continent to implement the new scheme. The UK government is calling it “10 friends and family” strategy. This would enable people to socialize with ten friends and family for sporting activities, having a beer, and or even having dinner. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      According to the Belgian newspaper Le Soir, the new strategy in reopening the economy while keeping the curve flatten was first examined by the Belgian government. The idea is to limit socialization in the immediate weeks and months after lockdowns are lifted to a small group. This will hopefully lower the probability of contracting the virus.

      Psychologist Dr. Linda Papadopoulos is optimistic about social bubbles:

      “At the start of COVID-19, people would have been like, ‘Are you kidding me? This is ridiculous!'” Papadopoulos told Market Watch. “But when we’ve not been allowed to see anybody bar immediate family for close to two months, I think people will see it as progress and a welcome development.”

      Rory Sutherland, a behavioral scientist and vice chairman of the advertising agency Ogilvy, noted: “The proposal [social bubbles] makes perfect sense from an epidemiological perspective.”

      “From a psychological perspective,” said Sutherland, “I am not sure that it works at all. … Any group assembling could simply claim that everyone present was part of the same cluster, and without spectacular levels of bureaucracy, it would be impossible to establish the veracity of this. It would re-establish the sight of large groups of people as a norm.”

      He added, “I think it falls into that category of “excellent science, bad policy.”

      Stefan Flasche, associate professor for the department of infectious disease epidemiology at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, detailed in a recent blog post the importance of exclusivity within these bubbles

      Flasche noted how lockdowns were extremely hard for his young daughter, explaining how at her age, with limited digital communication that “her social life is very much centered around close physical contact with her best friends.”

      He said allowing her to see her friends would “tremendously help her mental health and social development,” and he noted private playgroups could be formed. 

      This “social contact clustering for children would allow them to mingle with their friends while only adding a rather marginal risk for coronavirus infection from, or transmission to, those outside of the playgroup and their respective households,” Flasche said.

      Furthermore, do not worry about the enforcement of these bubbles; the government could use smartphone app(s) to track and trace bubble violaters

    • China Releases A Whole Lot Of Made Up Economic "Data", "Markets" Fail To Respond
      China Releases A Whole Lot Of Made Up Economic “Data”, “Markets” Fail To Respond

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 22:22

      It’s that time of the month when the goalseekotron in China’s NBS (which stands for National Bureau of Statistics and not Nonstop Bullshit) gets hyperactive and China spews out a whole lot of numbers that are supposed to represent the Beijing politburo’s model of how China’s economy should work at this moment. These include retail sales, industrial production, property investment, as well as unemployment, capex, and a bunch of other things we already forgot, and for some reason are closely followed by very serious analysts, and sometimes even move markets.

      Which is why it is out obligation to inform you that this is what China “reported” moments ago as part of its April “economic” “data” dump.

      • Industrial Output +3.9% Y/y; beat exp. +1.5%; up from -1.1% in March:
      • Retail sales -7.5% y/y; miss exp. -6%, up from -15.8%
      • Jan.-April fixed-asset investment excluding rural households -10.3% y/y; miss exp. -10%, and up from -16.1% in Jan.-March.
      • Jan.-April property investment -3.3% y/y vs -7.7% in Jan.-March
      • End-April surveyed jobless rate 6.0% vs 5.9% in March

      Visually:

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Now, we could provide some commentary – either pithy and incisive or profound and in-depth – on these data, but since this is all just made up numbers in some excel spreadsheet located in Beijing (perhaps one infected by some deadly Chinese visual basic virus), we won’t bother – especially when observing that after the biggest contraction in Chinese economic history the unemployment rate “soared” from 5% to 6%, we won’t, and instead will show what real time economic trackers show for China’s industrial and consumer activity, and let readers make their own conclusions.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      And since all the “data” is made up anyway, it is only fitting that the made up “market” did not even bother to respond.

    • What Is The Right "Letter" To Describe The Recovery? What A Stupid Question
      What Is The Right “Letter” To Describe The Recovery? What A Stupid Question

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 22:05

      For the past month, there has been an obsession by traders and strategists to “package” this cycle into one of the typical “letters” – V, U or L; perhaps W or even a “Nike swoosh.” Mocking the armchair “letterists”, Investing legend Paul Singer said to go ahead and call it a “Q-shaped recovery”:

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Clearly this is a ridiculous exercise, and trying to boil down a global economy, with quadrillions in fund flows, into a simplistic ‘shape’ that even a central banker can understand, is an exercise fit for an idiot or any other full-time central bank employee.

      Which is why Bank of America has taken a different approach, and instead of letters, its economists are thinking about the trajectory in phases. According to them, we are now past the first phase – the shutdown – and squarely in the second phase, which is one of a transitioning economy. The last stage is the recovery which will be driven by three factors: path of the virus, degree of offsetting stimulus and residual economic damage.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      So instead of letters, here are the 3 phases of the shutdown as defined by BofA:

      • Phase 1: The shutdown. This started in mid-March as lockdown orders were put in place, resulting in a dramatic decline in economic activity. Over the month of March, $1.1 trillion dollars were lost from a pullback in consumer spending. The unemployment rate jumped to 14.7% with more than 20 million jobs lost between March and April. This phase was completed in April as suggested by the stabilization in aggregated BAC card data, leveling off in small business closures according to Homebase, and a peak in initial jobless claims.
      • Phase 2: The transition. This phase started in May and will be a story of a transition with the weakness spilling from consumer spreading to the broader economy. The BAC aggregated card data show that consumer spending inflected higher as stimulus was delivered and businesses shifted online. However, there likely will be spillover effects as the pain in the household sector leads to a downturn in housing construction. Investment likely will also weaken as businesses pull back on capex and energy investment turns down. Re-escalation of the trade war looms in the background as an additional risk. There is also a risk that state & local governments fall under stress and begin to cut back. In this phase, the unemployment rate comes off the peak but remains uncomfortably elevated. This phase goes from mid 2Q to 3Q.
      • Phase 3: The recovery. In this last phase the economy reopens and businesses come back to life, bringing back workers. The strength of the recovery will depend highly on three factors: the path of the virus, the degree of stimulus and the extent of residual damage on the economy. The greatest uncertainty surrounds this phase.

      Phase 3: looks like a recovery, feels like a recession

      The bank’s economists are most concerned about the third phase. After the initial bounce from the bottom upon reopening, the economy needs to find a sounder footing to progress further. The risk is that it plateaus thereafter for a period of time, entering a recovery period of fits and starts; Ultimately, it will boil down to three factors, explained below:

      Phase 3: looks like a recovery, feels like a recession

      The third phase leaves us the most concerned. After the initial bounce from the bottom upon reopening, the economy needs to find a sounder footing to progress further. We think the risk is that it plateaus thereafter for a period of time, entering a recovery period of fits and starts. We think it will boil down to three factors, explained below:

      Path of the virus:

      The path of COVID-19 will be the most critical part of the equation to understand the path of the recovery. Health experts are warning that the COVID-19 curve – either measured by the number of cases or deaths – will naturally increase as the lockdown measures are eased; the question is whether this leads to renewed lockdowns based on either data or political interference. The slope of the curve matters. A rapid steepening of the virus, similar to the second phase of the Spanish Flu, could lead to another round of lockdowns, forcing businesses to close once again and crushing what is left of animal spirits.

      The goal is clearly to avoid such a negative outcome. The White House Coronavirus Task Force along with numerous health experts have outlined steps to a successful reopening, which include meeting a low enough level of COVID cases and implementing sufficient virus testing and contact tracing. Roughly 24 states have already eased social distancing policies in some form, kicking off the reopening process. Unfortunately many states have not met the criteria to reopen, which could put people in a place of having to weigh the tradeoffs between health and personal finances. Indeed, survey data suggests that even as states open up, activity will be slow to resume. According to CivicScience, while more than a third of workers feel comfortable returning to work now, consumers are hesitant to resume many typical activities such as traveling, eating out or going to a major sporting event for some time (Chart 3).

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      While BofA thinks it is unlikely that we will return to a blanket shelter-in-place policy, we could see “two steps forward, one step back” when it comes to the reopening. There will be some form of social distancing in place until there is a vaccine which could take 2 years, if not more. This will lead to cautious behavior including greater savings and therefore a slow and rocky recovery.

      Degree of stimulus:

      The policy response has been forceful thus far with around $2.8tn of stimulus on the fiscal front and a $2.4tn expansion of the Fed’s balance sheet. The stimulus put in place has been aimed at stabilizing the economy – to offset the loss of income from the private sector and get credit to flow through the financial system.

      The job is not over. The fiscal stimulus will fade in the summer and will likely need to be ramped up again. The expanded unemployment insurance of $600/week expires at the end of July while the expanded eligibility runs through the end of the year. However, that may not be sufficient on either metric, and these benefits will be extended, but perhaps adjusted to taper the $600/week added benefit until it is phased out. Also, the Payroll Protection Program (PPP) may need to extend the June 30th deadline to support small businesses with payroll and operating costs during the initial reopening phase. There will also need to be support for state & local governments to avoid coming cuts.

      The Fed has also been active in capital markets and will soon be kicking off the Main Street Lending Facility, but BofA expects even more intervention by the central bank. Recent comments suggest the Fed is considering ways to support nonprofit organization as well as universities and colleges.

      Residual damage to the economy:

      One of the ways that the shock ripples through the economy is through bankruptcies. Given the extreme degree of dislocation, the economy needs to prepare for the failure of many businesses, resulting in permanent damage to real activity. Looking to corporate bond markets, BofA believes that the credit cycle should be at least as damaging as recent recessions, which means a 21% cumulative default rate and 8-10% of fallen angel downgrades from Investment Grade BBBs per year. With every passing day, the risks are growing that credit losses will exceed those estimates.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Meanwhile, we are likely to see even more destruction at the small business level. A recent CNBC survey found that 13% of small businesses would fold in less than a month under current lockdown conditions, and another 31% if it persisted for a few months. Similarly, the Society for Human Resource Management’s (SHRM) survey found that 12% of small businesses would need to shut down in under a month in this environment, 20% more under 3 months, and another 20% under 6 months.

      That said, there are programs in place that should help mitigate the damage including the Fed’s corporate credit facilities and Main Street Lending Facility. However, the details of the Main Street Lending Facility are still be ironed out, and it is hard to say how successful it will prove to be. The Payroll Protection Program (PPP) is designed to bridge the gap for small businesses (< 500 employees), but it appears that demand is exceeding the amount of funds allocated to the program and although the funds will help cover payroll costs, there will still be the strain of other expenses which might make staying in business unviable.

      Bankruptcies are likely to be more disruptive and painful for certain industries than others. Naturally there is concern over retail, which was suffering prior to the COVID recession. Additionally, certain service companies such as restaurants and hospitality are at risk. This can leave workers displaced and struggling to find employment that fits their skill set. Of the total net jobs lost thus far in the cycle, 38% have been in leisure and hospitality and another 10% in retail (Chart 4). One has to therefore worry about the path of commercial real estate which creates another path for the shock to multiply. We are concerned about the adverse feedback loop that can be triggered by bankruptcies.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Bottom line: This cycle does not fit a mold. The downturn was painful and abrupt. There are now signs of life in the economy upon reopening. But the last stage of the cycle – the true recovery – will be challenging.

       

    • Amid Gold Market Turmoil, HSBC Taps Bank Of England For GLD Bars
      Amid Gold Market Turmoil, HSBC Taps Bank Of England For GLD Bars

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 21:45

      Submitted by Ronan Manly, BullionStar.com

      During March and April, amid global financial turmoil, unprecedented demand for physical gold, refinery closures and a London lockdown, one question on the minds of many in the gold market was how HSBC London, the vault custodian of the SPDR Gold Trust (GLD), was consistently able to source huge amounts of gold bars to back the enormous inflows into the world’s largest gold-backed Exchange Traded Fund (ETF).

      173 tonnes during London Lockdown

      From Monday 23 March (the day Boris Johnson triggered the UK and London lockdown) to close of business 12 May, the SPDR Gold Trust claims to have taken in a massive inflow of 175 tonnes of gold bars, swelling its gold holdings from 908 tonnes to 1083 tonnes.

      That’s an addition of approximately 14,065 large Good Delivery gold bars since 23 March, each weighing 400 troy ozs, which would take up 29 stacks of pallets, each 6 pallets high, and is more than three times the amount of gold pallets labelled in the below photo.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      175 tonnes of gold is over three times more than all the stacked pallets numbered in this photo. Each pallet contains 1 tonne of gold, with 6 pallets stacked being 6 tonnes.

      The time period of these GLD gold bar inflows was also not ‘business as usual’ in the London gold market despite what the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) may have you think, coinciding as it did with London gold spot liquidity problems (LBMA market maker bid-ask spreads and COMEX futures – spot gold spreads both reaching nearly $100 on 24 March) and a period in which no one else around the world was able to get their hands on physical gold in large quantities.

      It also came at a time in which HSBC now reveals that it had a $200 million one-day loss due to what HSBC describes as:

      “unprecedented widening of the gold exchange-for-physical basis, reflecting Covid-19-related challenges in gold refining and transportation, which affected HSBC’s gold leasing and financing business and other gold hedging activity leading to mark-to-market losses. “

      So how did HSBC manage to source so much gold for the GLD during these times? Having gold in the right place at the right time? Using a proverbial forklift truck to shunt 173 pallets of gold from one side of a secretive vault in London to the other during the London lockdown? Or begging and borrowing the gold from anywhere it could find it?

      Lender of Last Resort – Bank of England

      On some recent days it appears to have been the latter, for buried deep within the latest SPDR Gold Trust (GLD) quarterly SEC filing (10Q), filed on 8 May, we see the following admission from the Trust’s Sponsor, World Gold Trust Services (the US subsidiary of the World Gold Council):

      “Since April 15, 2020, gold was held by a subcustodian (the Bank of England), and the greatest amount of gold held on April 27, 2020 was approximately 45.91 tonnes or 4.4% of the Trust’s gold.”

      This means that during April, HSBC  used nearly 46 tonnes of gold stored in the Bank of England  gold vaults to add to the SPDR Gold Trust, instead of using gold at HSBC’s own commercial London vault.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      GLD 10-Q, Filed 8 May 2020

      And why is this important? It’s important because it implies that:

      a) there isn’t enough gold in the HSBC vault in London to fulfill SPDR Gold Trust basket creation requests from GLD Authorized Participants (APs).

      b) that gold which is ultimately borrowed central bank gold at the Bank of England is being used as a source of GLD gold holdings.

      c) that there are physical gold float shortages in the London physical gold market as well as liquidity problems of LBMA market makers in the London paper gold market.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      HSBC’s secretive Vault – An Open and Shut case?

      Looking first at a), the GLD creation process is as follows. When Authorized Participants (APs) of the SPDR Gold Trust want new baskets of GLD shares to sell to investors, they transfer unallocated gold (gold credit) to the Trust, after which HSBC London then allocates the equivalent physical gold from its vault inventory to the SPDR Gold Trust account.

      The fact that since mid April, HSBC has directed its custodian, the Bank of England, to allocate gold bars stored in the Bank of England vaults to the SPDR Gold Trust when processing Authorized Participant GLD creation requests implies that the HSBC London vault has not had sufficient gold inventory to provide at a minimum 45.91 tonnes gold bars to the SPDR Gold Trust (as of 27 April), and because of this had had to revert to using the gold of the GLD sub-custodian (the Bank of England).

      From the GLD Prospectus:

      “The subcustodians that the Custodian currently uses are the Bank of England, The Bank of Nova Scotia-ScotiaMocatta, ICBC Standard Bank London, JPMorgan Chase Bank and UBS AG.”

      The fact that HSBC had to source gold at the Bank of England subcustodian and not from one of the commercial vaults also puts in doubt the ability of the other SPDR Gold Trust sub-custodians (JP Morgan ChaseICBC Standard Bank, ScotiaMocatta and UBS) as sources for providing sufficient physical gold to GLD during this time. Note that JP Morgan and ICBC Standard have their own vaults in London but Scotia and UBS do not.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Gold-backed ETFS entail many risks, the use of sub-custodians among them

       

      Access to ‘Liquidity’

      That gold in the Bank of England vaults is ultimately borrowed central bank gold, can be seen by the fact that commercial bank members of the LBMA hold gold accounts at the Bank of England specifically so that they can engage in gold lending with central banks (the central banks lend the gold and the commercial banks borrow the gold). This is something the Bank of England and the LBMA euphemistically refer to as ‘liquidity’ provision.

      As the Bank of England says:

      “We provide gold accounts to certain commercial firms that facilitate access for central banks to the London gold market.”

      And as the Bank of England also says:

      “By offering allocated accounts to commercial banks, we allow central banks to access the liquidity of the London gold market and trade directly with the commercial banks”

      And as the LBMA states:

      “the Bank of England offers gold custodial services to central banks and certain commercial firms that faciliate central bank access to the liquidity of the London gold market.

      Those clearing members without their own vault operations – Scotiabank and UBS – utilise their accounts with one of the LBMA custodians or the Bank of England (BoE)”.

      The 5 commercial bank members of the bullion clearing group London Precious Metals Clearing Limited (LPMCL), i.e. HSBC, JP Morgan, ICBC Standard, Scotia and UBS, also use these gold accounts at the Bank of England as part of their ability to call on each other for allocation of gold to help in the clearing process.

      Beyond the LPMCL members, the Bank of England also provides gold custody accounts to any LBMA bullion bank member engaging in gold lending with central bank gold storage customers of the Bank of England. For example, these bullion banks would include Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley,  BNP Paribas, Citibank, and Standard Chartered etc.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      One of the 8-10 Bank of England gold vaults, City of London

      Why is all of this important to the SPDR Gold Trust? Because, Bank of England vault gold held by commercial banks ultimately comes from central banks through gold lending or is for delivery back to central banks. Which means that when GLD holds 400 oz gold bars at the Bank of England with Bank of England as subcustodian, it is holding gold bars that either came from gold lending transactions or are ultimately going back to the lending central banks.

      If the SPDR Gold Trust is now holding leased central bank gold as part of its gold holdings, this raises the issue of double counting, a situation in which the same gold bars are claimed by two distinct parties, the central bank which lent the gold and still accounts for it on its balance sheet, and an exchange traded gold-backed ETF (GLD) which thinks that it has title to those same gold bars since they were ‘allocated’ to GLD at the Bank of England.

      She can’nae take any more, Captain!

      An admission in an official SEC filing that the SPDR Gold Trust uses gold at the Bank of England is not unprecedented but is rare enough that it has not happened since 2016 after the SEC directed the GLD Sponsor, World Gold Trust Services to specifically divulge the use of subcustodians since the SEC deemed  subcustodian holdings a risk to the Trust. See BullionStar article “SPDR Gold Trust gold bars being held at the Bank of England” for details.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Letter from the SEC to the GLD Sponsor, 29 March 2016, directing that GLD divulge the use of subcustodians.

      Similar to the current scenario, the use of gold at the Bank of England in 2016 to back the SPDR Gold Trust took place during a time of very large and fast inflows into the GLD during Q1 2016, particularly in February 2016 when 108 tonnes of gold were added to GLD, and March 2016 when 42 tonnes of gold were added. See below chart and the steep increases in GLD gold holdings in early 2016 and again now since 23 March 2020.

      The GLD 10Q to the SEC at that time (filed on 29 April 2016), stated it as follows:

      “During the quarter ended March 31, 2016, the greatest amount of gold held by subcustodians was approximately 29 tonnes or approximately 3.8% of the Trust’s gold at such date. The Bank of England held that gold as subcustodian.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The periods in which GLD has held gold at the Bank of England, Q1 2016 and April 2020, correspond to very large and fast inflows into the SPDR Gold Trust. Chart source: www.GoldChartsRUs.com

      It’s notable therefore that the allocation to GLD of gold bars stored at the Bank of England corresponds to times in which there are fast and large inflows into GLD, with the Bank of England acting as an emergency backup to the HSBC vault. This time around with London on lockdown, is the HSBC London vault even open, or has it been shuttered along with everything else. Given that HSBC, the LBMA, and every party associated with the SPDR Gold Trust is ultra secretive about this vault even to the extent of not divulging its location, then no one in the market really knows.

      Conclusion

      It is interesting to note that the current large flows into the SPDR Gold Trust began on Monday 23 March. This was the same day as:

      • the UK and London went into lockdown
      • prices between COMEX gold futures and London gold spot (EfP) began to diverge widely
      • Bid – Ask spot gold spreads quoted by LBMA market makers diverged wildly

      UK Prime Minister speech on COVID-19, 10 Downing Street, 23 March, 8:30 pm

      The consistent and large inflows into the SPDR Gold Trust starting on 23 March all the way through April and into May also correspond to the period of persistent and wide spreads between COMEX futures gold prices and London spot gold prices when the LBMA in unprecedented fashion made various attempts to reassure that all was OK in the London gold market.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Tag team – LBMA and COMEX

       

      The biggest spread between COMEX and London spot was on 24 March,  when the contango was at one point $96. The spread remained wide (between 60 and 50) into 25 March, then contracted slightly to the 30 range over the rest of March. It was during this time that HSBC made its huge loss, which it describes in another filing here as:

      “delivery disruptions in the gold market, which became highly illiquid on news of refinery closings”.

      At the start of April the  spot to COMEX contango was in the 20-25 range, but it expanded to the 40 range from 6 April, and exploded again for the whole week before Easter, to between $60 and $80. The contango remained high on Monday 13 April at over $65 when GLD started sourcing its gold from gold holdings in the Bank of England vaults.

      The latest GLD 10-Q filing says that the SPDR Gold Trust began holding gold bars in the Bank of England beginning 15 April. While this is a delivery date of physical gold into the Trust, it could be based on trades a few days earlier, which would put the initial transactions in the days around Easter (12 April).

      With this new revelation that the SPDR Gold Trust began allocating gold bars at the Bank of England during the very same time as market maker liquidity  broke in the London gold market, it seems that the liquidity problems of the LBMA bullion banks are both in physical gold and in paper gold. Which would make sense seeing that the giant paper gold trading pyramid sits atop the tiny foundations of the physical gold market.

      And was the 27 April, the date on which the SPDR Gold Trust says it held 45.91 tonnes of gold at the Bank of England, merely the latest date the GLD accountants ran a query for their filing before signing it off? What about since 27 April? How low really is the London gold float?

      Since 27 April, another 35 tonnes of gold have been added to the mammoth GLD ETF. Where did this extra 35 tonnes of gold come from? If this were a bet, the odds on this gold being from the Bank of England would surely be less than evens, i.e. a sure fire bet.

      This article was originally published on the BullionStar.com website under a similar title “Amid gold market turmoil, HSBC taps Bank of England for GLD gold bars.”

    • Lockdown-Defying Speakeasies Cropping Up Across Manhattan
      Lockdown-Defying Speakeasies Cropping Up Across Manhattan

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 21:45

      As New Yorkers grow weary of the ongoing lockdowns due to the coronavirus pandemic, speakeasies have been cropping up in Manhattan according to Page Six.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Discreet patrons are filling the backs of bars, pizza parlors and even pet stores in order to enjoy libations and delicacies with like-minded people flouting quarantine.

      Page Six is told that a famous Upper East Side bar and lounge as well as a trendy downtown hotel have been opening up in spite of the coronavirus lockdown — but strictly for discreet friends of the owners and managers.

      Meanwhile, the New York Post revealed this week that the Lower East Side’s Omar’s La Boîte hosted a small invite-only party in early May. “I know at least five people who were at [the hotel bar] on Monday night,” said a source. “I called one of them and said, ‘I heard you were at [said hotel bar] last night, and she sounded shocked. She said, ‘How did you know!’” –Page Six

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      After the Post published a picture of La Boîte which appeared to show over “a dozen revelers with no masks in sight,” the manager of the club denied that there had been any parties. Owner Omar Hernandez, meanwhile, said “We are looking into this distressing report. I’m sheltering outside the city, certainly wasn’t there, and I had no knowledge of any social gathering on-site.”

      Just how long do our elected officials think people are going to remain compliant?

    • Cop Who Hid While Parkland Students Were Slaughtered Wins Job Back, Plus Back Pay And Overtime
      Cop Who Hid While Parkland Students Were Slaughtered Wins Job Back, Plus Back Pay And Overtime

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 21:25

      Authored by Daniel Payne via Just the News

      The Parkland, Florida, police officer who sheltered behind his car while nearly 20 students were shot and killed will be re-instated to his job, his union announced on Thursday. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      An arbitration process found that Brian Miller, at the time of the massacre a sergeant in the Broward County Sheriff’s Department, was “improperly terminated” by the department more than a year after the shooting. 

      An internal investigation last year determined that Miller had “neglected his duties” when he responded to the shooting reports at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School on Feb. 14, 2018. He “failed to coordinate or direct deputies’ actions and did not direct or coordinate an immediate response into the school,” a state commission eventually ruled. 

      Miller was initially suspended after the shooting and was fired in June of last year. Yet an arbitrator determined that the sheriff’s department had not afforded him due process when it terminated him. 

      He will receive back pay as well as missed overtime, accrued holidays and other benefits to which he would have otherwise been entitled. 

      The sergeant had been terminated by Sheriff Gregory Tony, who replaced Scott Israel in that role following the shooting. Israel had been suspended from the department by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis after the massacre; he is currently running against Tony to reclaim his position there.

    • Mexico Is Cremating Bodies On An "Industrial Scale"
      Mexico Is Cremating Bodies On An “Industrial Scale”

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 21:05

      Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) unveiled a plan this week to reopen the country’s severely damaged economy by June 1 as part of normalization after the COVID-19 pandemic triggered lockdowns.

      Lopez said Wednesday the reopening would be “cautious and gradual,” but with more than 40,000 infections and 4,200 deaths, there are new concerns the federal government is underreporting the public health crisis.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      “The numbers do not appear to reflect the death toll for certain,” Donna Patterson, an expert on Mexico’s health care system at Delaware State University, told VOX. “At the federal level, the numbers aren’t being reported accurately.”

      VOX reports that Mexican mayors, doctors, funeral home directors, and former government officials indicate the current situation on the ground is absolutely horrendous. They say deaths are being underreported and could be eight times higher than official data. 

      Dr. Laurie Ann Ximénez-Fyvie, the molecular genetics lab chief at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), said the underreporting is deliberate by the federal government. 

      “If Mexico is good at anything, it’s hiding numbers,” Fyvie said.

      Sky News investigations team dug deeper into the underreporting issue and discovered the death toll in Mexico City could be staggering. Disturbing images show the country is cremating bodies on an “industrial scale.” 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Here’s AP’s coverage on Mexico City’s COVID-19 death toll and cremating bodies 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Sky obtained access to the city’s morgues and crematoriums, to only discover that the government is massively underreporting COVID-19 deaths. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      From 30 crematoriums, Sky learned there is currently a three-day backlog in cremation across the city.

      There is currently a three-day backlog for cremation at every public crematorium in the city and crematorium workers in recent days have indicated that more burials will have to take place because burning capacity is overwhelmed.

      Black smoke billows out over cemeteries as the ovens are cremating on an industrial level in the city but the bodies don’t stop coming.

      In fact, the ovens simply cannot cope and there are regular reports of breakdowns only adding to the backlog.

      In full hazmat suits, crematorium staff are working around the clock bringing bodies to huge ovens for disposal.

      Sky did the math, also finds several hundred people per day have been dying from the virus, many of whom were not reported in official data. 

      Sky News analysis of the data from 30 crematoria across Mexico City shows that each one is disposing of between 18 and 22 bodies each day, with a three-day backlog.

      Taking an average number of 20 cremations, Sky has calculated the total number of cremations every day is 600. This figure does not include other crematoria or burials.

      The urban area of Mexico City spans over two federal entities – Mexico City and the state of Mexico. Because of this, in order to work out the official figure for how many people have died, the figures for the two entities need to be added together.

      Government figures show that the average number of people who die every day in Mexico City in May is 189 and (averaged out over the last five years for which figures are available, 2014-18) and the number for the state of Mexico is 185. That makes a total average daily deaths of 374.

      That means there are at least 226 excess deaths occurring every day in early May, with most probably down to coronavirus.

      In fact, crematorium sources told Sky News that 80-90% of the deaths they are having to deal with are due to COVID-19.

      Sky’s analysis suggests the government’s official figure is about 19% of the actual number of COVID-19 deaths in Mexico City, and the real value is probably five times higher, which is why the city is burning bodies on an industrial level. This is exactly what happened in Wuhan, China

      As to AMLO’s ability to open the economy remains anyone guess at the moment, one thing is certain, the country does not have the virus spread under control. 

    • Viruses Versus Lockdowns: It's Not About Tradeoffs
      Viruses Versus Lockdowns: It’s Not About Tradeoffs

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 20:45

      Authored by Michael Accad via The Mises Institute,

      It is tempting to oppose the harmful effects of COVID-related lockdowns with arguments couched in terms of tradeoffs.

      We may contend that when public authorities promote the benefits of “flattening the curve,” they fail to properly take into account the actual costs of imposing business closures and of forced social distancing: the coming economic depression will lead to mass unemployment, rising poverty, suicides, domestic abuse, alcoholism, and myriad other potential causes of death and suffering which could be considerably worse than the harms of the pandemic itself, especially if we consider the spontaneous mitigation that people normally apply under the circumstances.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      While I have no doubt that lockdown policies can and will have serious deleterious consequences, I believe that the emphasis on tradeoffs is misguided and counterproductive. It immediately invites a utilitarian calculus: How many deaths and how much suffering will be caused by lockdowns? How many deaths and how much suffering would occur without the lockdowns? How exactly are we to measure the total harm? What time frame should we consider when we ponder the costs of one option versus the other?

      It’s easy to see that no one can have any firm answers to those questions. No one can convincingly make the case that one policy is better than the other on utilitarian grounds, which is what tradeoff language encourages us to do. That is especially true if we consider that lockdown policies are invariably modified in response to changing circumstances and aim toward ever shifting goalposts

      This goes to the heart of Ludwig von Mises’s criticism of the empiricists and behaviorists of his day: they could only conceive of social phenomena in mechanical terms and failed to see that human action makes the planning of human affairs irreducible to predictive calculus. Things have not changed. Ludicrous presumptions hide behind mathematical wizardry and statistical modeling continues to rule. 

      IT’S ALL ABOUT THE ECONOMY

      On what grounds, then, should we oppose lockdowns if not by calling attention to the great harms that will ensue?

      It seems to me that lockdowns should be opposed not by arguing in terms of “quantity of harm,” but by pointing out that the only role for government—whether in pandemic times or not—is actually to promote the economy.

      But we need to understand what the economy is to begin with.

      In its broader, original meaning, the economy is not simply a sum total of exchanges of material goods and services among consumers, businesses, and governments, to be measured as a “GDP.” That is the concept that the utilitarians are accustomed to, and it’s how mainstream political philosophy conceives of the economy. Originally, however, the Greek term Oîkonomia meant “household affairs” and came to refer, by extension, to the entire life of the community as such

      The reason to consider the life of the community as such is that the human being is, by nature, a social animal who depends essentially on the division of labor that takes place within an integrated and wholly interconnected society. We depend on the division of labor from the moment we are born: we need parents who can feed us, and our parents themselves need the specialized work of others to survive—specialized work that invariably crosses different generations. The division of labor forms a more or less tight-knit “political” community that promotes and defends the interests of its own members. That community may be a small primitive tribe or a huge nation-state, it is nevertheless one community engaged in the division of labor in its own unique way.

      The division of labor, then, is not a matter of personal choice. Being connected to a community is not an option that one can choose to either engage in or refrain from. No one can live as an outcast. Even the hermit depends on others, and therefore on society. True ostracism is a death sentence, and involuntary partial ostracism (imprisonment) is a most severe punishment. The economy is as necessary to human life as oxygen or water are.

      For that reason, the famous evolutionary sociobiologist E.O. Wilson has changed his perspective on the human race. He has taken the position that human beings are a “eusocial species,” whose members are totally dependent on a complex, intergenerational division of labor in much the same way that bees are dependent on other bees. Man is indeed a very social animal.

      THE TRUE COMMON GOOD

      The broad division of labor on which we all essentially depend amounts to far more than the accounting transactions that occupy the attention of professional econometricians. It includes the myriad ways in which we depend on others, ways which may be at once measurable yet uncountable, self-interested yet gratuitous. Understood properly, the economy points to the true common good, the good that unites us as the eusocial animals that we are. That true common good does not distinguish between “essential” and “nonessential” worker or activity

      That understanding of the common good is a far cry from the perverted notion of it that dominates modern political thought: a stock of material goods or services to be taken from some and redistributed to others by the government according to “shared interests” and “rights.” We should be especially fearful of that notion given that the same government determines what those shared interests and rights are based on mechanistic, utilitarian norms—norms that invariably garner votes.

      If the government’s role is to safeguard the true common good, then it should do so primarily by safeguarding the integrity of the society, in which the division of labor naturally takes place. Government acts properly when that integrity is threatened, either from within (by criminal activity) or from without (by outside invaders or aggressors). Its role is to deter or defend from those threats when private efforts cannot prevail. The role of government is not to defend or promote the particular goods of certain individuals. That’s an abomination! 

      Even individual lives are not for the government to “save,” because efforts by the government to save the lives of some invariably infringe on the goods and sometimes on the lives of others. The saving of individual lives cannot possibly be a promotion of the true common good.

      But does not the saving of lives help safeguard the integrity of society? 

      Not really. To see this we must distinguish secondary effects from primary ones. For example, imagine that the police successfully intervene to stop Smith from murdering Jones. Did they act because the police has a mission to save Jones’s life? No. The primary effect of the police action is to protect the integrity of the community by putting Smith and his sociopathic behavior out of commission. It is not, per se, to save Jones’ life—even if he should be so lucky.

      Likewise, when soldiers are deployed against an invading army, the primary aim is to defend the integrity of society. Military defense is not carried out primarily to save individual lives or reduce individual suffering: more lives might conceivably be lost and more individual suffering occasioned in the process of defending the country than if the country were to capitulate and allow the invader to take over.

      BEWARE OF METAPHORS

      Might one argue that a pandemic threatens the integrity of society precisely as a foreign invader would? Doesn’t the COVID-19, then, warrant government action for that very reason?

      I don’t believe so. Such an argument falls into the metaphorical trap of considering the COVID-19 virus in martial terms. The virus is not an invader. It has no intention of destroying or taking over society. In fact, as Jörg Guido Hüllsman recently pointed out, it has no intention whatsoever. It is not even alive! To be sure, SARS-CoV-2 is a very dangerous and transmissible pollutant that can cause much harm and many deaths. But it is not, as such, a threat to the integrity of society.

      It is the true economy and the integrity of society that the government should protect or promote. Lockdowns do the exact opposite. They fracture us, harm us, and weaken us all. If maintained long enough, they will disintegrate us. In the meantime, they undoubtedly obstruct our efforts to find the best way to respond to pandemics. They should be opposed—not because of tradeoffs—but because they are antithetical to the economy, that is, to the good of society.

    • "Reckless" – Drone Operator Flies Dangerously Close To Blue Angels 
      “Reckless” – Drone Operator Flies Dangerously Close To Blue Angels 

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 20:25

      What we’re about to show you is probably one of the most reckless and irresponsible videos uploaded to the internet by a clueless civilian drone operator.

      During an America Strong flyover by the US Navy Blue Angels in Detroit, Michigan, on May 12, a civilian drone pilot flew his quadcopter dangerously close to the six F/A-18 Hornets as they flew over the city’s metro area.  

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      “The original video posted to YouTube included a number of different angles with the camera drone appearing momentarily in some of the shots. The final shot shows the Blue Angel six-aircraft wedge formation flying extremely close to the camera drone as they pass overhead at speed,” said The Aviationist.  

      The video was uploaded to a social media account called “@GIOLUCIA.” It has yet to be confirmed who the actual drone pilot is, but if caught by the Federal Aviation Administration, there would likely be severe fines and possible jail time. The video shows several potential violations: first, operating in controlled airspace that was shut down for the event, flying out of the line of sight, possibly breaching altitude height of 400 feet, and flying too close an aircraft. 

      The Aviationist said this “could have ended in a midair collision” – which would have been absolutely devastating, considering the F-18s were flying in a tight formation over a densely populated metro area. 

      Back in 2018, we showed another idiot drone operator ‘dive-bombing’ a commercial jetliner near the Vegas airport. 

      These are the idiots that could one day cause an incident of some sort and result in the government grounding and or banning civilian drone use for recreational purposes. Let’s hope that never happens.

    • Let's Not Allow Another Crisis To Bamboozle Us
      Let’s Not Allow Another Crisis To Bamboozle Us

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 20:05

      Authored by Walter Williams, op-ed via Townhall.com,

      Former Barack Obama adviser Rahm Emanuel, during a recent interview, reminded us of his 2008 financial crisis quotation, “Never allow a crisis to go to waste.” The COVID-19 pandemic has presented a wonderful opportunity for those of us who want greater control over our lives.

      Sadly, too many Americans have already taken the bait. We’ve allowed politicians and bureaucrats to dictate to us what’s an essential business and what isn’t, who has access to hospitals and who hasn’t, and a host of minor and major dictates.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Leftist politicians who want to get into our pocketbooks are beginning to argue that the COVID-19 pandemic is the best argument for a wealth tax. Let’s first define a wealth tax. A wealth tax is applicable to and levied on a variety of accumulated assets that include cash, money market funds, real property, trust funds, owner-occupied housing and other wealth accumulations. Assume a taxpayer earns $150,000 a year and falls in the 32% tax bracket. That individual’s income tax liability for the year will be 32% x $150,000 or $48,800. Say the taxpayer has a net worth of $500,000 consisting of a business or home and the government imposes a wealth tax of 32%, the person’s tax liability is $160,000.

      The problem with most politicians is when they enact a law, they seldom ask, “Then what?” They assume a world of what economists call zero elasticity wherein people behave after a tax is imposed just as they behaved before the tax was imposed and the only difference is that more money comes into the government’s tax coffers. The long-term effect of a wealth tax is that people will try to avoid it by not accumulating as much wealth or concealing the wealth they accumulate.

      A wealth tax has become increasingly attractive because it lends itself to demagoguery about the significant wealth disparity in the United States. The Federal Reserve reports that, in 2018, the wealthiest 10% of Americans owned 70% of the country’s wealth, and the richest 1% owned 32% of the wealth. That fact gave Democratic presidential contenders such as Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren incentives to propose a wealth tax as a part of their campaign rhetoric. Leftists lament that multibillionaires such as Charles Koch, Warren Buffett, Larry Ellison and Sheldon Adelson have not made charitable efforts to address the coronavirus crisis.

      My questions to these political leeches are: To whom does the billionaire’s wealth belong? And how did they accumulate such wealth?

      Did they accumulate their great wealth by looting, plundering and enslaving their fellow man, as has been the case throughout most of human history? No, they accumulated great wealth by serving and pleasing their fellow man in the pursuit of profits. Unfortunately, demagoguery and lack of understanding has led to “profit” becoming a dirty word. Profit is a payment to entrepreneurs just as wages are payments to labor, interest to capital and rent to land. In order to earn profits in free markets, entrepreneurs must identify and satisfy human wants in a way that economizes on society’s scarce resources.

      Here’s a question for you. Which entities produce greater consumer satisfaction: for-profit enterprises such as supermarkets, computer makers and clothing stores, or nonprofit entities such as public schools, post offices and motor vehicle departments? I’m guessing you’ll answer the former. Their survival depends on pleasing ordinary people. Public schools, post offices and motor vehicle departments’ survival are not strictly tied to pleasing people but rather on politicians and the ability of government to impose taxes.

      Some advocates of wealth taxes and other forms of taxation might argue that they are temporary measures to get us over the COVID-19 crisis. Do not buy that argument. The great Nobel Laureate economist Milton Friedman once said, “Nothing is more permanent than a temporary government program.” The telephone tax was levied on wealthy Americans with telephones in 1898 to help fund the Spanish-American War. That tax was repealed over 100 years later in 2006. One of the objectives of the World War II withholding tax was to bring faster revenues to fight the war. The withholding of taxes is still with us blinding Americans on the taxes they pay. Let us not allow a crisis to bamboozle us again.

    • Colombia Militarizes Brazilian Border As COVID Deaths Soar
      Colombia Militarizes Brazilian Border As COVID Deaths Soar

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 19:45

      A rise in cases and deaths from COVID-19 in Brazil has spooked neighboring countries, resulting in the National Army of Colombia to bolster forces along Brazil–Colombia border, reported Bloomberg

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Johns Hopkins University reported the South American country had more than 188,000 cases and 13,000 fatalities on Thursday afternoon. The fast-spreading virus is ravaging the country’s favelas, something we warned about in late March. 

      Brazil leads BRIC countries in terms of virus deaths

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro’s virus response has backfired, due mostly because his administration is concentrated on reopening the economy rather than flattening the curve. 

      Colombian President Ivan Duque Marquez has had no other choice than increase military presence on its Amazon border that is shared with Brazil and Peru, a move that will hopefully prevent virus carriers from entering the country. 

      “The decision has been made to militarize, with more presence, all the border points and exercise the respective control to prevent imported cases of floating populations from arriving,” President Duque said Tuesday.

      Brazil has transformed into the epicenter of the pandemic in South America. It has the sixth-highest number of infections and deaths globally. On the continent, second to Brazil is Peru, which has more than 76,000 cases and nearly 2,200 fatalities. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Paraguay President Abdo Benitez warned last week that the virus situation in Brazil is deteriorating. He deployed military personnel to Brazil–Paraguay border and enforced checkpoints.

      “Brazil is perhaps the place where there is today the greatest spread of coronavirus in the world, and that is a great threat to our country,” Benitez said. “We have to understand that this is a huge threat to the entire effort that the Paraguayan people have been making.”

      Argentinian President Alberto Fernandez has also expressed concern and recently said Brazil represents a threat to South America. 

      Scenes of Heavily armed Colombian troops patrolling Brazil–Colombia border. 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    • Companies Call The Market Top With Most Stock Sales In Eight Years
      Companies Call The Market Top With Most Stock Sales In Eight Years

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 19:25

      If one asks companies why the market, by which we of course mean just the top 5 tech names that now comprise “the market”…

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      … has soared 30% in the past two months, the most likely response is a blank stare: after all nearly 30% of companies have pulled guidance as nobody has any idea what is coming. Not even the Fed in fact: in an interview with MNI, St Louis Fed president James Bullard said the Fed may not have enough clarity on the economy by its June meeting to offer a quarterly forecast. 

      One thing companies do know, echoing recent similar observations from both Stanley Druckenmiller and David Tepper, is that stocks have run up too far, too fast. And, as a result, CEOs, CFOs and Treasurers are all taking advantage of the tidal wave of liquidity that has propelled many shares back to all time record levels, and are selling stock at a furious pace not seen in almost a decade.

      According to Bloomberg calculations, public companies have raised more cash in the past three days – from selling shares – than in any week in eight years. Buyers have been undaunted by warnings from either Fed Chair Jerome Powell, who cautioned about unprecedented downside risk to the U.S. economy, from Goldman Sachs which we first reported said stocks could drop nearly 20% in the next three months, or by investing titans who say this is the most overbought market in history. No, these are retail investors who know better than even corporate management…

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      … and riding a momentum wave unlike any in recent history, are buying everything companies have to sell.

      And while these same amateur traders will point to the strength in equity financing is a promising sign for the broader economy (what they really mean is that Fed backstops actually do work), the reality is that a burst of corporate selling is about as bearish as it gets, as the investors who know their own assets and growth potential best are rushing to sell their stock to a greater fool. Luckily, there is more than enough of those in the US retail investing population.

      “Now’s the time to act. The rally is extremely fragile,” said Michael Purves, CEO of Tallbacken Capital Advisors, who spent 12 years advising companies on mergers and capital-raising. “When you’re a CFO or a board director of a company in a capital intensive industry, you raise money so that you don’t lose your job. That’s 100% the right thing to do now.

      Sadly for all those greater, perhaps greatest fools, who bought the shares the rally is now ending, because despite a modest short covering rally on Thursday, the market has double-topped out, unable to rise above 2,950 and is now sliding despite trillions and trillions in central bank liquidity.

      Of course, every short-squeeze in the broader market will be promptly used by companies to sell even more shares. Just int the past three days, investment banks have conducted 16 secondary offerings on U.S. exchanges since Monday in stocks such as Zillow, Equinix, MyoKardia, YETI Holdings, and Q2 Holdings Inc. And according to Bloomberg, through Wednesday that already made for the busiest week of 2020.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      In fact, in just the first three days of the week, companies raised more than $17 billion from investors, the most since 2012, thanks largely to PNC Financial Services Group Inc. selling $12.1 billion of its BlackRock shares in the second-largest offering since 2009.

      As Bloomberg summarized, “a scarcity of deals during the market’s March meltdown has turned into a geyser after equities recovered and issuers released their first earnings reports since the new coronavirus pushed investors away from risk.”

      Since March 1, share sales by public companies and top holders have raised about $35 billion, with this week’s activity comprising half of that volume. Equity-linked offerings are also on the rise, raising $11 billion in the last two weeks – nearly double their haul from the second half of April.

      Yet what is even more bizarre is that traders are rewarding these massive at times dilutions (because who cares about such things as shares outstanding at a time of central planning) by bidding their stocks up by an average of 5% from their offering prices even as the Nasdaq has suffered a 2.2% decline in recent days.

      ”If your stock has done well, you might do a secondary offering here because you know there’s going to be an opportunity to deploy that,” said Jerry Braakman, chief investment officer of First American Trust, in Santa Ana, California, which manages about $1.8 billion. “When people are looking at this current environment, cash is king and equity is a long-term holding.” Because of course equity is a “long-term holding” during a depression when the only liquidity out there is thanks to central banks.

      There is just one problem: while it’s safe to say the situation now in the market defies historical comparison, Bloomberg points out that “the record for stocks after big surges in share sales isn’t encouraging” and usually results in broad market selling, something which the companies know too well, and is precisely why there is a firehose of equity offerings now before the window closes. Consider that monthly proceeds from secondary offerings have surpassed $30 billion on only three occasions since 2010. Three months after those spikes, the S&P 500 was trading lower every time (and on most occasions required either small or large Fed bailouts to keep the party going).

      Proceeds from this month’s U.S. stock offerings have surpassed $24 billion so far, but are almost assured to cross $30 billion in the next two weeks.

    Digest powered by RSS Digest

    Today’s News 14th May 2020

    • World's Largest Shipper Warns Of Collapsing Volumes, Dashes Hope For V-Shaped Recovery
      World’s Largest Shipper Warns Of Collapsing Volumes, Dashes Hope For V-Shaped Recovery

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 02:45

      A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S, the world’s largest container line, warned Wednesday that global trade will continue to falter with volumes declining by at least a quarter in 2Q20. Maersk dashed all hope that a V-shaped recovery will be seen in the back half of the year, rather suggesting a U-shaped recovery is more plausible. 

      “Looking into Q2 2020, visibility remains low as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. We continue to support our customers in keeping their supply chains running, however as global demand continues to be significantly affected, we expect volumes in Q2 to decrease across all businesses, possibly by as much as 20-25%,” Soren Skou, Maersk’s CEO, was quoted in a company press release

      “2020 is a challenging year, but as we proactively respond to lower demands and show progress in our transformation and financial performance, we are strongly positioned to weather the storm,” Skou said. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Maersk pulled its full-year guidance for 2020 in late March, due to the COVID-19 pandemic that has severely damaged the global economy. In an interview with Bloomberg, Skou said he’s expecting “some sort of U-shaped recovery.” 

      “Right now, we believe we are at the bottom and we will probably be here for a while,” Skou said. “But in the third quarter, the fourth quarter, we should start to see some recovery.”

      Maersk continued to reaffirm a gloomy outlook but was able to deliver some growth in operating profit for the first quarter. Revenue increased slightly to $9.57 billion, which was better than estimates of $9.36 billion. 

      Shares in Maersk plunged nearly 6% in trade on Wednesday. When macro matters once more, Maersk shares tend to sell ahead of a global selloff. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Maersk’s warning comes as the WTO last month indicated the pandemic will likely result in one of the worst collapses of international trade in the post–World War II economic expansion. 

      On Tuesday, IMF managing director Kristalina Georgieva said the current global economic outlook continues to deteriorate and has suffered the worst blow since the 1930s. The fund will publish downward revisions to its global economic forecasts next month, Georgieva said. 

      In mid-April, the IMF forecast a decline of 3% in global output, with emerging and developing economies contracting by 1% and advanced economies by more than 6% in 2020. 

      Georgieva spoke with FT on Tuesday, she said: “With the crisis still spreading, the outlook is worse than our already pessimistic projection. Without medical solutions on a global scale, for many economies a more adverse development is likely.” 

      It could take several years or more for global GDP to recover back to 2019 levels. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Investing legend Stan Druckenmiller called the V-shaped recovery a fantasy during a webcast Tuesday. 

      As of late, the V-shaped narrative for the Global and or US economy continues to unravel, suggesting more of a U-shaped or even L-shaped recovery is ahead. 

    • The Face Of Post-COVID Geo-Politics
      The Face Of Post-COVID Geo-Politics

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 02:00

      Authored by Wayne Madsen via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

      The post-Covid international geo-political structure may resemble that which followed the most lethal pandemic that affected the world – the highly contagious Black Death of the 14th century. The bubonic plague killed between 75 and 200 million people in Asia, Europe, and North Africa. It is believed the bubonic/pneumonic plague was carried by black rat flea parasites that travelled to Europe and the Middle East first via the Silk Road from China and then on Genoese merchant ships sailing from Crimea. The fleas spread from their rodent hosts to humans. An eerie connection to Covid-19 is that among the first victims of the Black Death were 80 percent of the population of Hubei province, including the town of Wuchang, present-day Wuhan.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      By the end of 1346, India had been largely depopulated and dead bodies were reported to have covered Tartary, Mesopotamia, Syria, and Armenia. In 1345, Damascus was recording 2000 deaths a day. By 1349, the plague had spread through Italy, France, Spain, Germany, England, Scotland, Ireland, Norway, and even far-off Iceland and Greenland. Only regions that had little contact with other countries through trade were relatively spared. These included the Basque region and isolated pockets in the Alpine, Pyrenees, and Atlas mountain ranges. The plague returned in follow-on phases from the 15th to 17th centuries. France lost a million of its citizens in just four years, between 1628 and 1631.

      Without a suitable vaccine to fend off Covid-19, the world may copy the effects that the Black death had on geo-politics, trade, the economy, and social structure.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The Black Death saw city dwellers flee for the countryside, stores closing their door, and doctors refusing to see patients. The bubonic plague also jumped species. Humans infected goats, sheep, cows, pigs, dogs, cats, and chickens and vice versa. So far, Covid-19 has been reported to have infected dogs, cats, lions, tigers, and minks.

      Just as with the current scapegoating of Covid-19 to blame Asians, Muslims, Jews, and other minorities, the Black Death also saw its share of playing the blame game, often with deadly consequences. Among those targeted in the 14th century as being responsible for the plague were Jews, Romani (gypsies), foreigners in general, religious pilgrims, witches, street beggars, lepers, and Catholic friars. The Jewish communities of Strasbourg, Mainz, and Cologne were decimated.

      Just as witnessed with Covid-19, “miracle cures” were in abundance during the Black Death. Ineffective treatments included bloodletting and boil lancing. One suggested cure was drinking a concoction of milk and garlic cloves. Others included drinking a solution of ground chicken bones or cold water mixed with vinegar. Other remedies were to burn incense made of frankincense, myrrh, basil aloe, garlic, and grape leaves; inhale strong odors from latrines to overcome the infectious “vapors” of the plague; wash walls with a solution of water and vinegar; and maintain a diet of wheat bread and citrus fruits, while avoiding red meat. Those who believed the plague was a punishment from God engaged in self-flagellation processions through villages and towns. Today, certain world leaders have advocated bleach and disinfectants, vodka, herbal tonics, and ultraviolet and sunlight to cure Covid-19.

      Authorities in Venice began requiring arriving ship crews to be kept on board their vessels for 40 days – what was called a “quarantine.” The practice continues to this day as a method by public health authorities to stop the spread of a contagion.

      With a lack of workers, prices of commodities and the cost of labor rapidly increased as the plague spread throughout Europe and North Africa. With serfs able to negotiate labor conditions with landowners, the feudal system became a collateral victim of the Black Death. Laborers became free to shop around their services to the highest bidder and average wages doubled as a result. A mobile labor force soon emerged.

      The Black Death’s aftermath created a political climate of mistrust of others, including foreign travelers, trading merchants, and money handlers. No one wanted a return to the 14th century, which was characterized in England as “nasty, brutish and short.” In England, cleric John Wycliffe questioned the authority of the Pope and advocated the pre-eminency of the Bible. Wycliffe was tried for heresy in 1377 but John of Gaunt, the king’s younger son and the top adviser to his father, defended Wycliffe and made it clear that the king also demanded more in taxes from the clergy. The Black Death paved the way for the Protestant Reformation in England two centuries later.

      Edward III was, at the outset of the plague, the Donald Trump of his era. He insisted on conducting tournaments at Windsor Castle and other locations in England even though some of his royal advisers urged caution in the face of the Black Death sweeping England. Edward’s tournaments featured jousting, feasting, dancing, along with another unwelcomed addition – transmission of the bubonic/pneumonic plague through close social contact. It was not until the king’s 14-year old daughter, Princess Joan, who was en route to Spain to marry Crown Prince Pedro of Castile, died from the plague that Edward took notice of the gravity of the disease and that “eat, drink, and be merry” would only hasten the depopulation of his realm.

      Joan, who died in Bordeaux, France, was Edward’s favorite child. When Edward’s much-beloved wife, Queen Philippa, died from the plague, Edward saw that his rule was in great jeopardy. He mandated English, not French, as the official language of his government and he agreed to personally address Parliament, which he had previously tried to circumvent at every turn. What occurred with the English royal family was akin to Trump having to deal with the Covid-19 deaths of his wife, Melania, and his favorite daughter, Ivanka.

      In response to the Black Death, many monarchs banned the export of food, as well as prohibiting black marketeering. Populations tended to place more trust in local authorities for such basic needs as food, clean water, clothing, burial services, and such medical care as it existed. Some local authorities established plague hospitals, constructed lazarettos (quarantine housing), established “cordons sanitaires,” closed borders, and required the wearing of masks. Some local leaders established a network of intelligence agents to warn their governments of plague outbreaks and surges in other countries. The decisive actions of the Doge of Venice to quarantine arriving ship crews and create public health boards, the sealing off of Milan by the ruling Visconti council, and even the armed outlaws who guarded Bristol, England from those who may have been infected all tended to place increased public trust in their local governing authorities.

      In Africa, populations living along the Nile River, where the plague was introduced by slaves and Arab traders, abandoned their river towns, including Asyut, and fled to remote areas up the Nile to escape the pandemic. The Arab scholar and historian, Ibn Khaldun, wrote that a spirit of “asabiyya” protected some North Africans from the plague. He defined “asabiyya” as a communal attachment to the land, whether it was the Sahara Desert or the Atlas Mountains. Ibn Khaldun points out that self-sufficiency and a shared commitment to the tribe is what saved to Bedouin and Sanhaja of the Sahara and the Berbers in the Atlas mountain range. The same degree of self-sufficiency and independence was seen in parts of Belgium, Switzerland, Bohemia, and Poland, as well as city-states in the Bight of Benin in West Africa that owed their allegiance to the Yoruba kingdom of Ijebu. They represented places where the Black Death had little to no impact.

      We see the same reliance today on local authorities. Governors of states of the United States, Brazil, and Mexico are heeded by the populace over central government leaders. Regional groupings of American states – in the Northeast, Midwest, and West Coast – have stepped up to handle Covid-19 policy in the absence of any clear direction from the Trump administration. This support for local government is seen in polling that shows that 59 percent of Americans rate the Covid response by their local governments “excellent” or “good.” The numbers dramatically decrease when asked about the Trump administration’s response.

      The same appreciation for local and state authorities exists in India. At the end of April 2020, the states of Goa, Sikkim, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, and Tripura were declared Covid-19 free. These and other Indian states that see a decrease in Covid infections will make every attempt to keep it that way. In India and other nations, internal border controls, health checks for travelers, increased local police authorities, and other measures may become permanent. And with such local and regional control will come a popular insistence on a devolution of other powers to state and local control, including public health, taxation, commerce, residency permits, and other functions.

      The “asabiyya” concept of self-sufficiency to guard against repeat phases of Covid-19 and other pandemics may eventually lead to the formation, or re-formation in some cases, of the independent city-state and other polities that would have as their first priority the health safety and security of their compact populations, whether they are urbanized areas like Hong Kong, Singapore, Dubai, Venice, Barcelona, New York City, London, Gaza, Aden, Labuan, Sao Paulo, Istanbul, Mumbai, Karachi, Bangkok, Saigon, Shanghai, and Lagos or distinct regions and territories like the Basque country (which succeeded in surviving the Black Death virtually unscathed), Scotland, Kerala, Flanders, Puerto Rico, Sarawak, Sabah, American Samoa, Zanzibar, and Mindanao.

      The activities of the Baltic trading bloc, the Hanseatic League, were largely suspended during the Black Death of the 14th century. We are already witnessing the suspension of certain activities of the European Union. Although the Hanseatic League existed on paper until the 19th century, the European Union may follow in its footsteps and become a mere paper organization, nothing more than a quaint notion but ineffective in a post-pandemic world. It is also noteworthy that the economies of Hanseatic League and Italian maritime republics, including Lubeck, Hamburg, Danzig, Amsterdam, Venice, Genoa, and Florence, improved more rapidly than national monarchies like France, England, and Spain in the aftermath of the Black Death.

      Just as the Black Death altered the course of world history, so too might Covid-19. There are some 5000 geographic areas inhabited by homogenous peoples. If they decide that they will no longer be placed at the end of the line to receive medical and other assistance during a pandemic from their central governments, they may opt to go it alone.

    • Why China's Move To Test 11 Million Wuhan Residents Could Set Off Firestorm In US
      Why China’s Move To Test 11 Million Wuhan Residents Could Set Off Firestorm In US

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 01:00

      After six new cases in the past days popped in Wuhan, despite health officials thinking corovavirus was finally eradicated in the place of its origin, authorities say they are planning to undertake the hugely ambitious task of testing all of the city’s eleven million residents starting in about a week.

      It will mark the first mass testing of its scale to be carried out anywhere, with scientists and governments across the globe sure to be interested in the data it produces, given it could portend second wave ‘flare-ups’ in other countries, should the results show more than expected are still being infected in Wuhan. 

      The six new cases reported Sunday and Monday were the first since the city’s strict lockdown was finally opened. The nightmare scenario is that Wuhan could again be impacted by ‘resurgent’ flare-up clusters

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Via AFP

      City districts have been ordered to draw up ground level data and a plan needed to test all residents in their area, to be submitted within ten days.

      As Bloomberg writes, the drastic and herculean effort that will be involved is driven by fears in Beijing they could be dealing with a serious stealth resurgence of the virus

      The ambitious move to test everyone in Wuhan reflects China’s anxiety over a resurgence of the epidemic, which it managed to stamp out through draconian restrictions that locked down hundreds of millions of people at its peak in February. Wuhan was sealed off from Jan. 23 until April 8 in a months-long ordeal that saw scores die as the local health system collapsed.

      Should it be the case that new large clusters are found as a result of the mass test push, it will no doubt spark a deeply pessimistic outlook for Europe, Russia and the United States.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Looking across the Yangtze River in Wuhan, AFP via Getty.

      Currently the United States, Russia, and the United Kingdom lead the world in confirmed COVID-19 cases, with the European countries of Spain, Italy, France, and Germany following. Economies have been decimated in the resulting meantime pandemic “pause” – and lingering uncertainty over just how long economic shutdowns will last. 

      The Wuhan data, which could possibly start to produce results in as little as weeks or a month, could spark a firestorm of controversy surrounding the already sensitive debate on reopening in the West.

      In short newly uncovered clusters in Wuhan would give leverage to those politicians and state governors in the US pushing to extend lockdown orders, at a key moment the White House is hoping for a national loosening up of business closures and public restrictions. This also at a time states are increasingly clashing with federal policies for opening back up.

      Some recently published controversial scientific models and forecasts designate that many states shouldn’t even start opening until mid to late July. For each side, the Wuhan data will likely tip the scales of the debate, either in the optimistic or pessimistic direction. 

    • The Worst Is Yet To Come: Contact-Tracing, Immunity-Cards, & Mass-Testing
      The Worst Is Yet To Come: Contact-Tracing, Immunity-Cards, & Mass-Testing

      Tyler Durden

      Thu, 05/14/2020 – 00:05

      Authored by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

      The things we were worried would happen are happening.

      – Angus Johnston, professor at the City University of New York

      No one is safe.

      No one is immune.

      No one gets spared the anguish, fear and heartache of living under the shadow of an authoritarian police state.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      That’s the message being broadcast 24/7 with every new piece of government propaganda, every new law that criminalizes otherwise lawful activity, every new policeman on the beat, every new surveillance camera casting a watchful eye, every sensationalist news story that titillates and distracts, every new prison or detention center built to house troublemakers and other undesirables, every new court ruling that gives government agents a green light to strip and steal and rape and ravage the citizenry, every school that opts to indoctrinate rather than educate, and every new justification for why Americans should comply with the government’s attempts to trample the Constitution underfoot.

      Yes, COVID-19 has taken a significant toll on the nation emotionally, physically, and economically, but there are still greater dangers on the horizon.

      As long as “we the people” continue to allow the government to trample our rights in the so-called name of national security, things will get worse, not better.

      It’s already worse.

      Now there’s talk of mass testing for COVID-19 antibodies, screening checkpoints, contact tracing, immunity passports to allow those who have recovered from the virus to move around more freely, and snitch tip lines for reporting “rule breakers” to the authorities.

      If you can’t read the writing on the wall, you need to pay better attention.

      These may seem like small, necessary steps in the war against the COVID-19 virus, but they’re only necessary to the police state in its efforts to further undermine the Constitution, extend its control over the populace, and feed its insatiable appetite for ever-greater powers.

      Nothing is ever as simple as the government claims it is.

      Whatever dangerous practices you allow the government to carry out now—whether it’s in the name of national security or protecting America’s borders or making America healthy again—rest assured, these same practices can and will be used against you when the government decides to set its sights on you.

      The war on drugs turned out to be a war on the American people, waged with SWAT teams and militarized police.

      The war on terror turned out to be a war on the American people, waged with warrantless surveillance and indefinite detention.

      The war on immigration turned out to be a war on the American people, waged with roving government agents demanding “papers, please.”

      This war on COVID-19 will be yet another war on the American people, waged with all of the surveillance weaponry at the government’s disposal: thermal imaging cameras, drones, contact tracing, biometric databases, etc.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      So you see, when you talk about empowering government agents to screen the populace in order to control and prevent spread of this virus, what you’re really talking about is creating a society in which ID cards, round ups, checkpoints and detention centers become routine weapons used by the government to control and suppress the populace, no matter the threat.

      This is also how you pave the way for a national identification system of epic proportions.

      Imagine it: a national classification system that not only categorizes you according to your health status but also allows the government to sort you in a hundred other ways: by gender, orientation, wealth, medical condition, religious beliefs, political viewpoint, legal status, etc.

      Are you starting to get the bigger picture yet?

      This is just another wolf in sheep’s clothing, a “show me your papers” scheme disguised as a means of fighting a virus.

      Don’t fall for it.

      The ramifications of such a “show me your papers” society in which government officials are empowered to stop individuals, demand they identify themselves, and subject them to patdowns, warrantless screenings, searches, and interrogations are beyond chilling.

      By allowing government agents to establish a litmus test for individuals to be able to exit a state of lockdown and engage in commerce, movement and any other right that corresponds to life in a supposedly free society, it lays the groundwork for a society in which you are required to identify yourself at any time to any government worker who demands it for any reason.

      Such tactics quickly lead one down a slippery slope that ends with government agents empowered to force anyone and everyone to prove they are in compliance with every statute and regulation on the books.

      It used to be that unless police had a reasonable suspicion that a person was guilty of wrongdoing, they had no legal authority to stop the person and require identification. In other words, “we the people” had the right to come and go as we please without the fear of being questioned by police or forced to identify ourselves.

      Unfortunately, in this age of COVID-19, that unrestricted right to move about freely is being pitted against the government’s power to lock down communities at a moment’s notice. And in this tug-of-war between individual freedoms and government power, “we the people” have been on the losing end of the deal.

      Curiously enough, these COVID-19 restrictions dovetail conveniently with a national timeline for states to comply with the Real ID Act, which imposes federal standards on identity documents such as state drivers’ licenses, a prelude to this national identification system.

      Talk about a perfect storm for bringing about a national ID card, the ultimate human tracking device.

      Granted, in the absence of a national ID card, which would make the police state’s task of monitoring, tracking and singling out individual suspects far simpler, “we the people” are already tracked in a myriad of ways: through our state driver’s licenses, Social Security numbers, bank accounts, purchases and electronic transactions; by way of our correspondence and communication devices—email, phone calls and mobile phones; through chips implanted in our vehicles, identification documents, even our clothing.

      Add to this the fact that businesses, schools and other facilities are relying more and more on fingerprints and facial recognition to identify us. All the while, data companies such as Acxiom are capturing vast caches of personal information to help airports, retailers, police and other government authorities instantly determine whether someone is the person he or she claims to be.

      This informational glut—used to great advantage by both the government and corporate sectors—has converged into a mandate for “an internal passport,” a.k.a., a national ID card that would store information as basic as a person’s name, birth date and place of birth, as well as private information, including a Social Security number, fingerprint, retinal scan and personal, criminal and financial records.

      A federalized, computerized, cross-referenced, databased system of identification policed by government agents would be the final nail in the coffin for privacy (not to mention a logistical security nightmare that would leave Americans even more vulnerable to every hacker in the cybersphere).

      Americans have always resisted adopting a national ID card for good reason: it gives the government and its agents the ultimate power to target, track and terrorize the populace according to the government’s own nefarious purposes.

      National ID card systems have been used before, by other oppressive governments, in the name of national security, invariably with horrifying results.

      For instance, in Germany, the Nazis required all Jews to carry special stamped ID cards for travel within the country. A prelude to the yellow Star of David badges, these stamped cards were instrumental in identifying Jews for deportation to death camps in Poland.

      Author Raul Hilberg summarizes the impact that such a system had on the Jews:

      The whole identification system, with its personal documents, specially assigned names, and conspicuous tagging in public, was a powerful weapon in the hands of the police. First, the system was an auxiliary device that facilitated the enforcement of residence and movement restrictions. Second, it was an independent control measure in that it enabled the police to pick up any Jew, anywhere, anytime. Third, and perhaps most important, identification had a paralyzing effect on its victims.

      In South Africa during apartheid, pass books were used to regulate the movement of black citizens and segregate the population. The Pass Laws Act of 1952 stipulated where, when and for how long a black African could remain in certain areas. Any government employee could strike out entries, which cancelled the permission to remain in an area. A pass book that did not have a valid entry resulted in the arrest and imprisonment of the bearer.

      Identity cards played a crucial role in the genocide of the Tutsis in the central African country of Rwanda. The assault, carried out by extremist Hutu militia groups, lasted around 100 days and resulted in close to a million deaths. While the ID cards were not a precondition to the genocide, they were a facilitating factor. Once the genocide began, the production of an identity card with the designation “Tutsi” spelled a death sentence at any roadblock.

      Identity cards have also helped oppressive regimes carry out eliminationist policies such as mass expulsion, forced relocation and group denationalization. Through the use of identity cards, Ethiopian authorities were able to identify people with Eritrean affiliation during the mass expulsion of 1998. The Vietnamese government was able to locate ethnic Chinese more easily during their 1978-79 expulsion. The USSR used identity cards to force the relocation of ethnic Koreans (1937), Volga Germans (1941), Kamyks and Karachai (1943), Crimean Tartars, Meshkhetian Turks, Chechens, Ingush and Balkars (1944) and ethnic Greeks (1949). And ethnic Vietnamese were identified for group denationalization through identity cards in Cambodia in 1993, as were the Kurds in Syria in 1962.

      And in the United States, post-9/11, more than 750 Muslim men were rounded up on the basis of their religion and ethnicity and detained for up to eight months. Their experiences echo those of 120,000 Japanese-Americans who were similarly detained 75 years ago following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

      Despite a belated apology and monetary issuance by the U.S. government, the U.S. Supreme Court has yet to declare such a practice illegal. Moreover, laws such as the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) empower the government to arrest and detain indefinitely anyone they “suspect” of being an enemy of the state.

      You see, you may be innocent of wrongdoing now, but when the standard for innocence is set by the government, no one is safe.

      Everyone is a suspect.

      And anyone can be a criminal when it’s the government determining what is a crime.

      It’s no longer a matter of if, but when.

      Remember, the police state does not discriminate.

      At some point, it will not matter whether your skin is black or yellow or brown or white. It will not matter whether you’re an immigrant or a citizen. It will not matter whether you’re rich or poor. It won’t even matter whether you’re driving, flying or walking.

      After all, government-issued bullets will kill you just as easily whether you’re a law-abiding citizen or a hardened criminal. Government jails will hold you just as easily whether you’ve obeyed every law or broken a dozen. And whether or not you’ve done anything wrong, government agents will treat you like a suspect simply because they have been trained to view and treat everyone like potential criminals.

      Eventually, when the police state has turned that final screw and slammed that final door, all that will matter is whether some government agent—poorly trained, utterly ignorant and dismissive of the Constitution, way too hyped up on the power of their badges, and authorized to detain, search, interrogate, threaten and generally harass anyone they see fit—chooses to single you out for special treatment.

      We’ve been having this same debate about the perils of government overreach for the past 50-plus years, and still we don’t seem to learn, or if we learn, we learn too late.

      All of the excessive, abusive tactics employed by the government today—warrantless surveillance, stop and frisk searches, SWAT team raids, roadside strip searches, asset forfeiture schemes, private prisons, indefinite detention, militarized police, etc.—started out as a seemingly well-meaning plan to address some problem in society that needed a little extra help.

      Be careful what you wish for: you will get more than you bargained for, especially when the government’s involved.

      In the case of a national identification system, it might start off as a means of tracking COVID-19 cases in order to “safely” re-open the nation, but it will end up as a means of controlling the American people.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      For those tempted to justify these draconian measures for whatever reason – for the sake of their health, the economy, or national security – remember, you can’t have it both ways.

      You can’t live in a constitutional republic if you allow the government to act like a police state.

      You can’t claim to value freedom if you allow the government to operate like a dictatorship.

      You can’t expect to have your rights respected if you allow the government to treat whomever it pleases with disrespect and an utter disregard for the rule of law.

      As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, if you’re inclined to advance this double standard because you believe you have done nothing wrong and have nothing to hide, beware: there’s always a boomerang effect.

    • New York Times Is Getting A Jump Start On Spreading COVID-19 "Anti-Vaxx" Hysteria
      New York Times Is Getting A Jump Start On Spreading COVID-19 “Anti-Vaxx” Hysteria

      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 23:45

      The coronavirus vaccine is still – according to the most optimistic projections provided by Dr. Anthony Fauci – at least 18 months away (Dr. Fauci reaffirmed during yesterday’s Senate testimony the expected timeline for a vaccine is 18-24 months, or longer). But the New York Times is getting a jump on stirring up the anti- ‘anti-vax’ hysteria that some of its most dedicated readers – super-uptight, Brooklyn-based, professional class, simps for former Deadspin staffers –  simply love to hate.

      Anti-vaxxers inspire a singularly intense horror in the liberal imagination. While the NYT loves to pin the ‘explosion’ in the movement’s popularity to ‘far-right’ hucksters, some of the worst outbreaks in recent years – for example: last year’s measles outbreak – took hold in the ultra-orthodox Jewish communities of New York State and the surrounding area, not the communities of ‘right-wing extremists’ living in Idaho and other states in the west and south. However, like the old saying goes, “Nazis sell newspapers”. NYT editors closely track which topics its readers love, and thinly sourced “news analysis” about the threat to society posed by the anti-vaccine movement in the age of COVID-19 is easy and cheap to produce.

      In a Wednesday column written by popular author and magazine writer Kevin Roose, the paper dares to ask: “What if we get a Covid-19 vaccine and half the country refuses to take it?”

      The viral popularity of “Plandemic”, a factually dubious documentary about a former colleague of Dr. Fauci who clearly has an axe to grind against him, is alarming, Roose says, and certainly justifies such an extreme conclusion.

      To this, we’d argue that repeatedly trying to delete the video to appease far-left tastemakers who are out of step with the American body politic only made viewers more eager to seek it out and watch. And as far as the risk of half the country refusing the vaccine, vaccination rates for MMR, a vaccine that is the subject of concentrated ire from the anti vaxxers, are still above 90% in the US.

      Plus, if you and your loved ones get vaccinated, shouldn’t you have nothing to worry about? (unless, of course, the vaccines prove ineffective with some/all patients, in which case we’d have a bigger problem to worry about).

      But Roose cites three supporting pillars for his argument that the anti-vaxx movement has been “waiting” for COVID-19 like a panther in the tall grass, waiting to pounce and spread its anti-science maliciousness across the globe in an evil scheme to wipe out humanity, or whatever.

      First: the fast-tracked approval process.

      First, because of the pandemic’s urgency, any promising Covid-19 vaccine is likely to be fast-tracked through the testing and approval process. It may not go through years of clinical trials and careful studies of possible long-term side effects, the way other drugs do. That could create an opening for anti-vaccine activists to claim that it is untested and dangerous, and to spin reasonable concerns about the vaccine into widespread, unfounded fears about its safety.

      According to the Milken Institute, more than 130 projects to find a vaccine are underway around the world. Though vaccines will receive expedited approval, any mass-produced vaccine will be subjected to intense, global scrutiny.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Second: The Bill Gates Foundation will inevitably be involved with distributing the vaccine.

      Second, if a vaccine does emerge, there is a good chance that leading health organizations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation or the World Health Organization will have a hand in producing or distributing it. If that’s the case, anti-vaccine activists, who have been crusading against these groups for years, will have plenty of material stockpiled to try to discredit them. They are already taking aim at Mr. Gates with baseless conspiracy theories claiming that he created and is trying to profit from the virus. These theories will be amplified, and the attempts to discredit leading virus research efforts will intensify as the vaccine nears.

      That’s probably true – but the Gates Foundation and WHO typically focus their efforts on developing economies that don’t have the immense resources that the US has.

      And third: if vaccination is required for air travel, school enrollment and other activities, the backlash might be intense.

      Third, if and when a Covid-19 vaccine is approved for widespread use, people may be required to take it before being allowed to fly on certain airlines, attend certain schools or enter certain businesses. That’s a good idea, public health-wise, but it would play into some of the worst fears of the anti-vaccine movement.

      Mandatory vaccination has been an especially potent talking point for anti-vaccine activists, some of whom have rebranded themselves “pro-choice” when it comes to vaccines. And years of battling states and school districts over mandatory vaccine policies have given them a playbook for creating a tangle of legal roadblocks and damaging publicity campaigns.

      Most school districts already require students to receive a battery of vaccines, which is one reason vaccination rates are so high in the US. There’s little reason to believe that things will be different here. After all, polls suggest that the majority of Americans are afraid of catching the virus and will take steps independent of the government to protect themselves and their families.

      There will inevitably be those who refuse the vaccine because they’re paranoid about the long-term consequences. And the reality is, even scientists admit that the only way to be certain about the long-term affects of any given vaccine or treatment is experience, especially if they live in a more rural setting. Is that really so wrong?

      But the aggression on the part of public officials is already starting: In Washington, Gov. Jay Inslee warned Wednesday that COVID-test-refusers wouldn’t be allowed into the state’s grocery stores.

      Of course, that’s just the start, as restrictions on test-deniers will inevitably be expanded to vaccine-deniers.

    • The "See-No-Evil" Phase of Russiagate
      The “See-No-Evil” Phase of Russiagate

      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 23:25

      Authored by Patrick Lawrence via ConsortiumNews.com,

      The media spinfest following the collapse of this conspiracy theory suggests our troubled republic simply cannot accept its errors, leaving us unable to learn from them.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The long, destructive conspiracy theory known as Russiagate, the mother of them all, at last evaporates into thin air. No shred of it remains as of back-to-back disclosures over the past couple of weeks. Where does this leave us? What is to come of this momentous turn of events?

      Among those not inclined toward hysteria or copious quaffs of Democratic Party Kool–Aid, it has long been a question how those who concocted and sustained the tales of Russian “meddling,” “collusion,” and mail hackery would manage their embarrassment — not to mention their potential legal liabilities — once their edifice-built-on-sand collapsed, as it was destined from the first to do.

      The early signs are as some predicted: They will slither quietly off the stage without comment, they will deny their incessant, ever-vehement accusations, they will profess to weariness, they will insist there are more important things to think about now.

      Here is a tweet from one Bob F published Saturday. Our Bob touches nearly all of the above-noted bases. His mentions of Matt Taibbi, Aaron Maté, and Jimmy Dore reference two journalists and a talk-show host who identified the fraud from the first and had the scruples not to surrender to the liberal totalitarianism we have suffered these past three years:

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Yes, Bob, lets. This is a brilliant specimen of the flaccid cowardice we’re now to witness many times over. Reassuringly enough, a modest twitter storm followed. Here is a reply from Kathy Woods, a consistently insightful commentator in Twitterland:

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      For good measure, here is another response to Big Bob, this one addressing his implicit assertion of Democratic Party virtue in the Age of Trump:  

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      There is anger abroad as Russiagate finally unwinds, plainly. This is an excellent thing. And Ms. Woods is right: It is important to make the sun shine on what became, before the end, a scandal of historic proportions. There is a chance of achieving the “complete exposure” Woods asks for, but it remains a question, as of now, whether this will come to pass. 

      Two weeks ago the Justice Department made public documents showing that when, in January 2017, prosecutors wanted to close the collusion case against Michael Flynn, who briefly served as President Donald Trump’s national security advisor, because they found “no derogatory information” against him, Peter Strzok, the philandering F.B.I. agent later found to be shaping an “insurance policy” against a Trump victory in the 2016 election, cajoled them into keeping it open — absence of evidence be damned.

      Two Other Developments

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Adam Schiff. (DonkeyHotey caricature via Flickr)

      The Strzok revelations turned out to be prelude to the two other developments further demolishing the Russiagate narrative. Last Thursday Justice finally dropped its case against Flynn altogether. We now know he was the victim of a perjury trap when questioned about his contacts with Sergey Kislyak, Moscow’s ambassador to Washington in 2016. “Get him to lie so we can prosecute him,” was the FBI’s directive.

      Yet worse, Flynn’s guilty plea was in response to prosecutors’ threats to indict his son if he pled otherwise. Tell me the difference, please, between this kind of stuff and the treatment of the accused in the postwar show trials in Eastern Europe.

      On the same day the Justice Department dropped the charges against Flynn, the House Intelligence Committee released documents showing that the FBI had no evidence that Russia pilfered the Democratic National Committee’s email archives by hacking into its servers in mid–2016. The FBI had none because CrowdStrike, the patently corrupt cyber-security firm on which it (inexplicably) relied, never gave it any: It had none, either — contrary to its many claims otherwise.

      The taker of cake here is that the documents also show that the House Intelligence Committee, chaired by the inimitable (thank goodness) Adam Schiff, knew there were no grounds to allege Russian involvement in what wasn’t a hack by anyone, but a leak, probably by someone with direct access to the DNC’s servers.

      My Consortium News colleague Ray McGovern has just detailed the collapse of the “Russians-hacked-it” ruse.

      No evidence anywhere along the line of collusion, none of Russians stealing mail. There is a simpler way to put this: No Russiagate.

      In truth, there has been evidence aplenty of the Russiagate fraud for some time, due in part to the researches of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, VIPS, of which McGovern is a principal. The problem has been to secure official acknowledgement of three years’ worth of wrongdoing. We now have it, even if it arrives with no admission whatsoever of responsibility.

      Enter Perception Management 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      (PIxabay)

      Now come the lies, the dissembling, and the media’s “perception management.”  Tucker Carlson, the Fox News presenter, offered a funny-but-not-funny catalog of the liars who now stand exposed, none more thoroughly than the egregious Schiff, who ought to resign over this, and Evelyn Farkas, another Obama-era holdover with absolutely no regard for the truth. Loretta Lynch, Obama’s A–G, will also have things to answer for, assuming answers for her misconduct are required of her.

      Among the press and broadcasters, it has been a spinfest this past week — led, naturally, by The New York Times, given no one in the media dares venture a syllable for which the Times has not signaled prior approval. The paper’s report on the dismissal of the Flynn case marked the judgment down as “the latest example of Attorney General William P. Barr’s efforts to chisel away at the results of the Russia investigation.” I lost count of the mentions of Flynn’s “lying” and “guilty plea” after nine. No reference to the perjury trap set for Flynn, or the threat to indict his son.

      The Times ran two further pieces hatcheting Flynn and Barr in Saturday’s editions, here and here, and a straight-out character assassination of Flynn on Sunday, casting him as some kind of pathological split personality. The Gray Lady doth protest too much, in my view.

      The press vastly over-invested in the Russiagate narrative from the first, and now appears set to throw yet more money after all the bad. This is not a good sign. It suggests that our troubled republic simply cannot accept its errors, leaving us unable to learn from them. This is why America in its post-democratic phase cannot self-correct. It is why we have no assurance that another Russiagate, in whatever form, will not be visited upon us.

      “Attorney General William P. Barr’s efforts to chisel away at the results of the Russia investigation”? Absolutely. We have to hope he gets somewhere. Committed Russiagaters now take to charging that Barr is corrupting an otherwise snow-white Justice Department. Say what? Given all we now know, this starts to tip into the zone of black humor.

      Barr and his investigators are fully armed as of last week. They have all they need to get to the bottom of this dark ocean. They have it in their power to bring to justice the three architects of the Russiagate scam when it was in motion — ex–C.I.A. Director John Brennan, ex–Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, ex–F.B.I. Director James Comey — for what amounted to an attempt to depose a president in a bloodless coup. These are the Democratic Party’s answer to former President Richard Nixon’s infamous “plumbers,” if you ask me.

      Whether Barr and his investigators get the task done is to a great extent a matter of politics and bureaucratic warfare that will at best be partially visible to us in coming months. It is a question of how far he will be permitted to go.

      Succeed or fail, the record is at least and at last straight.

    • Visualizing Where COVID-19 Is Rising And Falling Around The World
      Visualizing Where COVID-19 Is Rising And Falling Around The World

      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 23:05

      It’s been just over two months since New York declared a state of emergency, and global stock markets were hammered as the fears of a full-blown crisis began to take hold.

      Since then, we’ve seen detailed, daily coronavirus coverage in most of the major news outlets, and Visual Capitalist’s Nick Routley notes, with such a wealth of information available, it can be hard to keep track of the big picture of what’s happening around the world.

      Today’s graphic, adapted from Information is Beautiful, is an efficient look at where the virus is fading away, and where new infection hotspots are emerging.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The Ebb and Flow of Coronavirus Cases

      First, the good news: the number of new confirmed COVID-19 cases has started to level off on a global basis. This metric was rising rapidly until the beginning of April — but since then, it has plateaued and is holding steady (for now).

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Of course, the global total doesn’t tell the whole story. Different countries, and even regions within countries, are in very different phases of dealing with the pandemic.

      Let’s look at the current situation around the world.

      New Cases: Falling

      Many of the countries that experienced early outbreaks of COVID-19 are now seeing a drop-off in the number of new cases.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Italy, which experienced one of the most severe outbreaks, is finally emerging from the world’s longest nationwide lockdown. Switzerland and the Netherlands both had some of the highest confirmed case rates per capita, but are now in better situations as fresh cases drop off.

      The narrow, pointy curves exhibited by New Zealand and Austria give us an indication of where containment measures were successful at curbing the spread of the virus. This type of pronounced curve is less common, and is generally seen in nations with smaller populations.

      New Cases: Leveling Off

      For many of the world’s major economies, containing the spread of the virus has proven exceptionally difficult. Despite increased testing and lockdown measures, the United States still has one of the steepest infection trajectory curves. The UK also has a very similar new case curve.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Even as countries’ curves begin to flatten and level off, there is still a danger of new flare-ups of the virus – as is now the case in South Korea and China. Even in Singapore, which saw early success in containing the virus, is experiencing a rise in new COVID-19 cases.

      New Cases: Rising

      Some countries – particularly developing economies – are only in the beginning stages of facing COVID-19’s rapid spread. This is a cause for concern, as many of the countries with steeply rising curves have larger populations and fewer resources to deal with a pandemic.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      In late March, as the virus was spreading rapidly through Europe, Russia appeared to have avoided an outbreak within its borders. Today, however, that situation is much different. Russia has the world’s steepest infection trajectory curve, with the number of cases on a course to double roughly every five days.

      The countries in the image above have a combined population of 2.8 billion people, so as COVID-19 continues to spread through those countries, the eyes of the world will be watching.

    • "We Were In A Headless-Chicken Phase": NYTimes Reporter Rebuked For Anti-Trump Tirade On CNN
      “We Were In A Headless-Chicken Phase”: NYTimes Reporter Rebuked For Anti-Trump Tirade On CNN

      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 22:45

      Authored by Jonathan Turley,

      The New York Times’s Science and Health reporter, Donald McNeil Jr. is under fire for a tirade against President Donald Trump, Vice President Mike Pence and others in an interview on CNN.  The comments were so political that the paper itself issued a rebuke and told McNeil to stick with science in the future.

      McNeil’s statement that “we were in a headless-chicken phase” could as easily describe the status of journalistic ethics.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      McNeil’s comments were made in an interview with CNN International’s Christiane Amanpour, who I previously criticized for a shocking call to silence Trump by declaring his speeches criminal “hate speech.”

      In the interview, McNeil called for firings over how “we completely blew it” in responding to the virus:

      “We were in a headless-chicken phase, and yes, it’s the president’s fault, it is not China’s fault. You know, the head of the Chinese CDC was on the phone to Robert Redfield on Jan. 1, again on Jan. 8, and the two agencies were talking on Jan. 19. The Chinese had a test on Jan. 13; the Germans had a test on Jan. 16. We fiddled around for two months, we had a test on March 5 and it didn’t work. We didn’t have 10,000 people tested until March 15.”

      He went on to lambast the “incompetent leadership” at the CDC and called for its dirhead ector Dr. Robert Redfield to “resign.”  He also attacked President Trump as “the same guy who said inject yourself with disinfectant” and that his “grasp of the science” isn’t even “at a third-grade level.”

      In a more serious charge, he claimed “suppression from the top- I mean, the real coverup was the person in this country who was saying, you know, ‘This is not an important virus, the flu is worse, it’s all going to go away, it’s nothing,. And that encouraged everybody around him to say, ‘It’s nothing, it’s nothing, it’s nothing.’”

      The Times issued a statement that

      “In an interview with Christiane Amanpour today, Donald McNeil, Jr. went too far in expressing his personal views. His editors have discussed the issue with him to reiterate that his job is to report the facts and not to offer his own opinions. We are confident that his reporting on science and medicine for The Times has been scrupulously fair and accurate.”

      What is interesting is that Washington Post media critic Erik Wemple criticized McNeil’s comments as outside of the parameters for such interviews, saying “Such activism, after all, is extreme even for a veteran newsman exercising his analytical muscles in a freewheeling cable-news interview,”

      However, Wemple then later added his own freewheeling dig at the Administration, attacking Trump’s “unfathomable pronouncements of incompetence, indifference and cluelessness from the president in public appearance after public appearance. What’s an experienced health reporter to say?”  The later addendum certainly assuaged those who were upset with the Post for chastising a Trump critic.

      If this was a matter of journalistic ethics, why was it necessary to add an effective “well Trump had it coming” statement?

      If McNeil strayed outside of the ethical parameters, it does not matter how you view Trump. 

      The issue is the judgment of the journalist, not the reputation of the President.  Wemple’s “justified cause” addendum bulldozed the high ground by taking his own dig at the President. It is like saying that a police officer used excessive force but the suspect was a bad one so “what’s an experienced police officer to do?”

      The controversy reflects a frustration that I have expressed over legal analysis. I have been a columnist and legal analyst for decades.  Generally, while there were unfortunate outliers, legal analysts tended to be closely tied to legal authority and less partisan. That tradition has been lost in the age of echo-journalism where the ability to appear on many media outlets depends on your willingness to declare Trump or his associates guilty of an ever expanding array of crimes.  Legal analysts often feed an insatiable appetite for attacks disguised as analysis under the same relativistic view of “what is an experienced legal analysis to do?”

    • Exiled Businessman Exposes Sweeping Chinese 'Disinformation Campaign' On Social Media
      Exiled Businessman Exposes Sweeping Chinese ‘Disinformation Campaign’ On Social Media

      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 22:25

      Were you surprised by the sheer volume of vitriolic tweets about President Trump’s decision to use the phrase “Chinese virus”? Well, one London-based Chinese businessman/dissident says he has evidence that might explain this phenomenon, and shed some light on how Beijing manipulates social media platforms to exploit and shape public opinion far beyond the borders of the mainland.

      China has been using armies of “bot” accounts on platforms like twitter to harass and criticize those who speak out against the Chinese government in Beijing and its handling of the outbreak, and spread disinformation about the origins of the virus that – you guessed it – blame the American military for unleashing the virus in Wuhan.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The dissident said that during the week before last, he identified more than 1,000 bot accounts on Twitter which he believes to be part of a government-backed “Swarm”. He’s also identified dozens of suspicious pages on Facebook.

      Between April 25 and May 3, Strick said he identified more than 1,000 accounts on Twitter that were associated with the Chinese disinformation effort, as well as more than 50 different pages on Facebook. He estimated that 300 or 400 new Twitter accounts were joining the network each day, as part of the Chinese campaign.

      “The network has evolved and is still growing,” said Strick, in an interview. “I believe it’s a state-backed Chinese campaign.”

      Strick said his research is just the latest to highlight one aspect of China’s sweeping propaganda campaign to rewrite history as far as the virus is concerned. Yet, liberals who complain constantly about Fox News brainwashing are acting as the CCP’s “useful idiots” by amplifying these fake voices.

      Strick’s work is the latest research suggesting China has ramped up disinformation around the coronavirus, to dilute their own culpability and shift blame elsewhere, although some have cast doubt on certain findings or suggested they may warrant further investigation.

      In research published last week on the investigative website Bellingcat, Strick described the operation as a “well-structured information campaign” that was working in a coordinated way “to skew the narrative around varying topics, and to push set agendas.”

      The operation bears some of the same hallmarks as a network of 900 accounts that Twitter uncovered in August last year, which the company identified as “a significant state-backed information operation focused on the situation in Hong Kong,” operated from mainland China.

      And get this: A cybersecurity analyst quoted by BBG said the spam bot campaigns resembled the MO of an infamous Beijing-backed group known in the industry as “Spamouflague Dragon”.

      Ben Nimmo, director of investigations at Graphika Inc., said the accounts identified by Strick appeared to be linked to a network known as “Spamouflage Dragon,” which was previously identified promoting attacks on Hong Kong protesters by using hijacked and fake accounts on YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook.

      In a September 2019 report, Graphika described Spamouflague Dragon as “an active and prolific, but ultimately low-impact, cross-platform political spam network,” whose actions “appeared designed to support the Chinese government and discredit its critics, both at home and abroad.”

      For what it’s worth, China’s Foreign Ministry dismissed the claims as “unfounded” (shocker), and Twitter affirmed that while it’s working tirelessly to crack down on these malicious, foreign-influence-spreading bots, the company is preoccupied right now with silencing conservative voices.

      China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Wednesday called reports of a Chinese disinformation campaign “completely unfounded.”

      “China opposes disinformation,” ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian told reporters at a regular briefing in Beijing. “As to Chinese officials opening accounts on Twitter and other social media platforms, the purpose is to better communicate with the world and introduce China’s situation and policies. We want to strengthen communication and exchange with the outside world to enhance our mutual understanding.”
      A Twitter Inc. spokesperson said in a statement that it was working to “pro-actively monitor” the platform “to identify attempts at platform manipulation and mitigate them.”

      “If we identify information campaigns on our service that we can reliably attribute to state-backed activity either domestic or foreign-led, we will disclose them,” the spokesperson said.

      Facebook Inc. didn’t respond to a request for comment.

      Strick said many of the accounts were focused on attacking Guo Wengui, an exiled Chinese businessman, now based in the U.S., who is a fierce critic of the ruling Communist Party government. The accounts were also promoting baseless claims linking vaping and Covid-19, as well as amplifying conspiracy theories about biosecurity incidents in the U.S. under the hashtags #coronavirus and #TruthAboutCovid.

      The accounts also promoted content that included criticism of pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong.

      Many of the accounts on Twitter, he said, had Chinese names and posted content in both English and Chinese, while other accounts in the network used Russian account names written in the Cyrillic alphabet, possibly to deflect attribution of the accounts away from China.

      On May 8, the U.S. State Department’s Global Engagement Center said it had identified “a new network of inauthentic accounts” on Twitter, which it said we “created with the intent to amplify Chinese propaganda and disinformation.” It isn’t clear if the accounts were the same ones identified by Strick.

      Want to learn more about how to spot a bot? For regular users of social media, the process should be fairly easy, but many still mistake bots for humans (that’s why they’re still effective). Strick offers some advice above on how to spot a bot.

      But we suspect that as we get closer to election day, this “inference” from China (which hasn’t generated anywhere near the outcry that the (now proven to be total bs) ‘Russia collusion’ narrative, you’ll notice) will become even more widespread.

    • The COVID-19 Sword Of Damocles
      The COVID-19 Sword Of Damocles

      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 22:05

      Authored by Robert Weissberg via The Unz Review,

      A continuum exists in how to address the Covid-19 virus.

      • On one end are those wanting to quickly phase out the lockdown (“a cure worse than the disease”) despite the mounting deaths.

      • Opposed are Americans so terrified the that nothing less than total eradication of the virus will suffice.

      The first view typically rests on an economic cost/benefit analysis including “human despair” that may be short of death, for example, unemployment induced domestic violence (and see here and here).

      The justification for continued draconian measures, at least outside of “hotspots” like New York City is, however, less clear. This rationale is especially questionable given the low odds of catching the diseases and being hospitalized – the most recent pertinent data are 40.4 per 100,000 (but 131.6 for those 65+, a figure comparable for hospitalization rates for the seasonal flu). Moreover, many infected display no symptoms or recover at home so they are statistically invisible so the true infection rate of 40.4 per 100,000 is likely too high.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The mortality rate, the bottom line in assessing risk, is exceedingly complex and, varies as new data are uncovered and past figures are re-calculated. The overall rate is estimated to be 5.84%, but this is highly age-related, varies enormously by state(from 1282.2 per million in New York vs. 12.1 per million in Wyoming) and depends on other health factors such obesity and heart illness Yet, such is the nature of the complicated data, others (including Dr. Anthony Fauci) suggest that the mortality rate may be as low as 1%, a figure still substantially greater than the “normal” seasonal flu. All and all, then, the objective scientific data—the overall low incidence of infection, its selective impact and low death rate of those infected– hardly justifies the type of hysteria in which, for example, a hair salon operator is jailed for conducting business.

      What, then, accounts for the frenzy?

      Let’s begin by noting that carnage per se does not entirely explain the panic. The super-deadly 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic is well-known but more relevant was the ‘Hong Kong flu” of 1968, a far more lethal pox than today’s Asian import. Though largely forgotten, in 1968, the H3N2 (its technical name) pandemic killed 100,000 Americans (plus a million more worldwide), a figure that exceeds the death toll of both the Vietnam and Korean Wars. Moreover, the US population in 1970 was 209 million versus 330 million today, so adjusted for population the number killed was 136,000. For unclear reasons, however, the 1968 “Hong Kong” flu passed almost unnoticed when it hit, conceivably over-shadowed by the Vietnam war and widespread urban rioting. Closer in time was the epidemic of 1957 that killed 116,000 and the 2009 flu epidemic—H1N1—affected 60.8 million Americans and the estimated death toll was around 12,000.

      Part of the explanation for the panic (outside of a few hotspots like New York City and Northern New Jersey) lies in the predictability of deadly infection, not its absolute incidence. The power of controllability to calm fear is well-illustrated by how few Americans ever worried over AIDS once transmission mechanisms were uncovered. Since the HIV/AIDS epidemic exploded in the 1980s, some 700,000 Americans have died of AIDs but few Americans are panicked by the carnage. Escaping AIDs merely entails avoiding dangerous homosexual sex and shooting up drugs, behaviors that nearly Americans readily avoid. Thus understood, safety is guaranteed, so there is no anxiety or depression regardless of HIV/AIDs rates.

      This distinction between controllable versus almost random lethality helps explains why highlighting overall US morality statistics fails to calm the panic. For those terrified going to Whole Foods, it makes absolutely no difference if the 2017 death toll from heart illness was 647,457, or, for that matter, 1,000,000 or 10,000,000! Nobody suddenly contracts heart illness by shopping at Whole Foods. Of the ten major causes of death in 2017 tracked by the CDC, the only transmittable one is influenza and pneumonia (55,672 cases in 2017), and even here, potential victims exercise substantial individual controllability via flu shots or seeing a doctor early on.

      Covid-19 at least currently is different though, as public health officials insist, it can be mitigated by avoiding crowds, frequent hand washing and wearing masks. But, can such personal actions hardly guarantee given the iffy underlying science. For example, as one recent report from New York City found that two-thirds of those admitted to hospitals were, as per official decree, self-quarantined by staying home. Only a small percentage worked away from home and a tiny number took public transportation, In other words, the official wisdom may have been inaccurate, so who can be trusted?

      Potential unknown dangers lurk everywhere even if the actual hazard is exceedingly remote. Yes, you may barricade yourself, wear a Haz-Mat suit and order out meals but the Typhoid Mary delivery person may deposit the virus on the pizza box. Your non-medical grade mask only protects others from you, not vice versa so the infected person who jogs past you in the park may be a killer (and even medical grade face masks can be dangerous counterfeits). You cannot banish a spouse or child, and each might inadvertently bring the pox home. Keep in mind, that it will be months before a cure can be found, and given the millions of possible opportunities for infection, only a single incident can be deadly.

      The panic also reflects is the unavailability of the traditional, and most effective solution—escape. Rich Italians during the Renaissance practiced villeggiaturafleeing the city to a country farm or villa and waiting for the pestilence to subside. Given the frequency of plagues, building isolated rural villas flourished and undoubtedly help calmed frayed nerves.

      Alas, hardly possible in today’s travel-friendly world. When the epidemic first appeared, for example, many affluent New Yorkers fled to their seemingly safe vacation homes, but few city residents enjoy this costly option and, more important, the influx could hardly exclude asymptomatic carriers who would then infect escapees. The epidemic’s worldwide ubiquity also precludes easy refuge. An inexpensive Dominican Republic resort is hardly a safe haven–who can guarantee a virus-free staff, and local medical facilities may be inadequate. This physical escape option also assumes that the sanctuary will admit you.

      Make no mistake, the carnage is real, tragic and Pollyanna obliviousness is not the cure but, that being said, this is not the apocalypse. Especially troublesome is how sky-high anxiety levels undermine rational cost-benefit public debate. It is easy to understand why those suffering from cabin fever are confused by often uncertain epidemical CDC data. Statistics about the extremely low odds of infection for those under 65 and in decent health are meaningless to habitual lottery players or the innumerate. Terror may be especially likely for that fantasizing ending life as an anonymous corpse rotting in a refrigerated truck in a Queens New York parking lot thanks to briefly encountering a McDonald’s employee.

      Though it might bring momentary therapeutic relief, mindlessly lashing out at President Trump for insufficient testing, stockpiling too few ventilators, White House disorganization, recommending drinking Clorox or just “rejecting science” solves nothing.

    • California Inmates Infecting Themselves With COVID-19 In Scheme To Get Released
      California Inmates Infecting Themselves With COVID-19 In Scheme To Get Released

      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 21:45

      Inmates in Los Angeles County, California are infecting themselves with the Wuhan coronavirus in the hope that they will be released from prison, Sheriff Alex Villanueva revealed during a Monday press conference.

      Surveillance footage from the Pitchess Detention Center just north of Santa Clarita shows inmates passing a bottle of hot water around in what Villanueva described as an attempt to both become infected, and raise their body temperature before a nurse takes their temperature in order to fake the illness.

      “Under normal circumstances, no one would be doing that anyway, particularly when everyone has the same access to the water. … No one shares this,” said Villanueva. “Now, they’re sharing the hot water and using the same bottle.”

      There are roughly 2,000 inmates who have been quarantined at Pitchness, according to SCVTV.

      Everyone has the same symptoms,” said 28-year-old inmate David Lopez, who is serving a two-year sentence for assault. “I was down for four days. I had severe body aches, troubling breathing, sweating profusely with cold sweats, and I didn’t have the energy to get up to even use the restroom,” he said, adding “I have not been tested.”

      In other footage noted by Breitbart, inmates can be seen drinking from the same styrofoam cup and sniffing from a mask to try and become infected. They are also ‘deliberately crowding together and not social distancing,’ according to the Sheriff.

      That said, “There’s no such thing as social distancing here,” said inmate Rudolph Castro, 46, who is currently awaiting trial to face murder charges. “We’re pretty much packed in here like sardines.”

      Castro said the inmates use the same soap, they shower together, line up, sit and eat together, and “everything is really close.” They’ve also been given disinfectant to clean the floors with, but the inmates have said they don’t believe it is enough.

      According to at least three inmates within an NCFF dormitory, nearly every single inmate within a 90-man dorm began exhibiting some form of symptoms similar to those related to COVID-19 starting last week. All three said they’ve been experiencing symptoms, but outside of temperature checks and some receiving blood pressure checks, a majority of them remain untested and afraid. –SCVTV

      “It’s sad to think that someone deliberately tried to expose themself to [coronavirus],” he said, adding “As a result of this behavior, from this particular modular, 21 inmates tested positive for [coronavirus] in a week of these videos being taken.”

      “That is problematic because somehow there was a mistake in belief among the inmate population that if they tested positive that there was a way to force our hand and release more inmates out of our jail environment,” Villanueva added. “And that’s not going to happen.”

    • Wisconsin Supreme Court Strikes Down 'Stay At Home' Order; Maryland To Lift Lockdown Friday: Live Updates
      Wisconsin Supreme Court Strikes Down ‘Stay At Home’ Order; Maryland To Lift Lockdown Friday: Live Updates

      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 21:30

      Summary:

      • Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down Stay at Home order
      • Maryland lifts ‘stay at home’ order
      • Illinois reports record jump in deaths
      • WHO’s Ryan says virus risks becoming ‘endemic’
      • Spain says 5% of population infected by the virus
      • NJ gov says state will partially reopen Monday
      • Washington DC reopening pushed to June 8
      • NY reports jump in new cases for first time in 5 days
      • NY deaths decrease slightly day-over-day
      • US set to extend travel restrictions on Canada & Mexico borders
      • UK releases latest figures
      • Mexico plans to reopen Monday
      • Spain won’t reopen borders to most foreigners until at least July
      • VW ‘pauses’ manufacturing of VW Golf, SUVs
      • China imposes ‘partial lockdown’ on northeastern border city
      • SK’s ‘Itaewon’ cluster climbs to 120
      • Germany, Austria agree to reopen mutual border
      • Global cases: 4.22 million
      • Global deaths: 291,519
      • Poland reports record jump in new cases
      • Russia sees numbers start to slow after shocking record run of confirmations

      *          *           *

      Update (2100ET): Before we call it a night, we’ve seen a couple of important developments Wednesday evening in the US.

      In Wisconsin, the state Supreme Court ruled that Gov. Tony Evers stay at home order was unconstitutional. The court ruled it “unconstitutional” and “unenforceable” in what CNN described as a “high-profile win for the state’s Republican-led legislature”. Republican lawmakers filed the court challenge, and have spearheaded an effort to reopen the state more quickly. In a 4-3 decision, the court ruled that Evers and high-level bureaucrats had overstepped their authority.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Tony Evers

      The justices wrote in their decision that the state agency that issued the order “cannot confer on itself the power to dictate the lives of law-abiding individuals as comprehensively as the order does without reaching beyond the executive branch’s authority.” Evers ordered Department of Health Services Secretary-designee Andrea Palm – who was personally targeted by the lawsuit, along with other senior state officials – to issue the order.

      Evers hasn’t released a statement, but at the time the suit was filed, he tweeted that  “Republicans are exploiting a global pandemic to further their attempts to undermine the will of the people. But what’s at stake goes far beyond political power – lives are on the line.”

      On Wednesday evening in Maryland, Gov. Larry Hogan announced plans to lift the state’s “stay at home” order and replace it with a “safer at home” order.

      The order will be lifted and replaced at 5pmET on Friday, Hogan said, citing a slight decline in hospitalizations state-wide over 2 weeks as justification for the decision under the federal guidelines.

      The “Safer at Home” advisory, which will not be enforced by the rule of law, allows manufacturing, retail, haircuts and worship services to resume with limitations. Though the fight against the virus is “far from over,” Hogan said the state “can now at least begin to slowly recover,” he said during Wednesday’s press briefing.

      *          *           *

      Update (1700ET): A day after news out of LA County about an extension of its reopening timeline sent stocks sliding into the close, the LA Times reports that LA County has issued a new “Stay at Home” order with no end date.

      However, Los Angeles County businesses on Wednesday continued to reopen as officials eased restrictions by allowing thousands of retail shops and manufacturing companies to reopen with certain limitations. The extension of the order really means that the timeline for a return to “normal” – the long-term end date for when consumption and productivity at certain businesses can rebound closer to full capactiy – could potentially be expanded for months.

      Though, if NJ Gov Murphy’s big U-turn from earlier today is any indication, LA County might be offering some caveats and clarifications offering a more expeditious timeline for reopening.

      *          *           *

      Update (1530ET): As data showing state pension funds booked their worst quarter of losses ever during Q1, Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, the latest in a line of billionaire governors who have tried – and failed – to rectify the state’s myriad financial problems, announced that the state saw a record number of deaths yesterday, according to data released Wednesday afternoon by state public health officials.

      • ILLINOIS SEES 192 MORE VIRUS DEATHS, LARGEST 1-DAY INCREASE

      Watch the rest of his briefing below:

      *          *           *

      Update (1430ET): During Wednesday’s press briefing, the WHO’s Dr. Mike Ryan warned that the coronavirus might become “endemic”, bouncing around the population like HIV or a supercharged version of the common cold until a vaccine can be mass produced. He added a warning against all predictions about how long the virus will keep circulating.

      Dr. Ryan also urged the world to undertake a massive effort to eradicate it, to which we say…dude, really?

      “It is important to put this on the table: this virus may become just another endemic virus in our communities, and this virus may never go away,” WHO emergencies expert Mike Ryan told an online briefing.

      “I think it is important we are realistic and I don’t think anyone can predict when this disease will disappear,” he added. “I think there are no promises in this and there are no dates. This disease may settle into a long problem, or it may not be.”

      […]

      WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus added: “The trajectory is in our hands, and it’s everybody’s business, and we should all contribute to stop this pandemic.”

      Ryan said “very significant control” of the virus was required in order to lower the assessment of risk, which he said remained high at the “national, regional and global levels”.

      Reuters

      There are currently more than 100 vaccines in development, including projects like Moderna’s that seem to have found favor at the FDA.

      Dr. Ryan’s comment – which isn’t exactly a new theory – is really only notable because it follows Dr. Fauci’s warning before the Senate that a premature reopening risks igniting a second-wave of the virus.

      In other news, South Korea just confirmed 26 new cases of coronavirus, 4 of which were imported, on Wednesday, with 18 of them purportedly linked to the nightclub cluster.

      Seoul has ordered more than 2,000 clubs and bars to close again after the cluster of roughly 140 cases was discovered.

      In Japan, Shinzo Abe said the country is making great progress as the number of new infections as plunged in recent days. The PM signaled that he could lift the country’s state of emergency order within a week.

      *          *           *

      Update (1340ET): As more states and countries conduct random testing using the notoriously unreliable antibody tests that are flooding the market, the Spanish government has just announced the results of its first test, which found that 11% of the Madrid residents tested came back positive for virus antibodies.

      Testing positive for the antibodies means you were likely infected by the virus (unless it’s a false positive, which are rarer unfortunately than false negatives), or were infected, but didn’t show any symptoms of COVID-19 (the disease caused by the novel coronavirus).

      INITIAL DATA FROM SPAIN’S NATIONAL CORONAVIRUS ANTIBODY STUDY SHOWS ABOUT 5% OF POPULATION HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO VIRUS, WITH MADRID AT 11%, SORIA AT 14%

      We were surprised: Considering initial rounds of antibody surveillance in NYC found that more than 1/5th of residents have been infected.

      *          *           *

      Update (1310ET): Less than a day after he whined during his daily press briefing about having the worst mortality rate from the virus in the country (he doesn’t), NJ Gov Phil Murphy has on Wednesday seemingly taken a major u-turn, moving ahead with a plan to partially reopen the state on Monday after pledging to wait for more testing.

      Specifically, the state will allow construction workers and more ‘non-essential’ retail workers to report to work, with shoppers able to shop via ‘curbside’ pickup. We’ll let the governor tell you more himself:

      Yesterday, Murphy laid out a plan to use state money to significantly boost its testing and tracing capacity as he faces mounting pressure from the state’s business community to start the reopening process sooner rather than waiting out of what critics said was a misguided sense of caution. The state has already hired nearly 1k contact tracers.

      Murphy also reported a slowing in deaths in long-term care homes, as well as a slowdown in deaths and hospitalizations overall.

      Meanwhile, Washington DC is extending its lockdown until June 8 as Mayor Muriel Bowser insists that more testing is needed before the city can reopen. With markets deep in the red thanks to reopening anxieties stoked by a couple of “big rich guys”, will NJ’s reopening push have the opposite effect of Tuesday afternoon’s report about LA County’s reopening plans?

      Additionally, NJ has reported nearly 2 dozen cases of the mysterious respiratory syndrome seen in patients in NYC and UK. Fortunately, none of the children have died, though only 4 have tested positive for COVID-19.

      • FOUR OF YOUNG KAWASAKI DISEASE PATIENTS HAVE COVID-19
      • N.J. CONFIRMS 18 CHILDREN WITH INFLAMMATORY DISEASE
      • DISEASE IN N.Y. CHILDREN NOW TAKING HOLD IN NEW JERSEY

      *          *           *

      Update (1300ET): The rest of NY’s daily data have been released, and they offered evidence that the number of new cases accelerated for the first time in 5 days, after deaths moved marginally lower.

      • NEW YORK ADDS 2,176 VIRUS CASES, UP AFTER FIVE DAY DECLINE
      • NEW YORK GOVERNOR CUOMO SAYS 14 OTHER U.S. STATES ARE NOW INVESTIGATING CASES OF RARE INFLAMMATORY SYNDROME IMPACTING CHILDREN LINKED TO COVID-19
      • CUOMO: NOT READY TO SAY WHAT SCHOOLS SHOULD BE DOING IN SEPTEMBER

      *          *           *

      Update (1145ET): France is one of the slower-moving western European states when it comes to reopening. But in a sign of just how desperate Europeans are for outdoor exercise, the AFP shares a video of the streets of Paris flowing with bikers, skateboarders and others on the third day of gradually lifting the lockdown.

      Back in the US, while California’s AG drones on CNBC, NY has reported its latest daily figures, slowing an ever-so-slight pullback in new deaths. Gov. Cuomo is also delivering his daily briefing. Watch below:

      And as a reminder: With the Dems now pushing another relief bill – this one with a price tag of $3 trillion – here’s how the US’s stimulus spending – mostly comprising spending authorized in the $2.2 trillion CARES Act – stacks up to Japan, and others.

      *          *           *

      Update (1050ET): The White House is reportedly weighing an extension of the travel restrictions involving the US’s borders with Mexico and Canada. While Canada seems to have its outbreak mostly under control, Mexican President AMLO has allowed the virus to spread with only light restrictions on the population which are on track to be lifted Monday.

      *          *           *

      Update (0855ET): As Fed Chairman Jerome Powell speaks, the UK Department of Health and Social Care just released the latest daily figures. They brought total cases to 229,705 (+1.43% on yesterday) and deaths to 33,186 (+1.51%).

      The data include deaths in hospitals, care homes and at home. The true number of deaths may be significantly different.

      In Mexico, left-wing anti-establishment candidate AMLO announced Tuesday that he would reopen Mexico’s economy on May 18 – ie Monday. The decision comes as more evidence mounts suggesting that Mexico is deliberately undercounting the number of coronavirus-linked deaths and infections.

      It will be a real-time experiment in just how effective lockdowns are at preventing virus-related deaths long term.

      Here’s more on Mexico’s plans to reopen its auto, construction and mining sectors, with plans for ‘non-essential’ retail stores to reopen in greater numbers coming down the pike, via BBG:

      Mexico’s auto, construction and mining sectors have been cleared to restart operations beginning Monday, a decision that comes just a day after the government reported record deaths from the coronavirus.

      In a Wednesday news conference, Economy Minister Graciela Marquez laid out plans to reopen the Mexican economy in stages, starting with areas of the country where cases of virus have not been reported.

      President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador is faced with a tough choice as Latin America’s second-biggest economy tips into a recession that’s likely to be far deeper than the devastating Tequila Crisis of the mid 1990s. While a reopening may alleviate some of the strain on the economy, the decision also runs the real risk of fanning the pandemic, leading to an even greater economic disruption, some economists say.

      “The contraction would be more contained” if this reopening is successful, said Marco Oviedo, chief Latin America economist for Barclays Plc. “The problem is the data. It seems to be inconclusive on the situation.”

      Meanwhile, as we hinted at earlier, various governments’ plans regarding when they will reopen internal borders inside the Schengen area is becoming the most important issue in Europe on Wednesday. Spanish authorities are reportedly planning to keep borders closed for most foreigners until July, according to Reuters.

      *          *           *

      Update (0745ET): After reopening the largest auto factory in the world, Volkswagen is reportedly ‘pausing’ production of the Volkswagen Golf (a compact model more popular in Europe), as well as its SUVs, due to ‘poor sales’.

      What, exactly, was the point of reopening factories and potentially exposing workers to SARS-CoV-2, just to shut down operations again? Also, given that VW is the world’s largest carmaker, this is just the latest headline to undermine the “V-shaped” thesis/“fantasy”.

      *          *           *

      As we reported last night, news that LA County suspects its reopening will take up to 3 months – a month longer than previously expected – sent markets lower into the close. That news, combined with Dr. Fauci’s warning about states rushing to reopen, cemented the impression that the reopening of the American economy would probably be much more fraught with delays. And for a brief moment, it seemed like fun-durr-mentals almost mattered again…

      Anyway, European markets wobbled Wednesday following reports that the latest cluster of cases in Seoul had climbed to 119, the latest increase of dozens of cases as contact-tracers scramble to test as many people as possible. More than 14k people have been tested so far. To be sure, investigators have made some discoveries that undermined the theory that all of these cases are connected to one “super-spreader”. Rather, it’s believed that most of these cases were likely individuals who were asymptomatically infected elsewhere. The cases have been linked to multiple cases.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      While South Korea remains on high alert, the situation in northeastern China grew even more dire. As we have reported this week, local party officials in Jilin City had reimposed restrictions after an outbreak. Now, they’re taking things a step further and ordering a ‘partial lockdown’ of the village. Residents will only be allowed to leave after they’ve completed a period of ‘self-isolation’ and tested negative for the virus. Residential compounds have been closed to visitors, and public transit has been halted.

      It’s just the latest sign that both China and South Korea might be seeing the first stirrings of the ‘second wave’ that Dr. Fauci and other scientists have warned about.

      After rocketing into the No. 2 spot directly behind the US, Russia’s rate of new coronavirus cases eased on Wednesday, even if only slightly, as the country recorded an 11th consecutive day with more than 10,000 fresh infections. Russia recorded 10,028 new cases on Wednesday, according to official government data, the smallest rise in almost a fortnight. Its total number of cases is now at 242,271, with 2,212 deaths.

      As of Wednesday morning, the virus had infected more than 4.2 million people globally and killed 291,519, according to JHU’s tally.

      According to data released around the world on Tuesday, the number of new infections confirmed jumped day-over-day on Monday (though Mondays often see the largest daily tallies of the week since they directly follow the weekend).

      The German government says it has extended controls on its borders with France, Switzerland and Austria until June 15, according to interior minister Horst Seehofer. Germany plans to open its border with Luxembourg on Saturday, and hopes to reopen its border with Denmark.

      Austria said Wednesday it would fully reopen its border with Germany by mid-June and plans to open travel to most of its neighboring countries in the coming weeks, beginning on Friday, as it continues with its reopening push.

      Elsewhere in Central Europe, Poland reported its highest daily coronavirus infection count on Wednesday (with the data representing the totals from Tuesday), with 595 people testing positive for the virus amid an accelerating outbreak in the southern region of Silesia.

      Just days after Colombia’s Avianca, Latin America’s second-largest airline, filed for bankruptcy protection, Dubai’s Emirates has announced plans to reopen scheduled flights to nine destinations from May 21, the latest sign of “green shoots” in the air travel industry, even though traffic remains more than 90% below average.

      As Democrats in Congress push a $3 trillion coronavirus relief bill targeted at states and American households, Reuters reports that one progressive lawmaker and Democratic Socialist icon is taking the cause of coronavirus relief a step further, and pushing for the IMF and World Bank to forgive the debts of the poorest countries. Both NGOs have already waived the next six months’ worth of payments for 25 of the world’s poorest countries.

      Over 300 lawmakers from around the world on Wednesday urged the International Monetary Fund and World Bank to cancel the debt of the poorest countries in response to the coronavirus pandemic, and to boost funding to avert a global economic meltdown.

      The initiative, led by former U.S. presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Ilham Omar, a Democrat from Minnesota, comes amid growing concern that developing countries and emerging economies will be devastated by the pandemic.

      We can already hear the Sanders-nistas cooing about how their brave hero, having been robbed of the nomination he so rightfully deserved, continues to fight not only for the ‘real Americans’ of the working class – i.e. the struggling Brooklyn-based ‘freelance writers’ who account for much of Sanders’ most vocal supporters – but for the besotted masses of the ‘developing world’ (a racist term, no doubt).

    • "Don't Believe The Happy Talk" – Jim Rickards Warns "This Time 'Is' Different"
      “Don’t Believe The Happy Talk” – Jim Rickards Warns “This Time ‘Is’ Different”

      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 21:25

      Authored by James Rickards via The Daily Reckoning,

      Stocks stumbled the last two days, at least partially on fears about a resurgence in coronavirus cases.

      South Korea, which did an excellent job containing the virus, has reported a new batch of cases. Japan and Singapore also reported new cases. Infections are increasing in Germany as well, where lockdown restrictions are being lifted.

      We can also expect a rise in U.S. cases as several states lift their own restrictions.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      From both epidemiological and market perspectives, the pandemic has a long way to go.

      Its economic effects are already without precedent…

      In the midst of this economic collapse, many investors and analysts return reflexively to the 2008 financial panic.

      That crisis was severe, and of course trillions of dollars of wealth were lost in the stock market. That comparison is understandable, but it does not begin to scratch the surface.

      This collapse is worse than 2008, worse than the 2000 dot-com meltdown, worse than the 1998 Russia-LTCM panic, worse than the 1994 Mexican crisis and many more panics.

      You have to go back to 1929 and the start of the Great Depression for the right frame of reference.

      But even that does not explain how bad things are today. After October 1929, the stock market fell 90% and unemployment hit 24%. But that took three years to fully play out, until 1932.

      In this collapse the stock market fell 30% in a few weeks and unemployment is over 20%, also in a matter of a few weeks.

      Since the stock market has further to fall and unemployment will rise further, we will get to Great Depression levels of collapse in months, not years. How much worse can the economy get?

      Well, “Dr. Doom,” Nouriel Roubini, can give you some idea.

      Roubini earned the nickname Dr. Doom by predicting the 2008 collapse. He wasn’t the only one. I had been warning of a crash since 2004, but he deserves a lot of credit for sounding the alarm.

      The factors he lists that show the depression will get much worse include excessive debt, defaults, declining demographics, deflation, currency debasement and de-globalization.

      These are all important factors, and all of them go well beyond the usual stock market and unemployment indicators most analysts are using. Those economists expecting a “V-shaped” recovery should take heed. That’s highly unlikely in the face of all these headwinds.

      I’ve always taken the view that getting a Ph.D. in economics is a major handicap when it comes to understanding the economy.

      They teach you a lot of nonsense like the Phillips curve, the “wealth effect,” efficient markets, comparative advantage, etc. None of these really works in the real world outside of the classroom.

      They then require you to learn complex equations with advanced calculus that bear no relationship to the real world.

      If economists want to understand the economy, they should talk to their neighbors and get out of their bubble.

      The economy is nothing more than the sum total of all of the complex interactions of the people who make up the economy. Common sense, anecdotal information and direct observation are better than phony models every time.

      So what are everyday Americans actually saying?

      According to one survey, 89% of Americans worry the pandemic could cause a collapse of the U.S. economy. This view is shared by Republicans and Democrats alike.

      Ph.D. economists dislike anecdotal information because it’s hard to quantify and does not fit into their neat and tidy (but wrong) equations. But anecdotal information can be extremely important.

      With so many Americans fearing a collapse, it could create a self-fulfilling prophesy.

      If enough people believe something it becomes true (even if it was not true to begin with) because people behave according to the expectation and cause it to happen.

      The technical name for this is a recursive function, also known as a “feedback loop.” Whatever you call it, it’s happening now.

      Based on that view and a lot of other evidence, we can forecast that the depression will get much worse from here despite the initial severity.

      But as usual, the Ph.D. crowd will be the last to know.

      You shouldn’t believe the happy talk. We’re in a deflationary and debt death spiral that has only just begun…

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Nothing like what we’re witnessing has ever happened before. Even the savviest analysts cannot yet internalize what happened.

      As I explained earlier, comparisons to the 2008 crisis or even the 1929 stock market crash that started the Great Depression fail to capture the magnitude of the economic damage of the virus. You may have to go back to the Black Plague of the mid-14th century for the right comparison.

      Unfortunately the economy will not return to normal for years. Some businesses will never return to normal because they’ll be bankrupt before they are even allowed to reopen.

      Businesses like restaurants, bars, pizza parlors, dry cleaners, hair salons and many similar businesses make up 44% of total U.S. GDP and 47% of all jobs. This is where many of the job losses, shutdowns and lost revenues occurred.

      The U.S. government response to the economic collapse has been unprecedented in size and scope. The U.S. has a baseline budget deficit of about $1 trillion for fiscal year 2020. Congress added $2.2 trillion to that in its first economic bailout bill. A second bailout bill added an additional $500 billion. Another bill may add another $2 trillion to the deficit.

      Combining the baseline deficit, enacted legislation and anticipated legislation brings the fiscal 2020 deficit to $5.7 trillion. That’s equal to more than 25% of GDP and will push the U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio to as high as 130% once the lost output ($6 trillion annualized) is taken into account. The previous record debt for the U.S. was about 120% of GDP at the end of World War II.

      This puts the U.S. in the same category as Greece, Lebanon and Japan when it comes to the most heavily indebted countries in the world.

      The Federal Reserve is also printing money at an unprecedented rate. The Fed’s balance sheet is already above $6.7 trillion, up from about $4.5 trillion at the end of QE3 in 2015. The first rescue bill for $2.2 trillion included $454 billion of new capital for a special purpose vehicle (SPV) managed by the U.S. Treasury Department and the Fed.

      Since the Fed is a bank, it can leverage the SPV’s $454 billion in equity provided by the Treasury into $4.54 trillion on its balance sheet. The Fed could use that capacity to buy corporate debt, junk bonds, mortgages, Treasury notes and municipal bonds and to make direct corporate loans.

      Once the Fed is done, its balance sheet will reach $10 trillion.

      That much is known. What is not known is how quickly the economy will recover. The best evidence indicates that the economy will not recover quickly, and an age of low output, high unemployment and deflation is upon us.

      Here’s why the economic recovery will not exhibit the “pent-up demand” and other happy-talk traits you hear about on TV…

      The first reason the economic downturn will persist is the lost income for individuals. Unemployment compensation and PPP loans will only scratch the surface of total lost income from layoffs, pay cuts, reduced hours, business failures and individuals who are not only unemployed but drop out of the workforce entirely.

      In addition to lost wages through layoffs and pay cuts, many other workers are losing pay in the form of tips, bonuses and commissions. Even a fully employed waitress or salesperson cannot collect tips or sales commissions if there are no customers. This illustrates how the economy is tightly linked so that problems in one sector quickly spread to other sectors.

      In addition to lost individual income, there is a massive loss of business income. Earnings per share of publicly traded companies are not only declining in the second quarter (and likely the third quarter) but many are negative.

      Lost business income will be another source of lower stock valuations and a source of dividend cuts. Reduced dividends are also a source of lost income for individual stockholders who rely on dividends to pay for their retirements or medical expenses.

      Programs such as PPP and other direct government-to-business loans will not come close to compensating for the losses described above. The loans (which can turn into grants) will help for a month or two but are not a permanent solution to lost customers.

      For still other firms, the loans won’t help at all because the firms are short of working capital and will simply close their doors for good and file for bankruptcy. This means the jobs in those enterprises will be permanently lost.

      From these straightforward events (lost individual income, lost business income, dividend cuts and bankruptcies) come a host of ripple effects.

      Once the government aid is distributed, many recipients will not spend it (as hoped) but will save it. Such savings are called “precautionary.” Even if you are not laid off, you may worry that your job is still in jeopardy. Any income you receive will either go to pay bills or into savings “just in case.”

      In either case, the money will not be used for new spending. At a time when the economy needs consumption, we will not get it. The economy will fall into a “liquidity trap” where saving leads to deflation, which increases the value of cash, which leads to more saving. This pattern was last seen in the Great Depression (1929–40) and will soon be prevalent again.

      Even if individuals were inclined to spend, there would be reduced spending in any case because there are fewer things to spend money on. Shows and sporting events are called off. Restaurants and movie theaters are closed. Travel is almost nonexistent, and no one wants to hop on a cruise ship or visit a resort until they can be assured that the risk of COVID-19 is greatly reduced.

      This will guarantee a continued slow recovery and persistent deflation, which makes the slow recovery worse.

      In addition to these constraints on demand, there are serious constraints on supply. Global supply chains have been seriously disrupted due to shutdowns and transportation bottlenecks. Social distancing will slow production even at those facilities that are open and can get needed inputs.

      One case of COVID-19 in a factory can cause the entire factory to be shut down for a two-week quarantine period. Companies that depend on the output of that factory to manufacture their own products will also be shut down.

      Beyond these direct effects of lost income and lost output, there are significant indirect effects on the willingness of entrepreneurs to invest and of individuals to spend.

      First among these is the “wealth effect.” When stock values drop 20–30% as they have recently, investors feel poorer even if they have substantial net worth after the drop. The psychological effect is to cause people to reduce spending even if they can afford not to.

      This means that spending cutbacks come not only from the middle class and unemployed but also from wealthier individuals who feel threatened by lost wealth even if they have continued income.

      Finally, real estate values will collapse as tenants refuse to pay rent and landlords default on their mortgages, putting properties into foreclosure.

      None of these negative economic consequences of the New Depression are amenable to easy fixes by the Congress or the Fed.

      Deficit spending will not “stimulate” the economy as the recipients of the spending will pay bills or save money. The Fed can provide liquidity and keep the lights on in the financial system, but it cannot cure insolvency or prevent bankruptcies.

      The process will feed on itself expressed as deflation, which will encourage even more savings and discourage consumption. We’re in a deflationary and debt death spiral that has only just begun.

      Based on this analysis, investors should expect the recovery from the New Depression to be slow and weak. The Fed will be out of bullets. Deficit spending will slow growth rather than stimulate it because the unprecedented level of debt will cause Americans to expect higher taxes, inflation or both.

      The U.S. economy will not recover 2019 levels of GDP until 2022.

      Unemployment will not return even to 5% until 2026 or later.

      This means stocks are far from a bottom.

      The S&P 500 Index could easily hit 1,870 (it’s 2,943 as of this writing) and the Dow Jones Index could fall to 15,000 (it’s 24,360 as of this writing).

      Those are levels at which investors might want to consider investing in stocks.

      Any effort to “buy the dips” in the meantime will just lead to further losses when the full impact of what’s described above begins to sink in.

      Got gold?

    • China Still Bitter, Wants Houston Rockets GM "Properly Handled" Over Hong Kong Support
      China Still Bitter, Wants Houston Rockets GM “Properly Handled” Over Hong Kong Support

      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 21:05

      Six months ago, China brought the NBA to heel over a tweet by Houston Rockets general manager Daryl Morey which showed his support for democracy in Hong Kong.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Following the tweet, Beijing severed ties with 11 of the NBA’s official Chinese partners, canceled endorsement deals, forced stores to stop selling Rockets merchandise, and refused to air games over CCTV.

      LA Lakers star LeBron James – the league’s biggest star and one of the world’s most dominant athletes – criticized Morey for not being “educated on the situation” and warned that freedom of speech can sometimes have “a lot of negatives that come with it.” James said that “so many people could have been harmed” by Morey’s tweet, not just financially, but “physically, emotionally [and] spiritually” as well.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Six months later, China is still bitter – and continues to refuse to air NBA games from China Central Television, despite the fact that Michael Ma – the son of CCTV co-founder Ma Guoli – was appointed as CEO of NBA China.

      On Tuesday, China’s state mouthpiece the Global Times published an article saying that Ma’s appointment was nice, but the NBA needs to ‘properly handle’ Morey over his support of the Hong Kong protests last year.

      “if it wants to win its way back to the Chinese mainland market, it should properly handle Houston Rockets general manager Daryl Morey — who tweeted in support of Hong Kong rioters last year,” writes the Times, adding that the NBA has “found itself stuck in the public opinion battlefield between China and the US, as bilateral ties remain tense amid the COVID-19 pandemic.”

      If the Morey incident is properly handled, the NBA, in the long run, could demonstrate that China welcomes foreign businesses to invest and make money in the country, as long as they respect the country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, Su said.

      The appointment came a day after CCTV issued a solemn statement on China’s Twitter-like Sina Weibo, denying any plan to resume airing NBA games. CCTV has not broadcast any NBA games since October 2019. 

      Chinese netizens commented on the NBA official reshuffle, and many said they could not care less about the US league, unless Morey is punished for his misbehavior. –Global Times

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Of note, NBA Commissioner Adam Silver admitted last October that China insisted the league fire Morey.

      We made clear that we were being asked to fire him, by the Chinese government, by the parties we dealt with, government and business,” Silver said. “We said there’s no chance that’s happening. There’s no chance we’ll even discipline him.” 

      Speaking at the TIME 100 Health Summit, Silver noted that “The losses have already been substantial,” adding “Our games are not back on the air in China as we speak, and we’ll see what happens next.” 

      Maybe Xi will hire LeBron for a few more CCP sound bytes in the hopes of getting Morey fired (or worse).

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    • The "Big Short 2" Hits An All Time Low As Commercial Real Estate Implodes
      The “Big Short 2” Hits An All Time Low As Commercial Real Estate Implodes

      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 20:45

      Back in March 2017, a bearish trade emerged which quickly gained popularity on Wall Street, and promptly received the moniker “The Next Big Short.”

      As we reported at the time, similar to the run-up to the housing debacle, a small number of bearish funds were positioning to profit from a “retail apocalypse” that could spur a wave of defaults. Their target: securities backed not by subprime mortgages, but by loans taken out by beleaguered mall and shopping center operators which had fallen victim to the Amazon juggernaut. And as bad news piled up for anchor chains like Macy’s and J.C. Penney, bearish bets against commercial mortgage-backed securities kept rising.

      The trade was simple: shorting malls by going long default risk via CMBX 6 (BBB- or BB) or otherwise shorting the CMBS complex. For those who have not read our previous reports (here, here, here, here, here, here and here) on the second Big Short, here is a brief rundown via the Journal:

      each side of the trade is speculating on the direction of an index, called CMBX 6, which tracks the value of 25 commercial-mortgage-backed securities, or CMBS. The index has grabbed investor attention because it has significant exposure to loans made in 2012 to malls that lately have been running into difficulties. Bulls profit when the index rises and shorts make money when it falls.

      The various CMBX series are shown in the chart below, with the notorious CMBX 6 most notable for its substantial, 40% exposure to retail properties.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      One of the firms that had put on the “Big Short 2” trade back in late 2016 was hedge fund Alder Hill Management – an outfit started by protégés of hedge-fund billionaire David Tepper – which ramped up wagers against the mall bonds. Alder Hill joined other traders which in early 2017 bought a net $985 million contracts that targeted the two riskiest types of CMBS.

      “These malls are dying, and we see very limited prospect of a turnaround in performance,” said a January 2017 report from Alder Hill, which began shorting the securities. “We expect 2017 to be a tipping point.”

      Alas, Alder Hill was wrong, because while the deluge of retail bankruptcies…

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      … and mall vacancies accelerated since then, hitting an all time high in 2019…

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      …  not only was 2017 not a tipping point, but the trade failed to generate the kinds of desired mass defaults that the shorters were betting on, while the negative carry associated with the short hurt many of those who were hoping for quick riches.

      One of them was investing legend Carl Icahn who as we reported last November, emerged as one of the big fans of the “Big Short 2“, although as even he found out, CMBX was a very painful short as it was not reflecting fundamentals, but merely the overall euphoria sweeping the market and record Fed bubble (very much like most other shorts in the past decade). The resulting loss, as we reported last November,  was “tens if not hundreds of millions in losses so far” for the storied corporate raider.

      That said, while Carl Icahn was far from shutting down his family office because one particular trade has gone against him, this trade put him on a collision course with two of the largest money managers, including Putnam Investments and AllianceBernstein, which for the past few years had a bullish view on malls and had taken the other side of the Big Short/CMBX trade, the WSJ reports. This face-off, in the words of Dan McNamara a principal at the NY-based MP Securitized Credit Partners, was “the biggest battle in the mortgage bond market today” adding that the showdown is the talk of this corner of the bond market, where more than $10 billion of potential profits are at stake on an obscure index.

      However, as they say, good things come to those who wait, and are willing to shoulder big losses as they wait for a massive payoffs, and for the likes of Carl Icahn, McNamara and others who were short the CMBX, payday arrived in mid-March, just as the market collapsed, hammering the CMBX Series BBB-.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      And while the broader market has rebounded since then by a whopping 30%, the trade also known as the “Big Short 2” has continued to collapse and today CMBX 6 hit a new lifetime low of just $62.83, down $10 since our last update on this storied trade several weeks ago.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      That, in the parlance of our times, is what traders call a “jackpot.”

      Why the continued selling? Because it is no longer just retail outlets and malls: as a result of the Covid lockdown, and America’s transition to “Work From Home” and “stay away from all crowded places”, the entire commercial real estate sector is on the verge of collapse, as we reported last week in “A Quarter Of All Outstanding CMBS Debt Is On Verge Of Default

      Sure enough, according to a Bloomberg update, a record 167 CMBS 2.0 loans turned newly delinquent in May even though only 25% of loans have reported remits so far, Morgan Stanley analysts said in a research note Wednesday, triple the April total when 68 loans became delinquent. This suggests delinquencies may rise to 5% in May, and those that are late but still within grace period track at 10% for the second month.

      Looking at the carnage in the latest remittance data, and explaining the sharp leg lower in the “Big Short 2” index, Morgan Stanley said that several troubled malls that are a part of CMBX 6 are among the loans that were newly delinquent or transferred to special servicers. Among these:

      • Crystal Mall in Waterford, Connecticut, is currently due for the April and May 2020 payments. There has been a marked decline in both occupancy and revenue. This loan accounts for nearly 10% of a CMBS deal called UBSBB 2012-C2
      • Louis Joliet Mall in Joliet, Illinois, is also referenced in CMBX 6. The mall was originally anchored by Sears, JC Penney, Carson’s, and Macy’s. The loan is also a part of the CMBS deal UBSBB 2012-C2
      • A loan for the Poughkeepsie Galleria in upstate New York was recently transferred to special servicing for imminent monetary default at the borrower’s request. The loan has exposure in two 2012 CMBS deals that are referenced by CMBX 6
      • Other troubled mall-chain tenants include GNC, Claire’s, Body Works and Footlocker, according to Datex Property Solutions. These all have significant exposure in CMBX 6.

      Of course, the record crash in the CMBX 6 BBB has meant that all those shorts who for years suffered the slings and stones of outrageous margin calls but held on to this “big short”, have not only gotten very rich, but are now getting even richer – this is one case where everyone will admit that Carl Icahn adding another zero to his net worth was fully deserved as he did it using his brain and not some crony central bank pumping the rich with newly printed money – it has also means the pain is just starting for all those “superstar” funds on the other side of the trade who were long CMBX over the past few years, collecting pennies and clipping coupons in front of a P&L mauling steamroller.

      One of them is mutual fund giant AllianceBernstein, which has suffered massive paper losses on the trade, amid soaring fears that the coronavirus pandemic is the straw on the camel’s back that will finally cripple US shopping malls whose debt is now expected to default en masse, something which the latest remittance data is confirming with every passing week!

      According to the FT, more than two dozen funds managed by AllianceBernstein have sold over $4 billion worth of CMBX protection to the likes of Icahn. One among them is AllianceBernstein’s $29 billion American Income Portfolio, which crashed after written $1.9bn of protection on CMBX 6, while some of the group’s smaller funds have even higher concentrations.

      The trade reflected AB’s conviction that American malls are “evolving, not dying,” as the firm put it last October, in a paper entitled “The Real Story Behind the CMBX. 6: Debunking the Next ‘Big Short’” (reader can get some cheap laughs courtesy of Brian Philips, AB’s CRE Credit Research Director, at this link).

      Hillariously, that paper quietly “disappeared” from AllianceBernstein’s website, but magically reappeared in late March, shortly after the Financial Times asked about it.

      “We definitely still like this,” said Gershon Distenfeld, AllianceBernstein’s co-head of fixed income. “You can expect this will be on the potential list of things we might buy [more of].”

      Sure, quadruple down, why not: it appears that there are still greater fools who haven’t redeemed their money.

      In addition to AllianceBernstein, another listed property fund, run by Canadian asset management group Brookfield, that is exposed to the wrong side of the CMBX trade recently moved to reassure investors about its financial health. “We continue to enjoy the sponsorship of Brookfield Asset Management,” the group said in a statement, adding that its parent company was “in excellent financial condition should we ever require assistance.”

      Alas, if the plunge in CMBX continues, that won’t be the case for long.

      Meanwhile, as stunned funds try to make sense of epic portfolio losses, the denials got even louder: execs at AllianceBernstein told FT the paper losses on their CMBX 6 positions reflected outflows of capital from high-yielding assets that investors see as risky. They added that the trade outperformed last year. Well yes, it outperformed last year… but maybe check where it is trading now.

      Even if some borrowers ultimately default, CDS owners are not likely to be owed any cash for several years, said Brian Phillips, a senior vice-president at AllianceBernstein.

      He believes any liabilities under the insurance will ultimately be smaller than the annual coupon payment the funds receive. “We’re going to continue to get a coupon from Carl Icahn or whoever — I don’t know who’s on the other side,” Phillips added. “And they’re going to keep [paying] that coupon in for many years.”

      What can one say here but lol: Brian, buddy, no idea what alternative universe you are living in, but in the world called reality, it’s a second great depression for commercial real estate which due to the coronavirus is facing an outright apocalypse, and not only are malls going to be swept in mass defaults soon, but your fund will likely implode even sooner between unprecedented capital losses and massive redemptions… but you keep “clipping those coupons” we’ll see how far that takes you. As for Uncle Carl who absolutely crushed you – and judging by the ongoing collapse in commercial real estate is crushing you with every passing day – since you will be begging him for a job soon, it’s probably a good idea to go easy on the mocking.

      Afterthought: with CMBX 6 now done, keep a close eye on CMBX 9. With its outlier exposure to hotels which have quickly emerged as the most impacted sector from the pandemic, this may well be the next big short.

    • Amazon Restoring Normal Delivery Times For Products, Will Cut Overtime Pay For Workers 
      Amazon Restoring Normal Delivery Times For Products, Will Cut Overtime Pay For Workers 

      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 20:25

      Update: Amazon appears to be normalizing operations following an unprecedented demand surge during lockdowns. We noted earlier, normal delivery times for many of its products will be gradually seen over the next couple of weeks. Now it appears the company will revert pay for many of its workers back to pre-corona times after May 30. 

      Amazon warehouse workers saw a $2 per hour wage increase during the coronavirus pandemic. Since online sales could be subsiding as lockdowns are being lifted in many states, the company will halt temporary overtime pay rise in June.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The question remains — What happens to the +100k workers the company added during the height of the pandemic? As states reopen, does that mean Amazon will lay off excess workers? 

      * * * 

      There is good news this morning for anyone who has been absolutely fed up with Amazon delaying one- and two-day delivery times for specific products. Bloomberg says regular delivery service will be restored this month as the online retailer catches up with orders after an unprecedented demand surge thanks to everyone ordering products via the e-commerce platform during lockdowns. 

      Amazon notified suppliers Sunday that they can begin shifting more inventory into its warehouses and will gradually shorten the delivery time for products that were restricted during the last several months because they were deemed non-essential during the pandemic

      “We removed quantity limits on products our suppliers can send to our fulfillment centers,” Amazon spokeswoman Kristen Kish told Bloomberg in an email. “We continue to adhere to extensive health and safety measures to protect our associates as they pick, pack and ship products to customers, and are improving delivery speeds across our store.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Anthony Ferry, CEO of PriceSpider, said the online retailer was overwhelmed by orders in April, which led the company to discontinue its rapid delivery service for many products. He said this forced many Amazon members to use curbside pickup programs of their local supermarkets, Walmart, Target, and other big-box retailers because it was much faster. 

      “Loyal Amazon shoppers left the site when they saw long delivery times or items were out of stock,” Ferry said. “Buy-online pickup-in store has become a much more enticing and desirable solution when people want something now.”

      Juozas Kaziukenas, the founder of Marketplace Pulse, a research firm that continuously monitors trends on the Amazon site, said long delivery times in a post-corona world infuriated many Amazon members. Delivery times that use to take one or two days were pushed out to a week or even several. Members left more than 800,000 negative reviews on the online retailer’s site in April, mostly complaining about shipping times. 

      “Amazon is known for great selection, low prices and fast shipping,” Kaziukenas said. “These all broke during the pandemic. Selection was not always there, prices were not lowest because Amazon sold out, and fast shipping was gone.”

      To meet unprecedented demand, Amazon hired over 100,000 new workers for its warehouses since about mid-March, which is around the time most of the country descended into lockdowns. Consumers were left with very few shopping options over the last month, most of them went to Amazon and or other e-commerce platforms to panic hoard products. 

    • "My Job Is To Make Syria A Quagmire For The Russians": CIA Doctrine Made Official Policy
      “My Job Is To Make Syria A Quagmire For The Russians”: CIA Doctrine Made Official Policy

      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 20:05

      Like with the disastrous Iraq quagmire years before the US war machine came to Syria under Obama, Washington’s rationale and justification for occupying the Syrian Arab Republic has shifted and changed drastically multiple times over

      When ultimately what started as US covert regime change efforts targeting Assad failed (based ostensibly in “protecting civilians”), the official mission then conveniently switched to ‘defeating terrorism’ — though of course this meant turning on the very jihadists the US armed and trained in the first place. Then the Kurds became the proxy flavor of the month, which also happened to have control of all the major oil and gas fields in the country’s east (“secure the oil!” – Trump has repeatedly echoed of late). 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      At least 100 Russian soldiers have been killed in Syria since September 2015. Image source: Reuters

      When the Islamic State collapsed and became just another underground insurgency like its al Qaeda cousin, the ever-hawkish national security state establishment argued that Trump must not pull troops out because of ‘Iranian expansion’.

      But now that the myth that somehow Assad and the Syrians just want to hand their sovereign country over to their allies the Iranians has also largely fallen away (remember that Baathist Syria is a secular Arab and multi-confessional state, while Iran is a hardline Shia Islamic theocracy), a new official – and it might be added, provocative – US administration rationale has been concocted.

      Washington now says it’s all about defeating the Russians. While it’s not the first time this has been thrown around in policy circles (recall that a year after Russia’s 2015 entry into Syria at Assad’s invitation, former CIA Deputy Director Mike Morell admitted in a TV interview he views that the US should be in the business of “killing Russians and Iranians covertly”).

      And now the top US special envoy to region, James Jeffrey, has this to say on US troops in Syria:

      “My job is to make it a quagmire for the Russians.”

      Ironically, Jeffrey’s official title has been Special Envoy for the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIL, but apparently the mission is now to essentially “give the Russians hell”. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      US envoy to Syria, Ambassador James Jeffrey, file image.

      His comments were made Tuesday during a video conference hosted by the neocon Hudson Institute:

      Asked why the American public should tolerate US involvement in Syria, Special Envoy James Jeffrey points out the small US footprint in the fight against ISIS. “This isn’t Afghanistan. This isn’t Vietnam. This isn’t a quagmire. My job is to make it a quagmire for the Russians.”

      He also emphasized that the Syrian state would continue to be squeezed into submission as part of long-term US efforts (going back to at least 2011) to legitimize a Syria government in exile of sorts. This after the Trump administration recently piled new sanctions on Damascus.

      As University of Oklahoma professor and expert on the region Joshua Landis summarized of Jeffrey’s remarks: “He pledged that the United States will continue to deny Syria – international funding, reconstruction, oil, banking, agriculture & recognition of government.”

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      But no doubt both Putin and Assad have understood Washington’s real proxy war interests all along, which is why last year Russia delivered it’s lethal S-300 into the hands of Assad (and amid constant Israeli attacks).

      As for oil, currently Damascus is well supplied by the Iranians, eager to dump their stock in fuel-starved Syria amid the global glut. Trump has previously voiced that part of US troops “securing the oil fields” is to keep them out of the hands of Russia and Iran.

      * * *

      Recall the CIA’s 2016 admission of what’s really going on in terms of US action in Syria:

    • HSBC Lost $200 Million In One Day When The Gold Market Broke
      HSBC Lost $200 Million In One Day When The Gold Market Broke

      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 19:45

      Last week, we discovered precisely which bank got hammered by the violent divergence between the spot and future price of gold. As we reported, “HSBC had 15 “back-testing exceptions” in January and March, when the firm was caught out by moves in the prices of precious metals. Europe’s biggest bank said … problems were caused in part by “delivery disruptions in the gold market” which means that we now know which bank was on the other side of the gold spot-future trade.”

      Today we also learned just how much these unexpected moves cost Europe’s largest bank: according to Bloomberg, HSBC lost around $200 million in one day in March because of the previously discussed disruptions to the gold market that caused prices to diverge dramatically in key trading hubs.

      The one-day loss, which far exceeded the maximum loss anticipated by HSBC’s value-at-risk models, was unusually large for a market in which the leading banks – HSBC and JPMorgan – typically make around $200 million in an entire year. In other words, in one day, HSBC lost an entire year’s worth of revenue.

      HSBC’s loss highlights the extreme nature of the disruption to the gold market in late March, as lockdowns closed refineries and grounded planes, strangling the supply routes that allow physical gold to move around the globe. As we discussed at the time, the price of gold futures in New York and spot gold in London, which usually trade within a few dollars an ounce of one another, diverged by as much as $70, the most on record.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The divergence hit banks that are active in trading the so-called EFP, or Exchange for Physical, the mechanism by which traders switch positions between the New York and London markets, according to Bloomberg which also notes that HSBC, which last week first revealed it was hit by the gold market disruption, also disclosed the scale of the loss in a chart this week showing its daily trading profits for the first quarter.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The bank described the loss as a “mark-to-market loss mainly associated with gold refining and transportation challenges.” It highlighted the “unprecedented widening of the gold exchange-for-physical basis,” which “affected HSBC’s gold leasing and financing business and other gold hedging activity leading to mark-to-market losses.”

      Since late March, the EFP has normalized and the price spread between the spot and futures markets has returned to normal levels of less than $5 an ounce.
      Still, HSBC is not the only one struggling with the unusual moves in the gold market. Banks often sell gold futures in New York to hedge their positions in the London market, exposing them to significant losses should the two markets diverge. While it has not been confirmed, some speculate that Canada’s Bank of Nova Scotia, for years one of the leading bullion traders with a business that dates back to the 17th century, shuttered its precious metals unit due to outsized losses following the March gold market turmoil.

    • 992 Billion Reasons Why The Fed Needs Another Market Crash In The Next Few Weeks
      992 Billion Reasons Why The Fed Needs Another Market Crash In The Next Few Weeks

      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 19:25

      Speaking in a video conference organized by the Peterson Institute, turbo money printer Jerome Powell today reassured the market that negative rates are not something the Fed – which expanded its balance sheet by $2.6 trillion in the past two months – is contemplating now. Of course, that will change after the next market crash or if economic shutdowns return, but for now the Fed’s message to traders was clear: don’t push forward fed fund rates negative, which also catalyzed today’s sharp market drop as a key source of potential forced easing was removed.

      However, with Powell taking negative rates off the table (for now), it means the Fed has another problem on its hands, one which was first laid out by Deutsche Bank’s credit strategist Stuart Sparks, who in a recent note said that “for all the measures taken by the Fed and fiscal authorities to counter the COVID19 shock, policy remains too tight.” And, as Sparks adds, if the Fed opts to avoid negative policy rates – which appears to be the case – “further easing must be provided by the size and  composition of the Fed’s balance sheet”, meaning more QE.

      How much more QE? Well, with short-dated market real yields positive, Deutsche Bank estimates that r*, or the neutral rate of interest, has fallen to around -1%, “suggesting additional accommodation required for policy to be “easy” could be more than 100 bp in terms of “policy rate equivalent.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Previously the Fed had estimated that $100 billion in QE has approximately the same short term impact on growth as 3 bps of rate cuts. This equivalence means that in order to provide a 1% of “rate equivalent” easing, the Fed would need to grow the balance sheet by roughly $3.3 trillion.

      This creates a headache for the Fed in that balance sheet growth of this magnitude creates a structural supply/demand imbalance even given extraordinary Treasury funding needs, and should compress the term premium over time. And given Deutsche Bank projections for Treasury supply and Fed purchases, “this imbalance could be as large as $1.4 trillion. Ultimately, the argument is that the drain of duration supply dominates maturity selection implicit in Fed purchases, causing the term premium to decline.” This is shown in the chart below.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Even more term-premium distortions aside, the Fed has no choice as we explain below. Because, as crazy as it may sound, despite the Fed’s massive liquidity injection to date which has pushed the Fed’s balance sheet from $4.2 trillion to $6.7 trillion since mid-March, it is not enough and to ensure that the problem of the -1% r* is addressed without cutting rates negative – a problem which is now manifesting itself in a chronically high dollar, i.e., dollar shortage, which has failed to normalize back to pre-crisis levels as shown below…

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      the Fed will need to expand its balance sheet trillions…. And it will have to do it very soon!

      As Curvature Securities’ strategist Scott Skyrm writes today, General Collateral unexpectedly dropped down to 0% yesterday and was below 0% today. And while this is “Strange”, Skyrm correctly points out that “low GC rates can only be temporary.”

      The reason? There is a flood of liquidity-draining issuance on the horizon.

      As Skyrm further explains, with QE purchases winding down – recall that last Friday the Fed cut its daily POMO average to just $7 billion from $75 billion two months ago…

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      … the deluge of more Treasury supply will ultimately push rates higher.

      But in the near term, things are about to get scary: as Skyrm calculates, “there are $79 billion CMBs settling tomorrow and $39 net new Treasurys settling on Friday for the refunding. But that’s just the start. All total, there are $689 billion net new Treasurys settling during the month of May and $992 billion net new Treasurys settling between now and June 15. Yes, almost one trillion new Treasury securities hitting the market within the next month!”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      His conclusion: “That means the market needs to come up with about one trillion dollars to pay for those securities over the next month.” Which, of course, is a euphemism because we all know who in the market needs to come up with one trillion dollar – the only one who literally prints money: the Federal Reserve.

      For those who missed all that, here is the layman’s version: the Fed has flooded the system with liquidity… and it is not enough, because the way helicopter money works, is that liquidity supply (the Fed), and liquidity demand (Treasury via debt issuance) go hand in hand, and periods of too much supply, as was the cash with the Fed’s massive QE in late March and early April, are promptly followed by periods of dramatic liquidity demand, such as the next month when $1 trillion in liquidity will be drained to fund the US government “money helicopter.”

      This also suggests that Deutsche Bank’s estimate of a $3.3 trillion cumulative shortfall is accurate and that the Fed will soon find itself trapped again, because instead of injecting liquidity it continues to drain it by shrinking the weekly POMO injection.

      As a result, Powell faces a two-fold problem: since the Fed chair has taken negative rates off the table, Powell has no choice but too boost QE again, and unleash another firehose of liquidity in the financial system. However, any such reversal to the Fed’s current posture of shrinking QE will be met with howls of rage, especially in the political establishment. Which means that, just like in March when the Fed used the first pandemic-induced market crash to unleash unlimited QE, the Fed will soon have to go for round 2 and spark a new market crash, one which it then uses as an alibi for the next massive liquidity injection. Failing to do that, watch as the dollar takes off as markets sniff out that another major dollar squeeze is imminent. And since this will accelerate the liquidity crunch, one way or another, the coming 992 billion net Treasury issuance will serve as a trigger for the next market shock, one which the Fed will quickly reverse by expanding the already unlimited QE by over $3 trillion on very short notice.

      The only question we have is whether this will be the market crash that the Fed uses to unveil it will also buy equity ETfs next, or if Powell will save this final bullet in its ammo for whatever comes next. 

    Digest powered by RSS Digest

    Today’s News 13th May 2020

    • EU Threatens To Sue After Germany Questions Legality Of ECB Bond Buying Program
      EU Threatens To Sue After Germany Questions Legality Of ECB Bond Buying Program

      Germany and the EU are in the midst of an escalating legal struggle that could wreak havoc for the Eurozone. 

      The struggle came to a head on Sunday when the EU threatened to sue Germany after the country’s top court questioned the ECB’s bond buying program. The program was approved by a 15 judge EU panel in December 2018. 

      The question is one of which court holds the power: under EU treaties, the EU Court of Justice should rank higher. That was the court that cleared the central bank’s bond purchases, which have totaled $2.9 trillion since 2015. But German judges said the country could “deviate because the bloc’s top judges overstepped their powers when they backed the ECB’s policy in a previous ruling,” according to Bloomberg

      Naturally, this drew criticism from European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, who commented on Sunday: “The final word on EU law is always spoken by the European court. Nowhere else.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      In a case where a member country doesn’t follow its rules, the EU issues a warning and then moves to file a court case. But having such a powerful nation defy the EU leaves the commission in a tough spot. 

      Miguel Maduro, a former advocate general at the EU Court of Justice, said: “The commission cannot simply ignore this challenge to EU law. Otherwise, such national challenges might be replicated by other states. What would the commission do if the Hungarian constitutional court or the Polish constitutional court, or others, do something like this.”

      It would almost be like they were actual countries again…

      “Making this statement that they’re considering opening an infringement procedure without actually opening it is a smart, prudent approach,” Maduro said.

      In the event that the EU does sue, it would be heard by the EU’s top court – the same ones that Germany is currently having a dispute with. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Meanwhile, ECB President Christine Lagarde has said that the central bank doesn’t plan on taking action and argued that the ECB is not under the purview of the EU Court of Justice, but rather is accountable to European Parliament. 

      Germany’s hand remains to be seen. The country’s court, which is held in high favor by its citizens, has championed civil liberties and has high approval rates. Bloomberg even speculated that Chancellor Angela Merkel may want to lose the case on purpose, so Germany’s leaders could still say it protected Germany’s constitution, while ultimately caving to the EU. 

      Germany has repeatedly challenged the ECB’s bond buying program and Eurozone bailouts. 

      Soon, we predict, other countries could follow suit. The jig for the EU appears to be close to up. Central Banks could be next…


      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 02:45

    • Who Controls The British Government Response To COVID-19, Part 2
      Who Controls The British Government Response To COVID-19, Part 2

      Authored by Vanessa Beeley via Off-Guardian.org,

      “To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, loyalty to family tradition, national patriotism, and religious dogmas.”

      – Dr George Brock Chisholm, who served as the first Director-General of the World Health Organisation (WHO) from 1948 to 1953

      In Part One of Who controls the British Government response to Covid–19?, I began an investigation into the individuals and entities that are, effectively, driving the UK Government response to Covid–19.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      In Part Two, I will expand upon the Big Pharma and Artificial Intelligence (AI) links already identified and will introduce new connections that appear to have considerable bearing upon the UK Government’s Covid–19 strategy. I will expand upon the Bill Gates connections to the various organisations that are advocating global immunisation.

      The UK Government chief medical adviser and Chief Medical Officer for England, Chris Whitty, is saying that a return to “normal” in the short-term is “wholly unrealistic”. Whitty is telling us that the “highly disruptive” social distancing policy will be in place “for really quite a long period of time”.

      “Highly disruptive” is a euphemism for the devastation of the world economy and the horrifying knock-on effect — an estimated 50% of the world workforce are at risk of losing their livelihood.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      April 16th headline in Business Insider. Chris Whitty with UK Health Secretary, Matt Hancock.

      The UK Government has been promoting the concept of “immunity passports” as a means of loosening the draconian lockdown measures. It is very possible that facial recognition technology may dictate who can exit lockdown and return to work. To get a passport, individuals must upload an image of their face to the app along with their ID (passport or driving licence).

      They are then tested to ascertain if they have had the virus and developed immunity. The app will then generate a QR code, which the employer will use to verify ID and immunity before allowing the employee back to work.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Onfido’s track and trace app, under serious consideration by the government

      The UK health service’s innovation agency NHSx has called for businesses and technology experts to submit their ideas for providing immunity passports. Companies currently making proposals to the UK Government include OnfidoYoti, IDnow, OCL, and iDenfy.

      These UK Government “track and trace” plans still face various obstacles — including the questionable accuracy of some of the antibody tests — but the spectre of increased surveillance and government control over the workforce, and many other aspects of civil liberty, looms undeniably on the horizon.

      As I pointed out in Part One, it is no coincidence that the Oxford University start-up, Microsoft-funded facial recognition firm Onfido “has recently raised $100 million (now $200m) to boost its ID technology” to enable the creation of immunity passports.

      According to an interview with Onfido’s CEO, Husayn Kassai, the firm had previously offered a service that “automates background checks on prospective employees before they are accepted for work”; it would appear that immunity passports are a logical extension to what is, effectively, private sector spying on the workforce.

      more recent article proclaims: “Onfido in talks with government about systems to help Britons return to work”.

      Onfido, already at “pilot stage” in other countries, is claiming that its proposals could be executed within months and that the “health certificate through app technology” is “gaining traction”. Onfido claims this technology could be the linchpin of the new “normality” and key to stimulating the economy — as backed by Bill Gates/Microsoft and undeniably in lock-step with ID2020’s manifesto.

      Many analysts have highlighted the danger of ID2020 being introduced under cover of the Covid–19 “crisis”:

      We may indeed be just at the beginning of the implementation of ID2020 — which includes forced vaccination, population reduction and total digital control of everybody, on the way to One World Order; and global financial hegemony — Full Spectrum Dominance, as the PNAC (Plan for a New American Century) likes to call it.
      Peter Koenig

      THE TEAM BEHIND THE UK GOVERNMENT COVID–19 RESPONSE

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      [click to enlarge]

      My focus in Part One was largely on the role of Imperial College and Prof. Neil Ferguson in “modelling” the virus infection trajectory and influencing the UK Government response, as he has done previously, with a 100% failure rate on the accuracy of his virtual predictions.

      My focus in Part Two is to put the spotlight on other members of the UK Government advisory committee and to reveal their connections to Big Pharma and the for-profit sector linked to the Covid–19 response.

      NEIL FERGUSON DEFENDS LOCKDOWN POLICY WHILE CONVENIENTLY FORGETTING THE FAILURE RECORD OF HIS “MODEL”

      In a recent interview, Neil Ferguson defended his Covid–19 predictions, which now appear to have been greatly exaggerated.

      Ferguson reinforced the message that Britons [emphasis added]:

      cannot go completely back to normal, until we have a vaccine there will be a degree of social distancing in place.”

      Ferguson also confirmed the UK Government’s track-and-trace policy [emphasis added]:

      Longer-term social distancing will be required, not at the levels we have today, if we have contact tracing in place.”

      With numbers not adding up to Ferguson’s alarmist projections, the subsequent lockdown of the economy, and now the UK Government’s potential roll-out of mandatory vaccinations and biometric surveillance of the workforce, we could be forgiven for suspecting that the overarching agenda was always the increased surveillance and control of the majority of the population.

      FERGUSON H1N1 CASE STUDY — PATRICK VALLANCE — GLAXOSMITHKLINE

      At this point, I would like to go back in time to 2009 and Ferguson/Imperial College’s analysis of swine flu, H1N1: they claimed this virus would take the lives of 65,000 people in the UK. In the end, 457 people died from the virus.

      In response to the threat of swine flu, Big Pharma giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) developed the Pandemrix vaccine, with disastrous consequences.

      An alleged sixty patients who suffered brain damage as a result of the vaccine were allocated £60 million in compensation by the UK Government. Most of the victims were children.

      As one report has it:

      It was subsequently revealed that the vaccine, Pandemrix, can cause narcolepsy and cataplexy in about one in 16,000 people, and many more are expected to come forward with the symptoms.”

      A later British Medical Journal (BMJ) report deemed that GSK and health authorities had failed to warn the public of the vaccine’s alarming “safety signal”.

      The vaccine was developed by GSK and patented in September 2006. Pandemrix contained a flu strain recommended by the WHO. After reports of brain damage began to emerge, the WHO revised their advice to urge “restricted use” for people under the age of 20. Pandemrix is no longer licensed for use, but at the time, the Gordon Brown-led Labour government had granted GSK indemnity. Details of that agreement have never been made public.

      From 2012 to March 2018, Sir Patrick Vallance was president of research and development at GSK. He went directly from GSK to his post as the UK Government chief scientific adviser.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      While Vallance and the UK Government are favouring AstraZeneca — in partnership with Oxford University — to fast-track vaccine development, GSK is also in the race.

      GSK is working in collaboration with the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), “aimed at helping the global effort to develop a vaccine” for Covid–19.

      The UK Government has invested £50 million in CEPI to support the rapid vaccine and immunoprophylactic development against “unknown pathogens” (also referred to as Disease X). Bill Gates was one of the original and most influential sponsors of CEPI; more details later in this article.

      So, the UK Government appears to favour AstraZeneca, but Vallance and the government also appear to be subtly supporting Vallance’s former employer, GSK, despite their Pandemrix fiasco.

      While Vallance was in charge of research and development at GSK, collaboration with the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation was increased. In 2013, a new partnership between GSK and the Gates Foundation was announced: to “accelerate research into vaccines for global health needs”.

      What we start to see here is the very definition of a revolving-door policy between philanthrocapitalism, Big Pharma and government agencies, all effectively working in lock-step to promote the global immunisation agenda, with massive projected profit for the Big Pharma complex and in particular for the members closely associated with Gates, the WHO, UNICEF, and world governments, as already discussed in Part One.

      SCIENTISTS, EPIDEMIOLOGISTS AND ANALYSTS ARE NOT SPEAKING AS ONE VOICE ON COVID–19

      Going back to the Ferguson interview I mentioned earlier, my observation is that Ferguson was ill at ease, appearing to defend a script rather than opening up the discussion to include other models and expert opinions that vehemently disagree with his assessment.

      Eminent epidemiologist and bio-statistician Prof. Knut Wittkowski has been an outspoken critic of lockdown and social distancing from the outset. In a recent interview, Perspectives on the Pandemic, he spoke about the Ferguson model:

      It does not make any sense. I have no clue [what inspired Ferguson to make his estimates]. I don’t like to engage in conspiracy theories, so, if you have a model that give results that contradict everything else, then you contact your colleagues, you say, ‘Send me your model, let me try it, let us compare what we have, where are we in agreement and what is it that makes my model different from yours?’. This is how science works. We all make mistakes — but we don’t present the results without first double-checking.

      Even Dr Anthony Fauci, Ferguson’s counterpart in the US, has also cast doubt on the efficacy of these models to determine government response to any given virus:

      I’ve never seen a model of the diseases I’ve dealt with where the worst case actually came out […] they always overshoot.

      The fact that Ferguson ploughs on regardless — and without any reference to his appalling record and disastrous consequences for the British public — suggests that he functions largely as an outreach agent for actors with vested interests who are exploiting him to keep the Government on track with their own profit-driven Covid–19 campaigns.

      THE BIG PHARMA MONOPOLY DICTATING THE “NEW NORMAL” IN GLOBAL HEALTHCARE

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Who are CEPI? CEPI is the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations. CEPI was launched at Davos in 2017 by the governments of Norway and India, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the British-based Wellcome Trust global health “charity”, and the World Economic Forum.

      CEPI is described as an “innovative partnership between public, private, philanthropic and civil organisations”, to which I would add governments: the coalition has received investment from the governments of Germany, Japan, Australia, the UK, Belgium and Canada. Their primary role in relation to Covid–19 is the “development of platforms that can be used for rapid vaccine development against unknown pathogens” (2018).

      Historian and author Prof. Michel Chossudovsky is convinced that CEPI is “seeking a monopoly role in the vaccination business, the objective of which is a global vaccine project”.

      As I have previously reported, CEPI is key to the success of the Gates “vaccine decade” project, which reaches its conclusion in 2020 — coinciding with the outbreak of Covid–19. CEPI brings together the main players in biotechnology, Big Pharma and associated global health charities, governmental agencies, and university R&D to drive us towards global immunisation.

      CEPI’s euphemistically named “wider community” is represented by five non-voting members or observers; these include the World Bank, which is the principal financial institution holding CEPI funds, and a representative from the WHO.

      Every governing body or complex that is promoting global immunisation registers the same entities as influencers and sponsors. Again and again, the conflict of interest question must be raised in relation to the Covid–19 response.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Just as Sir Patrick Vallance was linked to GSK, so Chris Whitty, the UK Government’s Chief Medical Advisor, was on the interim board of CEPI until the permanent board was announced in 2018. Should we be surprised that the UK Government has invested £50 million in CEPI while being advised by Whitty?

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Whitty with Matt Hancock. “The expert we need in the coronavirus crisis.”

      Whitty also received Gates funding in 2008: $40m for malaria research in Africa. The fact that Whitty was involved in the kick-start of CEPI, Gates’ immunisation monopoly project, should therefore not come as a huge surprise.

      CEPI AND IMPERIAL COLLEGE PARTNERSHIP

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Ferguson’s model was generated under the auspices of the Vaccine Modelling Impact Consortium, hosted by Imperial College — both effectively funded by Bill Gates and Britain’s Wellcome Trust (primarily).

      In December 2018, CEPI went into partnership with Imperial College, London.

      CEPI provided funding of US$8.4 million for Imperial College to work on a vaccine platform that can be used to “rapidly develop vaccines against pathogens — even unknown ones”.

      The platform was appropriately named RapidVac and was focused on producing vaccines for H1N1, rabies and Marburg virus as “proof of concept”. The next step would be to develop vaccines rapidly in responses to “new and unknown pathogens, known as ‘Disease X’”.

      So, one year before the Covid–19 outbreak, Imperial College was working on a vaccine for “Disease X”.

      An Imperial College statement claimed that the partnership of CEPI and IC aimed to develop vaccines “against new and unknown pathogens within 16 weeks from identification of antigen to product release for trials” (emphasis added).

      This is an extraordinary claim, when vaccines have a typical R&D gestation period of up to fifteen years before being safely approved for public consumption. In addition, we must also always consider that there is a very strong argument against the use of vaccines altogether; perhaps a subject for another article.

      DEVELOPMENT OF COVID–19 VACCINES

      The genome sequence of Covid–19 was published online in mid-January and researchers reportedly sprang into action. The global quest for a vaccine excompasses some ten to fifteen serious programmes. CEPI is reportedly funding six of these programmes: CureVac, Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Moderna, and the Universities of Oxford, Imperial College and Queensland in Australia. We can also now add GSK to the list of participants partnered with the UK Government-assisted CEPI.

      GAVI AND CEPI PARTNERSHIP, DECEMBER 2018

      In Part One, I discussed GAVI, the self-proclaimed vaccine alliance. GAVI was established twenty years ago and incorporates the members of the Gates Foundation “Global Health Leaders Launch Decade of Vaccines Collaboration” consortium: those include, once again, the WHO, the World Bank, UNICEF and governments.

      The UK Government is GAVI’s top sponsor. In turn, GAVI sponsors the VIMC, where Ferguson models his response to Covid–19 — hosted by Imperial College.

      In December 2018, the same month that CEPI went into partnership with Imperial College, the board of GAVI approved a proposal for the Kingdom of Norway to support CEPI through a bond scheme backed by a new Norwegian “pledge to the International Finance Facility for Immunisation” (IFFIm).

      Utilising the bond scheme, Norway funded CEPI to the sum of US$58.1 million. Gates-funded, Gates-established GAVI was the broker for this sponsorship deal, which funnelled money to the Gates-funded, Gates-established CEPI.

      Other sponsors are clearly involved, but I am just making the point of the revolving-door policy in relation to these consortiums that bring together private, public and global health sectors to further vaccine promotion globally. As Gavi’s website proudly states, the alliance now vaccinates almost half of the world’s children.

      The UK Government blurring the lines between private and public sector when it comes to vaccines

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      UK Column infograph — from the news programme.

      The UK Government not only funds Gates-generated projects indirectly through CEPI and GAVI; there is also a direct collaboration that is off the radar of most reporting on the government’s response to Covid–19. If you enter the search term “Bill Gates” as an implementing partner into the UKAID development tracker, a number of vaccine-related projects are revealed.

      This week, the Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, co-hosted the virtual Coronavirus Global Response International Pledging Conference — to “drive forward the global race for coronavirus vaccines, treatments and tests” (emphasis added).

      According to information published, the UK has already provided £744 million of UKAID for the global response to Covid–19. That includes £388 million in support for new vaccines, tests and treatments. The UK has pledged £250 million to CEPI (the biggest contribution of any country).

      £40 million has gone to support rapid development of Covid–19 treatments; £23 million to develop rapid tests for the virus; and £75 million to the WHO critical health systems response. The UK has also pledged the equivalent of £330 million per year for five years to GAVI, the self-proclaimed vaccine alliance.

      The UK Government is effectively focusing on the market sector it has most heavily invested in — global immunisation — at a time when the British domestic economy is being forced to its knees by the government response to Covid–19.

      Perhaps at this stage, one might still argue that the UK Government has the welfare of its citizens at the forefront of its agenda; but delving a little deeper makes it much harder to draw that conclusion.

      THE UK VACCINE NETWORK

      Not only was Chris Whitty previously sponsored by Bill Gates and on the interim board of CEPI; he now chairs the UK Vaccine Network (UK VN). The UK VN brings together “industry, academia and relevant funding bodies to make targeted investments in specific vaccines and vaccine technology for infectious diseases with the potential to cause an epidemic”.

      The UK Vaccine Network provides funding for vaccine development programmes. Projects supported by the DHSC through the UK Vaccine Network are listed here.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      One of the projects from the DHSC funding document.

      Under Chris Whitty’s administration — Whitty is co-lead for the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) — the NIHR and UK Research and Innovation are giving another £20 million to CEPI for Covid–19 vaccine development. This is in addition to the £50 million already given by the UK Government to CEPI.

      “IT’S HUMANITY VERSUS THE VIRUS” FOLLOWS WORLD IMMUNISATION WEEK (APRIL 26TH–30TH)

      The timing of Boris Johnson’s “humanity versus virus” conference is unlikely to be coincidental, following as it does hot on the heels of World Immunisation Week.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      A WHO advertisement for vaccines featured at the World Immunisation Week.

      A document produced by Public Health England (PHE) provides a greater insight into how hard the UK Government is promoting vaccines during the Covid–19 “crisis”. The 2020 theme is “Vaccines work for all” — coinciding with the last year of the Gates “vaccine decade” of the 2010s.

      Hashtags like #CarryOnVaccinating are being deployed, and the “vaccines work for all” campaign will focus on “how vaccines — and the people who develop, deliver and receive them — are heroes by working to protect the health of everyone, everywhere”.

      The WHO has designated 2020 the International Year of the Nurse and the Midwife. Why? Because of those professions’ “crucial role as early vaccine champions for new parents and parents-to-be and life course vaccination, making sure older adults have their routine protection”. What a clever way to harness the genuinely dedicated nursing staff to promote vaccines to a huge market sector.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The outsourcing of vaccine promotion continues. There are social media memes prepared earlier that can be uploaded and shared to Facebook, Instagram and Twitter by an unsuspecting public, who will thus advertise global immunity for free.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The language of the report is sinister in its behavioural nudging: “Last year, WHO declared vaccine hesitancy among the top ten threats to global health”.

      A civilian population in lockdown — desperate to stimulate the economy, to return to work and to avoid being infected with “Pandemic 1” — will be easily gaslighted by such a lexicon into accepting anything that will address the concerns that have been imprinted into their subconscious.

      The document details the need to “counter the infodemic”, i.e. expert opinion that does not comply with the Big Pharma/WHO diktats:

      If you are looking for information about vaccines, be sure to consult trusted and credible sources, like your health worker, local health authorities, health institutions like NHS.UK, Public Health England, WHO or the members of the Vaccine Safety Net.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      We are, of course, already seeing this infodemic warfare in action: the YouTube CEO recently announced that YouTube would remove any video deemed to be in contravention of advice being given by the WHO. A recent statement from the Secretary-General of the UN, Antonio Guterres, reinforces the WHO recommendations.

      Guterres condemns what he claims to be “a dangerous epidemic of misinformation”. Journalist and researcher Michael Swifte described the vaccine agenda as follows:

      The loving embrace of a vaccine administered by the biggest public-private partnership in history. This is what the Secretary General of the UN is promoting.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The Keep Calm meme taken from the PHE document.

      Reading through this PHE document is a veritable exercise in Behavioural Insights methodology: again, no coincidence, when one considers British expertise in “nudging” the public towards any given pre-determined agendas or decisions that benefit the ruling classes. This excellent article at UK Column provides a comprehensive analysis of the role played in the Covid–19 response by Behavioural Insights.

      PUBLIC HEALTH ENGLAND — WHO ARE THEY, AND HOW ARE THEY LINKED TO PORTON BIOPHARMA?

      According to one report, PHE exists to “protect and improve the nation’s health and wellbeing, and reduce health inequalities”. PHE is an “operationally autonomous executive agency, sponsored by the Department for Health and Social Care (DHSC)”.

      In June 2018, PHE transferred its drug development to a new state-owned company, Porton Biopharma Ltd (PBL), which is wholly owned by Her Majesty’s Secretary of State for Health (currently Matt Hancock).

      Perhaps unsurprisingly, PBL has the only UK-licensed anthrax vaccine among its portfolio. We are told that “the future success and revenue growth of PBL will provide PHE with an income dividend which will be ploughed back into the delivery of its priorities”. Once again, we see the revolving door between government agencies and private, for-profit sectors with a focus on vaccines.

      MATT HANCOCK AND UK GOVERNMENT COMMERCIAL INTERESTS IN COVID–19

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, Matt Hancock, is also owner of Porton Biopharma during his tenure; but that is not the only tie that Hancock appears to have to for-profit entities that stand to benefit from Covid–19 response strategies.

      A recent report in the Byline Times detailed “highly controversial contracts” which will enable British ministers and senior health officials to “mine confidential data from tens of thousands of Covid–19 hospital patients”.

      These contracts have allegedly been awarded to technology companies “without being put out to competitive tender, NHS has disclosed”. Microsoft is included in those companies; that is, Bill Gates is present.

      BABYLON HEALTH — THE NHS IS NOT FOR SALE (!)

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Matt Hancock accused of breaking ministerial code by endorsing a private healthcare company.

      Both Hancock and Dominic Cummings, chief adviser to the Prime Minister, have questionable ties to Babylon Health, a prominent health tech firm implementing AI. Cummings held an undisclosed consultancy job at this healthcare venture: a firm endorsed by the government and at the top of the list to receive a National Health Service (NHS) Fund cash injection of £250 million.

      According to an article in The Bureau Investigates, during 2018, Cummings “advised Babylon Health on its communications strategy and senior recruitment just months before its GP at Hand app was publicly backed by Matt Hancock.”

      Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow health secretary (British opposition spokesman on health), condemned the Cummings/Hancock

      The links between Dominic Cummings in the heart of Downing Street, the health secretary and this AI health firm are increasingly murky and highly irresponsible.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      In case anyone is in doubt over Hancock’s enthusiasm for the Babylon GP at Hand app, it is highly advisable to read this article published at the British Medical Journal (BMJ), written by Rachel Clark, a doctor specialising in palliative medicine:

      Matt Hancock loves Babylon so much he doesn’t merely use its smartphone app, GP at Hand, he gushes enthusiasm for the product at every opportunity. First, at Expo, he name-checked Babylon, among others, as one of the “world’s best HealthTech companies.”

      Then he gave a speech eulogising the company while literally standing beneath its logos inside its London HQ. Then in comments to The Telegraph he declared a breathless vision for the “revolutionary” app to be “available for all”.

      And, last week he featured in a double-page, Babylon-sponsored puff piece in the Evening Standard entitled “Technology can be a great fixer for the NHS.”

      Its centrepiece was an interview proclaiming Hancock’s ringing endorsement of Babylon: he declared GP at Hand to be “a force for good within the NHS”.

      Although this detail may appear to be an excursus away from the involvement of the UK Government Covid–19 health advisory board in the promotion of global vaccine programmes, it serves as a further demonstration of the blurring of lines between commercial interests and the welfare of citizens.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      This relationship is highlighted in legendary journalist John Pilger’s latest documentary The Dirty War on the NHS, a film I cannot recommend highly enough for its stark portrayal of the stealth privatisation of the NHS.

      Babylon Health was founded by former Goldman Sachs banker Ali Parsa, who also co-founded and acted as CEO of a private healthcare company, Circle — the first private business to operate an NHS hospital. That hospital was Hinchingbrooke, which proved to be a disastrous enterprise.

      BABYLON AND BILL GATES

      Yes, Bill Gates has a connection to Babylon, too. In March 2020, Babylon’s Rwanda-focused virtual care subsidiary, Babyl, signed a ten-year partnership with the Rwandan government giving every citizen over the age of 12 access to digital health consultations.

      The project is heavily subsidised by the Rwandan government and the Bill Gates Foundation and promises (!) to “make health care affordable” for even the poorest communities. Again, we must ask to what degree these apps are serving as surveillance instruments for government agencies.

      The alleged war criminal and President of Rwanda, Paul Kagame, and Bill Gates proclaim: “Every vaccine is a shot of adrenaline into the heart of the African economy.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Cue the Babylon Covid–19 Care Assistant app. The app provides a four step care programme to subscribers: information, symptom checker and live chat with healthcare experts, a care plan, and video consultation with a healthcare professional.

      We are informed:

      “The app is free to download. Using the service is free in Birmingham and London through the NHS. However, users located elsewhere will have to sign up for pay-as-you-go or annual subscriptions to the service. Annual plans start from £149. One-off consultations can cost as much as £49 each time.”

      CUMMINGS AND HANCOCK — TAG TEAM THAT PUSHED FOR LOCKDOWN WHILE PROMOTING VACCINES

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Dominic Cummings (Image: Radical Larry 1 / CC BY-SA 4.0)

      Cummings is accused of pressuring Boris Johnson’s advisers to adopt a draconian lockdown policy to combat Covid–19. If this is true, it must raise the question, yet again, of how much the UK Government’s policy is influenced by genuine medical expert opinion and how much by commercial, Big Pharma, interests and agendas — interests and agendas which are demonstrably also those of the UK Government.

      Certainly, members of the scientific advisory committee “were shocked, concerned and worried for the impartiality of advice” after Cummings effectively gatecrashed the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergency (SAGE) meetings.

      Just this week, Hancock warned that there has been “no greater demonstration in modern history” of a need for a vaccine.

      Previously, in September 2019, Hancock had stated that the government was looking seriously at mandatory vaccines for state school pupils. Falling vaccination rates for children in the UK prompted Hancock to consider prohibiting self-determination among parents who do not agree with vaccination regimes.

      The fact that Cummings used his influence to politicise the SAGE meetings, and that Hancock is not averse to using his influence to promote private sector businesses with links to the NHS, should alert us to the possibility that both individuals are exploiting Covid–19 to further the aims of those whom they are connected to and potentially profit from.

      Bill Gates takes pride of place at the heart of the advisory network that has introduced and maintained lockdown in the UK — a lockdown not to be relaxed “until a vaccine is available”.

      COVID–19 IS PUSHING US TOWARDS GLOBAL HEALTH FASCISM

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      One of the questions I get asked the most these days is when the world will be able to go back to the way things were in December before the coronavirus pandemic. My answer is always the same: when we have an almost perfect drug to treat COVID–19, or when almost every person on the planet has been vaccinated against coronavirus.

      – Bill Gates — Gates Notes

      Covid–19 threatens an imminent “new normal” of global health tyranny and unprecedented government control and surveillance. The SAGE team was very likely derailed by Cummings’ political agenda and undue influence that he brought to bear upon the committee, which should have remained impartial and science-focused.

      The most influential members of the UK Government advisory team have demonstrated a blatant conflict of interest through their connections to the Bill Gates empire, but the British Government itself has invested heavily in the global immunisation concept that Gates is engineering through all manner of public and private sector initiatives.

      The WHO is the global health governing body and is heavily influenced and financed by Bill Gates. In January 2020, the WHO published its R&D blueprint prioritising novel Coronavirus vaccine clinical trials.

      The WHO’s Working Group for Vaccine Prioritisation aimed in that blueprint to provide guidance and recommendations to vaccine developers and to identify candidates who could be considered for further development and evaluation.

      The WHO is effectively a self-regulatory entity in charge of world health but with little public accountability, particularly where vaccines are concerned. The Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS) was established by the WHO in 1999 to respond to vaccine safety issues of “potential global importance”.

      Bill Gates is demanding indemnity against lawsuits before he agrees to distribute vaccines. We are all being fast-tracked into a future where our medical self-determination is in serious jeopardy and where those who decide for us will, potentially, not be held accountable for any health-endangering side effects.

      We have already seen the devastating consequences of mass immunisation during the H1N1 epidemic, with questionable Big Pharma transparency regarding risk, as found by those who were given a vaccination that left them brain damaged for life.

      Experts in the field have warned against rushing through a Covid–19 vaccine, bearing in mind it can usually take up to fifteen years of rigorous testing prior to approval. Any attempt to compress this process must carry risks.

      Dr Peter Hotez, Dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, told Reuters:

      I understand the importance of accelerating timelines for vaccines in general […] there is a risk of immune enhancement.

      In 2009, Dr Wolfgang Wodarg initiated the Committee of Inquiry into the WHO’s role in H1N1 (‘swine flu’) held by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg.

      In this recent interview, Wodarg describes Bill Gates as “crazy” to be attempting to shortcut research and development. Wodarg also talks about the “secret contracts” between states and Big Pharma that perhaps determine the trajectory of vaccine development.

      The H1N1 vaccine travesty must serve as a warning against precipitous vaccine development motivated by lockdown cabin fever, when the lockdown itself is looking more and more likely to be orchestrated to achieve precisely this outcome.

      At the same time, as the possibility of compulsory vaccination is under discussion, the government intends to roll out a surveillance apparatus that will ensure forever-control over an already politically weakened workforce pushed ever deeper into financial insecurity, first by austerity measures and now by Covid–19.

      It is very important to push back against the emotional triggering that is being generated by the state-aligned media and agencies. The behavioural insight experts are working hard to nudge us towards dependency on the state — but we must not surrender our individual and collective independence.

      We must determine the drivers behind this “crisis”, identify the causes, and deal with the symptoms without succumbing to fear or panic. It is not easy; but our futures depend upon our ability to see what is really going on and to respond accordingly.


      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 02:00

    • Pentagon Has An Obsession With This Robot Minesweeping Stealth Boat  
      Pentagon Has An Obsession With This Robot Minesweeping Stealth Boat  

      The Pentagon has agreed to allocate an additional $20.7 million in funding to AAI Corp., a unit of Textron Systems, for engineering and technical services to develop more robot stealth boats that probe for underwater mines and can attack enemy forces with its machine gun. 

      AAI’s stealth boat is badass, and made right here in the USA, at several production facilities on the East Coast. The deal is valued at $20,720,170 and is a modification to a previously awarded contract from 2014 for the Navy’s Unmanned Influence Sweep System (UISS) and Unmanned Surface Vehicle program.

      About 70% of the vessel will be constructed at AAI’s Hunt Valley, Maryland facility, with the remaining 30% at the company’s Slidell, Louisiana plant. 

      UISS is the Navy’s program for “a rapid wide-area coverage mine clearance capability which are required to neutralize magnetic/acoustic influence mines,” reported Navy Recognition. The vessel also packs firepower where it can remotely engage enemy forces. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The robot vessel is designed to perform mine countermeasures and capabilities by employing mine-hunting and mine-sweeping systems and work alongside Littoral Combat Ships (LCS) and other vessels. It is small enough to launch from an LCS or another vessel. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      It has high endurance and can conduct up to 20 hours of operation with countermine mine technology payload. For defensive and offensive operations, the vessel houses a machine gun that remotely fires on enemy targets. 

      The Pentagon awarded the contract to AAI in 2014 for the vessels with a completion date of September 2020, with a total value amount of $122.1 million. The work was pushed out one year to September 2021, with contract value increased to $142.8 to $165.2 million. 

      It appears to the Navy wants more and more of these robot stealth boats. It’s like Skynet on water…  


      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 01:00

    • On The Battleground Of The Virus, The Fox Laughs Last
      On The Battleground Of The Virus, The Fox Laughs Last

      Authored by Alastair Crooke via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

      U.S. professor of history at John Hopkins University, Mike Vlahos, in a series of short interviews with John Batchelor, tells us how Coronavirus has become a fiery pivot, pushing different leaders in the U.S. to take existential stands on how to deal with this virus. With various separate American states insisting to pursue directly polarised paths: Mandated ‘sheltering’ (the U.S. term for distancing) versus economic opening; States versus the Federal government; Blue versus Red; Dems versus GOP; ‘authoritarianism’ versus Laissez Faire and traditional American liberties – and now, internal state, Blue-Red conflicts (i.e. Ventura County versus California’s Governor, on the burning issue of open or closed beaches); and even, counties versus states.

      Vlahos notes the point is that that the battleground, thanks to the virus, has turned existential. No more is Blue/Red just a crafted rhetorical flourish – It is embodied; it is of biological flesh; it cuts into flesh – even as the virus’ future is unknown. In fact, the unknown deepens fears. The choice: ‘food on the table’ in a re-opened the economy (even at the real risk of those ‘doctors of death’ returning), or to play safe, passively, with distancing. The collective psyche is split; passions are raised; weapons are flourished, and militia parade. This is not theater: Its fervor is suffused into daily life: masks or not; socialie or not; work or not.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      “The U.S. constitutional order is fissuring before our eyes: That we have skirted constitutional crisis for the past quarter century, is no reassurance: [as] each new test is yet more bitterly contested, and still less resolved”, Vlahos explains:

      “Today, two irreconcilable visions of American life believe that they can continue only if they own the whole order”, Vlahos argues. “Yet, ours has been a shared constitutional order … The single-minded drive toward this goal – especially now by Blue state Democrats — has embrittled our constitutional order, and is creating the basis for a full-scale legitimacy crackup”.

      The Executive – initially claiming sole authority over Covid practice – has backed down, in the face of governors asserting (correctly) that they enjoy co-sovereignty with the Federal government. The Blue and the Red governors – both – are at entirely cross-purposes, yet both are exercising their respective sovereignties – flagrantly.

      Trump, meanwhile, is astride both horses: He cheers on the Second Amendment libertarian rebels, whilst at the same time, putting in place a wholly authoritarian, Federalised, bail-out economy, at the apex of which he will preside – having completed his ‘coup’ through merging the Treasury and Fed together, as a single (dollar) printing press – and atop a cascading monetary cornucopia.

      Today, there are two irreconcilable visions of American life. After 1992, the two parties alternated presidents every eight years. Yet, with each succeeding administration, the political milieu has grown yet more rancorous and divided. There is no relationship between parties now — save as sworn enemies, Vlahos observes.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Via Reuters

      On the one side, we have ‘Unionists’, who expect public deference towards the judgements and authority of the élite technocracy (whether financial or medical), and on the other, a tradition of state sovereignty, dating back to the 1871 (the Articles of Confederacy), which grant no deference towards the Federal authorities – but rather is suffused with disdain for them. Hence the culture of (often armed) militia, ready to fight ‘the Feds’ for their ‘liberties’.

      This latter touches a deep skein of emotion: the ancient fight against the tentacles of the British Imperial Octopus to secure America’s ‘liberties’. Thus, lockdown, and the medical world’s dire predictions necessitating economic shut-down, smack of ‘another agenda’ (the octopus agenda) – a backdoor, by which the globalists can complete their (imagined) project to feudalize an otherwise free people. One consequence of this is that, post-virus, the lockdown and the epidemiologists will be widely blamed for the coming depression – and the risky bubbles in the economy that were already inflated before virus, will be forgotten.

      Vlahos is a tad coy on whether, or how, some reconciliation of these estranged parties can come about. The New Yorker opines in a similar vein: “The pandemic has dangerously deepened divisions across America—a nation already riven in recent years by race, class, religion, and trash-talking politics. The concept of ‘one nation, indivisible’ seems ever more elusive, even unattainable, in these anxious days of deadly pathogens, soaring joblessness, and food shortages. For many, the future seems so uncertain. So does survival, a privilege taken as a virtual right by the majority of Americans courtesy of economic and medical achievements since the Second World War.”

      In this context of a ‘nation fissured’, the U.S. military have issued some catchy posters, urging national unity and the wearing of face-masks. (They can be seen here). And they all crib a notably nostalgic WW2 style: “It’s a woman’s war too”; “Fight the spread of coronavirus”, and “Let’s all fight” (as a GI lunges forward, in attack mode, his gleaming bayonet fixed).

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Ok, Ok, everyone today is employing the military meme. That’s not the point. Ask historian, Professor Vlahos. He will tell you the salient point is that the American Civil War never really ended, and is still there, latent, today – except …

      Except … during FDR’s term in office, when America fought WW2 – that’s the point. Only then was America a unitive state: ‘one nation, undivided’. That is, when it was fighting a war. So how to reconcile America’s split psyche? How to win re-election? Well … Blame China. Hot or cold? Who knows? It’s going to be a long, fraught six months ‘til November.

      At one level, the targeting of China, might be viewed as a defensive change-the-narrative ploy, when blame for any U.S. poor handling of the Coronavirus contagion inevitably will be exploited electorally. But at another level, the danger is that the White House and Pentagon seem to be pivoting towards giving substance to the rhetoric. In this election year, someone must be blamed (that is the standard practice in politics), but in so doing, we are rapidly moving in the direction of the unknown.

      What we suspect is that this is likely to become a ‘war’ of system-fragilities. This is China – no small fry. Nassim Taleb makes the point that it is easy to detect system-fragility: Fragility (and its opposite) can almost always be detected, using a simple test of asymmetry: Anything that sustains itself through sudden change (or shock), is resilient; the reverse is fragile. Washington, by its own liberal market metrics, believes the Chinese economy to be extremely fragile. We know however, that China has been long preparing for just such an (expected) moment.

      Will China prove the more fragile? Both have undoubted fragilities to their economies; and yet, a political system that is “fissuring before our eyes”, is that not an obvious fragility? Will a sudden ‘shock’ fragment it into parts? Or, will escalation against China bring about another FDR ‘moment’ of healing for its split psyche? China, on the other hand, enjoys a certain popular solidarity, and the experience of regimentation. The Party remains a formidable ‘machine’, reaching into all spheres of life. Are these not the signs of resilience? Many unknowns.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Via FT

      Europeans will have no call to be smug about these U.S. fissures – for they have their own. Did not the 2016 Presidential election prefigure today’s rise of states-sovereignty-ism in the U.S.? Did not 2016 and Brexit prefigure today’s ‘populism’ in Europe? Will the virus bring these ‘fissured’ European visions to an open assault on an EU ‘octopus’ already found wanting in the face of Covid-19?

      In the U.S., the Virus has spun-off ancient, irreconcilable differences about the nature of the State and the nature of power in the wake of their civil war. European thinking, between the two world wars, fell into relativism, nihilism, and the brooding existentialism of an Albert Camus. It also witnessed massive, blood-stained, governmental intrusions into every facet of civil society – with the rise of national-socialism, Trotskyism and Stalinism. Europe consequently finds itself today immobilized with its own (apparently) irreconcilable polarities – but lacks the means to lean inwards, toward some transcending framework that might make intelligible these conflicts, and allow them to be surpassed.

      The attempt to develop some impersonal philosophical standard by which to adjudicate has failed, precisely because the attempt to free ethics from history, with its stress on personal autonomy, obstructs any answer to the questions: by whose justice; by which rationality; by whose narrative are we to decide.

      So the story of the Coronavirus in the West, is also the story of Nassim Taleb’s tale of that extraneous event and ‘sudden shock’, exposing our hidden fragility of presuming upon life to be both secure – and predictable. Modern Man takes himself after Prometheus: the latter is celebrated as winning Man his freedom from ‘the tyranny of the gods’. What Prometheus did however was to teach man to regard himself as autonomous; to regard nothing as sacred; to ‘strike wounds in the divine environment’; to relegate nature to a heap of raw materials; to regard technology as the highest achievement; to probe nature’s deepest secrets, and not hesitate to play with fire.

      WB Yeats once said ‘God save me from thoughts men think in the mind alone. If thought were a matter of mind only, man would be a windowless monad, an ego-bound monstrosity’. Yes. Just as polar-opposites never unite at their own level, a supra-ordinate ‘third’ is always required, through which the two, artificially warring, parts to the psyche can come together in synthesis. And since Nature derives as much from the unconscious as the conscious, perhaps the unexpected intrusion from Nature, underscoring our human precarity, and the shocking reality that constitutes Life, may be able to unite the severed spheres.

      Ted Hughes, the celebrated poet and student of Shakespeare, tells his own story of escape from arid intellectual anomie in academia through The Burnt Fox, in which he remembers struggling as an undergraduate at Cambridge University with a tutorial essay. Abandoning the task in despair at two in the morning, young Ted goes to bed, and dreams that he is visited by a strange figure, half-man and half-fox, ‘just now stepped out of a furnace’ and in terrible agony from the burns that cover its body from head to foot. This enigmatic creature moves towards the desk and places its paw on the sheets on which Hughes is forlornly attempting to concoct an essay, leaving a bloody print behind, and says:

      ‘Stop this – you are destroying us’. Hughes wakes up a sadder and a wiser man.

      And with the advent of the Coronavirus, maybe the burnt fox it is who laughs last?


      Tyler Durden

      Wed, 05/13/2020 – 00:05

    • Arkansas Prof Arrested For Concealing 'Close' Ties To China; Accused Of 'Scheme To Defraud' While Receiving Millions In Grants
      Arkansas Prof Arrested For Concealing ‘Close’ Ties To China; Accused Of ‘Scheme To Defraud’ While Receiving Millions In Grants

      A professor at the University of Arkansas who received millions of dollars in research grants, including $500,000 from NASA, was arrested on Friday and charged with one count of wire fraud, according to a criminal affidavit unsealed Monday.

      63-year-old Simon Saw-Teong Ang is the director of the school’s High Density Electronics Center, which received funding from the National Science Foundation (NSF), Department of Energy (DOE), Department of Defense (DOD) and NASA. Since 2013, Ang has been the primary investigator or co-investigator on US government-funded grants totaling over $5 million, according to the Washington Examiner‘s Jerry Dunleavy.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      According to the FBI, Ang failed to disclose that he was getting paid by a Chinese university and Chinese companies in violation of university policy. He is accused of making false statements while failing to disclose his extensive ties to China as a member of the “Thousand Talents Scholars” program.

      Ang intentionally made materially false representations to the University of Arkansas and NASA which caused with transmission to be sent and received in the form of grant applications and grant funding that he would not otherwise have been entitled to receive,” wrote FBI special agent Jonathan Willett in the affidavit.

      “The complaint charges that Ang had close ties with the Chinese government and Chinese companies, and failed to disclose those ties when required to do so in order to receive grant money from NASA,” said the Justice Department. “These materially false representations to NASA and the University of Arkansas resulted in numerous wires to be sent and received that facilitated Ang’s scheme to defraud.”

      The FBI was tipped off to Ang’s activities after a hard drive was turned into the university’s lost and found. In an attempt to determine who it belonged to, a staff member discovered an email exchanges between the professor and a visiting researcher from Xidian University in Xi’an China in a file conspicuously labeled “Ang_Confidential.pdf.” 

      In one email from September 15, 2018, Ang writes:

      “Dear [RESEARCHER 1], I want you to understand that I will do my best to support your stay here in Arkansas, there are things that are becoming very difficult for me recently because of the political climate. You can search the Chiense website regarding what the US will do to Thousand Talent Scholars. Not many people here know I am one of them but if this leaks out, my job here will be in deep troubles. I have to be very careful or else I may be out of a job from this university. I hope you understand my deep concerns…Please keep this to yourself as I trust you.”

      In November, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations chaired by Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) released a 109-page bipartisan report which concluded that foreign nations “seek to exploit America’s openness to advance their own national interests,” the most ambitious of which “has been China,” according to the Examiner. According to the report, Chinese academics involved in their so-called ‘Thousand Talents’ program have been exploiting access to US research labs.

      Ang applied for and was awarded a NASA grant for a November 2016 proposal titled “500° Celsius Capable Weather-Resistant Electronics Packaging for Extreme Environment Exploration.” The government funding was worth $512,904 between 2017 and 2020, and he got it despite NASA’s “China Funding Restriction.” The NASA contracting officer overseeing the $500,000 grant said it never would have been awarded to Ang if they had known about his vast China connections.Washington Examiner

      According to the FBI, Ang did disclose his participation in the “Thousand Talents Scholars” in 2014, but not his participation in other programs from 2012 – 2018, which the FBI suggested demonstrated ‘his intent to execute a scheme do defraud the University of Arkansas and NASA” since he “obviously knew about the requirement to disclosure such conflicts of interest and deliberately kept all such conflicts of interest” from them.

      In addition to his participation in the Thousand Talents program, Ang concealed his role at Binzhou Maotong Electronic Technology Company from 2011 – 2018 while acting as their principal investigator for a research project concerning hydrogen fuel cell research. He also failed to mention that he was the CTO at Binzhou Gande Electronic Technology from 2011 – 2018, as well as his stake in Jiangsu Xuanzhi New Materials and Technology Company – which he claimed to own between 7 – 9% of in an email.

      The Justice Department’s China Initiative, launched in 2018, aims to combat both Chinese malign influence (ranging from cyberespionage to technology theft) and its Thousand Talents Program, which is aimed at stealing research. The department charged Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei in a global racketeering scheme earlier this year.

      On Friday, Dr. Xiao-Jiang Li, a former Emory University professor and Chinese Thousand Talents Program participant, pleaded guilty to filing false tax returns after he worked overseas at Chinese universities and did not report any of his foreign income on his federal tax returns.

      The Department of Education’s Foreign Gift and Contract Report website shows $15.76 billion in foreign funding on U.S. campuses between 2014 and 2019, including $1.17 billion from China. Both the Education Department and Justice Department prosecutors have gone after universities for concealing their foreign funding. –Washington Examiner

      Read the complaint below:


      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/12/2020 – 23:45

    • "Eat A Waffle, Go To Jail…" – Authoritarians Using COVID-19 Fear To Destroy America
      “Eat A Waffle, Go To Jail…” – Authoritarians Using COVID-19 Fear To Destroy America

      Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

      A Fresno, California waffle restaurant dared to open its doors for business this weekend to the delight of a long line of customers, who waited up to two hours for the “privilege” of willingly spending their money in a business happy to serve them breakfast on Mother’s Day. This freedom of voluntary transaction is the core of what we used to call our free society. But in an America paralyzed by fear – ramped up by a mainstream media that churns out propaganda at a level unparalleled in history – no one is allowed to enjoy themselves.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Thankfully everyone carries a smartphone these days and can record and upload the frequent violations of our Constitutional liberties. In the case of the waffle restaurant, thanks to a cell phone video we saw the police show up in force and try to push through the crowd waiting outside. An elderly man who was next in line to enter was indignant, complaining that he had been waiting two hours to eat at the restaurant and was not about to step aside while the police shut down the place. The police proceeded to violently handcuff and arrest the man, dragging him off while his wife followed sadly behind him to the police car.

      It is hard not to be disgusted by government enforcers who would brutally drag an elderly man away from a restaurant for the “crime” of wanting to take his wife out for breakfast on Mother’s Day. A virus far more deadly than the coronavirus is spreading from Washington down to the local city hall. Tin pot dictators are ruling by decree while federal, state, and local legislators largely stand by and watch as the US Constitution they swore to protect goes up in smoke.

      Politicians with perfect haircuts issue “executive orders” that anyone cutting hair for mere private citizens must be arrested. In Texas a brave salon owner willingly went to jail for the “crime” of re-opening her business in defiance of “executive orders.” To add insult to injury, Governor Greg Abbott very quickly condemned the one week jail sentence of salon owner Shelley Luther – but the officers who arrested her were only carrying out Abbott’s own orders!

      First we were told we had to shut down the country to “flatten the curve” so that hospitals were not overwhelmed by coronavirus patients. When most hospitals were nowhere near overwhelmed, and in fact were laying off thousands of healthcare workers because there were no patients, they moved the goalposts and said we cannot have our freedom back until a vaccine was available to force on us or the virus completely disappeared – neither of which is likely to happen anytime soon.

      Many politicians clearly see the creeping totalitarianism but lack the courage to speak out. Thankfully, patriots like Shelley Luther are demonstrating the courage our political leaders lack.

      When Patrick Henry famously said “give me liberty or give me death” in 1775, he didn’t add under his breath “unless a virus shows up.” If we wish to reclaim our freedoms we will have to fight – peacefully – for them. As Thomas Paine wrote in 1776, “These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.”


      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/12/2020 – 23:25

    • "Shocking & Regretful": UN Security Council Becomes US-China Battleground Over WHO
      “Shocking & Regretful”: UN Security Council Becomes US-China Battleground Over WHO

      At this point China is grasping at whatever it can to use as leverage to “embarrass” Washington — so to no one’s surprise Chinese officials are expressing outrage at the US blocking a draft United Nations Security Council resolution backing UN chief Antonio Guterres’ call for a global ceasefire in order to concentrate the world’s resources on fighting the coronavirus pandemic.

      A Chinese diplomat was cited in Reuters as saying it was “shocking and regretful” that Washington withdrew its support for the draft resolution Friday.

      “The United States had agreed to the compromise text and it’s shocking and regretful that the U.S. changed its position,” the diplomat said. However, a US official shot back, saying there was never any agreement about the text.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      UN Secretary General with Director General of the WHO, via Xinhuanet

      Front and center to the debate is the World Health Organization, currently source of deep controversy and growing tensions between China and the US, especially after German intelligence just revealed that Chinese President Xi Jinping asked World Health Organization (WHO) Director-General Tedros Adhanom Thebreyesus to cover up the severity of the coronavirus pandemic in January, according to a bombshell Der Spiegel report.

      As related to the UN’s draft ‘global ceasefire’ Reuters explains that “talks have been stymied by a stand-off between China and the United States over whether to mention the World Health Organization.”

      It remains that “The United States does not want a reference, China has insisted it be included, while some other members see the mention – or not – of WHO as a marginal issue, diplomats said.”

      The US ultimately rejected any reference to the WHO, even when the text was changed to merely denote “specialized health agencies” instead of a direct reference. US diplomats also reportedly vowed to veto anything with such language in it.

      President Trump cut off funding for the WHO, which is a UN agency, after it not only severely downplayed the coming threat of a global pandemic (by only belatedly identifying it as such), but after the administration charged the organization with being “China-centric” and allowing itself to be Beijing’s “disinformation” puppet as communist officials attempted to do PR damage control after the disease ripped through Wuhan and then spread far outside China’s borders. 


      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/12/2020 – 23:05

    • Scarred & Scared: The Reshaping Of The American Consumer Begins
      Scarred & Scared: The Reshaping Of The American Consumer Begins

      Authored by Christopher Condon via BloombergQuint.com,

      David Wright, 62, stood at the door of his Replay Arcade last week, trying to look at the bright side of things. The sole owner, he’s a tenant at the Mall of Georgia, which shut for a month but re-opened on May 4.

      “Traffic is about 10% of normal, but that’s 10% better than zero,” he chuckled in a phone interview from his business just outside Atlanta.

      Even with the rosy assumption that the Covid-19 virus will be contained in the coming weeks, the U.S. economy is in for a slow and painful struggle back from this devastating public health crisis.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Entrance to the Mall of Georgia.

      Consumers drive 70% of U.S. gross domestic product and they’ve been dealt multiple blows. For some it’s a direct hit to their bank account. For others it’s a shot to their psyches as earners, spenders and social animals.

      “We can’t just flip the switch,” said Claudia Sahm, director of macroeconomic policy at the Washington Center for Equitable Growth.

      “Just because you can go to the store and buy things again, doesn’t mean you will.”

      Spending Ability

      There will doubtlessly be cheerleading from elected officials and business leaders as restrictions are slowly lifted. Already there’s talk of pent-up demand as consumers dream about getting out of the house for more than groceries and prescriptions.
      That may be true in some areas, like health care services, where important but non-urgent physician visits and medical procedures were postponed. More broadly, the reality is likely to be disappointing.

      In Week Two of the Big Reopen, Half-Empty Bar Feels Like a Win

      For starters, more than 33 million Americans have lost their jobs in the seven weeks since wide swaths of the U.S. economy shuttered to stem the outbreak. Many may end up being out of work for the long-term, outlasting unemployment benefits that will typically end after 39 weeks, and far past the federal government’s $600 weekly supplement that’s set to expire on July 31.

      “There’s willingness to spend and there’s ability to spend,” said Jack Kleinhenz, chief economist for the National Federation of Retailers.

      “For many people, their ability to spend has been negated.”

      Younger Generation

      Severe economic shocks can even scar those who hang on to their jobs but are rattled watching friends, neighbors or relatives lose their work. Economists said it’s also worth noting this is the second recession in the space of 12 years that Americans have been told is the worst since the Great Depression.

      Richard Curtin, director of the University of Michigan’s Survey of Consumers, worries the cumulative effect, especially on younger generations, could compare to the devastating impact in the 1930s had on the psychology of Americans.

      “The Great Depression affected people their whole lives, and that could be true now for millennials,” he said.

      There’s also an additional layer this time. This crash was triggered by a virus that, itself, can kill. How that will affect consumption is unclear. Early signs from economies that are already re-opening, and from surveys of consumer attitudes, don’t look promising.

      Psychological Impact

      Data from China, where the virus appeared first and where many restrictions have been relaxed, point to a slow recovery of consumer spending, according to a note from economists at HSBC Bank in London. And in Sweden, though bars and restaurants have remained open throughout the contagion, patrons have largely stayed away.

      Polling by YouGov showed 57% of Americans were “very” or “somewhat” scared they might contract the virus. Among 26 countries surveyed since April 24, the average was 62%, with only Finland below 40%.

      “The psychological impact of risk aversion setting in cannot be understated,” HSBC’s James Pomeroy and Fabio Balboni wrote in their May 1 note.

      “Until people feel safe returning to places where large crowds are prevalent — such as public transport, bars, restaurants and many recreational venues — consumer spending in this part of the economy is likely to remain subdued.”

      In the U.S., industry groups are making a big effort to help boost confidence. Groups like the National Restaurant Association are offering extensive guidelines, often in conjunction with government agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, on how businesses should go about re-opening.

      At Wright’s arcade in the Atlanta-area mall, he’s made every effort to keep his operation safe and reassure customers. The pinball machines and other games are spaced farther apart. Staff wear masks and gloves and add their own constant cleaning efforts. But he’s resigned to a slow return of his clientele.

      “This might take a long, long time for people to feel comfortable again,” he laments.

      Curtin, who conducts monthly surveys on consumer behavior, expects companies will have a hard time reassuring people because risks trigger an emotional response.

      “However much you enjoyed flying, or going on vacation or to a restaurant, you’ll be a little more hesitant,” he said.

      “The cognitive system we can turn on and off almost immediately, but emotions we can’t turn on and off.”


      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/12/2020 – 22:45

    • Florida Beach Steps Up Enforcement As Visitors Leave 13,000 Pounds Of Trash During Busy Weekend
      Florida Beach Steps Up Enforcement As Visitors Leave 13,000 Pounds Of Trash During Busy Weekend

      Amazingly, local officials in Florida decided to reopen a beach to the public, and the biggest scandal to arise from the occasion had less to do with the coronavirus, and more to do with more prosaic problems of selfish, sh*tty people.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      As thousands traveled to the beach – which has been open for weeks – over the weekend, municipal crews collected more than 13,000 pounds of garbage last weekend that was left behind by visitors at Cocoa Beach as the state continues to relax coronavirus restrictions, according to the Hill.

      The Cocoa Beach Police Department warned it would dramatically step up enforcement and write tickets for outsize sums for anybody caught littering from here on out.

      “As restrictions are becoming more relaxed during this pandemic, the City of Cocoa Beach is beginning to see an influx of day-trippers to our beaches, along with piles of unlawfully discarded trash in their wake,” Cocoa Beach Police Department wrote in a notice.

      “This will not be tolerated.”

      Read the full warning below:

      As coronavirus restrictions begin to ease, people and their trash have been inundating beaches in Brevard County.

      The beach actually reopened on April 21, but the nice weather over the weekend brought thousands to the beach as the spring and summer beachgoing season in the state begins.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      According to the Hill, littering in Cocoa Beach can now fetch offenders a $250 fine.


      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/12/2020 – 22:25

    • Soros Has "Faith That Trump Will Destroy Himself", Fears "Weakened" Xi, Sees "Existential Risk" For EU
      Soros Has “Faith That Trump Will Destroy Himself”, Fears “Weakened” Xi, Sees “Existential Risk” For EU

      Gregor Peter Schmitz interviews George Soros for Project Syndicate,

      The Crisis Of A Lifetime

      Only one thing is certain about the post-pandemic world: there is no way back to the globalized economy that preceded it. Everything else is up for grabs, including the rise of China, the fate of the United States, and the survival of the European Union.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Gregor Peter Schmitz: You have seen many crises. Is the COVID-19 pandemic comparable to any previous one?

      George Soros: No. This is the crisis of my lifetime. Even before the pandemic hit, I realized that we were in a revolutionary moment where what would be impossible or even inconceivable in normal times had become not only possible, but probably absolutely necessary. And then came COVID-19, which has totally disrupted people’s lives and required very different behavior. It is an unprecedented event that probably has never occurred in this combination. And it really endangers the survival of our civilization.

      GPS: Could this crisis have been prevented if governments had been better prepared?

      SOROS: We have had infectious disease pandemics ever since the bubonic plague. They were quite frequent in the nineteenth century, and then we had the Spanish flu at the end of World War I, which actually occurred in three waves, with the second wave being the deadliest. Millions of people died. And we have had other serious outbreaks, such as the swine flu just a decade ago. So it’s amazing how unprepared countries were for something like this.

      GPS: Is that the biggest problem of the current situation — this lack of certainty about how to deal with this virus and how to proceed in the coming months or years?

      SOROS: It is certainly a very big one. We are learning very fast, and we now know a lot more about the virus than we did when it emerged, but we are shooting at a moving target because the virus itself changes rapidly. It will take a long time to develop a vaccine. And even after we have developed one, we will have to learn how to change it every year, because the virus will most likely change. That’s what we do with the flu shot every year.

      GPS: Will this crisis change the nature of capitalism? Even before COVID-19 led to the current catastrophic recession, the downsides of globalization and free trade were attracting greater attention.

      SOROS: We will not go back to where we were when the pandemic started. That is pretty certain. But that is the only thing that is certain. Everything else is up for grabs. I do not think anybody knows how capitalism will evolve.

      GPS: Could this crisis bring people — and nation-states — closer together?

      SOROS: In the long run, yes. At the present time, people are dominated by fear. And fear very often makes people hurt themselves. That is true of individuals as well as institutions, nations, and humanity itself.

      GPS: Are we witnessing that in the current blame game between the United States and China over the origins of the virus?

      SOROS: The continuing conflict between the US and China complicates matters, because we ought to work together on climate change and on developing a vaccine against COVID-19. But, apparently, we cannot work together because we are already competing over who will develop — and use — the vaccine. The fact that we have got two very different systems of government, democratic and …

      GPS: Autocratic?

      SOROS: Right. That makes everything much harder. There are a lot of people who say that we should be working very closely with China, but I am not in favor of doing that. We must protect our democratic open society. At the same time, we must find a way to cooperate on fighting climate change and the novel coronavirus. That won’t be easy. I sympathize with the Chinese people, because they are under the domination of a dictator, President Xi Jinping. I think a lot of educated Chinese are very resentful of that, and the general public is still very angry with him for keeping COVID-19 a secret until after the Chinese New Year.

      GPS: Could Xi’s grip on power weaken as the Chinese come to recognize that the handling of the crisis was sub-optimal?

      SOROS: Very much so. When Xi abolished term limits and named himself, in essence, president for life, he destroyed the political future of the most important and ambitious men in a very narrow and competitive elite. It was a big mistake on his part. So, yes, he is very strong in a way, but at the same time extremely weak, and now perhaps vulnerable.

      The struggle within the Chinese leadership is something that I follow very closely because I am on the side of those who believe in an open society. And there are many people in China who are very much in favor of an open society, too.

      GPS: Then again, the current U.S. president does not really represent the values of an open and free society…

      SOROS: Well, that is a weakness that I hope will not last very long. Donald Trump would like to be a dictator. But he cannot be one because there is a constitution in the United States that people still respect. And it will prevent him from doing certain things. That does not mean that he will not try, because he is literally fighting for his life. I will also say that I have put my faith in Trump to destroy himself, and he has exceeded my wildest expectations.

      GPS: What role does the European Union — your home that you care about so much — play in this power struggle?

      SOROS: I am particularly concerned about the survival of the EU because it is an incomplete union. It was in the process of being created. But the process was never completed and that makes Europe exceptionally vulnerable — more vulnerable than the U.S. not just because it is an incomplete union but also because it is based on the rule of law. And the wheels of justice move very slowly, while threats such as the COVID-19 virus move very fast. That creates a particular problem for the European Union.

      GPS: Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court exploded a bombshell last week with its latest ruling on the European Central Bank. How seriously do you take it?

      SOROS: I take it extremely seriously. The ruling poses a threat that could destroy the European Union as an institution based on the rule of law, precisely because it was delivered by the German constitutional court, which is the most highly respected institution in Germany. Before it delivered its verdict, it had consulted with the European Court of Justice and then decided to challenge it. So you now have a conflict between the German Constitutional Court and the European Court of Justice. Which court has precedence?

      GPS: Technically, the European Treaties give the ECJ supremacy in this area. That is very clear.

      SOROS: Right. When Germany joined the EU, it committed itself to abide by European law. But the ruling raises an even bigger issue: if the German court can question the decisions of the European Court of Justice, can other countries follow its example? Can Hungary and Poland decide whether they follow European law or their own courts — whose legitimacy the EU has questioned? That question goes to the very heart of the EU, which is built on the rule of law.

      Poland has immediately risen to the occasion and asserted the supremacy of its government-controlled courts over European law. In Hungary, Viktor Orbán has already used the COVID-19 emergency and a captured parliament to appoint himself dictator. The parliament is kept in session to rubber-stamp his decrees, which clearly violate European law. If the German court’s verdict prevents the EU from resisting these developments, it will be the end of the EU as we know it.

      GPS: Will the ECB need to change its policies after this ruling?

      SOROS: Not necessarily. This ruling only requires the ECB to justify its current monetary policies. It has been given three months to justify the actions it has taken. That will consume a lot of the ECB’s attention when it is the only really functioning institution in Europe that can provide the financial resources needed to combat the pandemic. Therefore, it should focus its attention on helping Europe to establish a Recovery Fund.

      GPS: Do you have any suggestions where these resources could come from?

      SOROS: I have proposed that the EU should issue perpetual bonds, although I now think that they should be called “Consols,” because perpetual bonds have been successfully used under that name by Britain since 1751 and the United States since the 1870s.

      Perpetual bonds have become confused with “Coronabonds,” which have been rejected by the European Council — and with good reason, because they imply a mutualization of accumulated debts that the member states are unwilling to accept. That has poisoned the debate about perpetual bonds.

      I believe that the current predicament strengthens my case for Consols. The German court said that the ECB’s actions were legal because they adhered to the requirement that its bond purchases were proportional to the member states’ shareholding in the ECB. But the clear implication was that any ECB purchases that were not proportional to the ECB “capital key” could be challenged and deemed ultra vires by the court.

      The kind of bonds that I have proposed would sidestep this problem, because they would be issued by the EU as a whole, would automatically be proportional, and would remain so eternally. The member states would have to pay only the annual interest, which is so minimal — at, say, 0.5% — that the bonds could be easily subscribed by the member states, either unanimously or by a coalition of the willing.

      European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen says that Europe needs about 1 trillion euros ($1.1 trillion) to fight this pandemic, and she should have added another 1 trillion euros for climate change. Consols could provide those amounts if the EU’s member states authorized them.

      Unfortunately, Germany and the “Hanseatic League” states led by the Netherlands are adamantly opposed. They should think again. The EU is now considering doubling its budget, which would provide only about 100 billion euros and yield only one-tenth of the benefit that perpetual bonds could provide. Those who want to keep their EU budget contribution to a minimum ought to support Consols. They would have to authorize certain taxes, like a financial-transaction tax, that would provide the EU with its own resources, assuring its AAA rating, but the taxes would not have to be imposed — their place would be taken by Consols. Both these parties and the rest of Europe would be much better off. Annual payments of 5 billion euros, whose present value would continuously decline, would give the EU 1 trillion euros that the continent urgently needs — an amazing cost-benefit ratio.

      GPS: When the EU relaxed its rules against state aid, Germany submitted more than half of the requests. Some people argue that this undermines the principles of a single market because it gives Germany an unfair advantage. What do you think?

      SOROS: I agree with their argument. It is particularly unfair to Italy, which was already the sick man of Europe and then the hardest hit by COVID-19. Lega party leader Matteo Salvini is agitating for Italy to leave the euro and also the European Union. Fortunately, his personal popularity has declined since he left the government, but his advocacy is gaining followers.

      This is another existential threat for the EU. What would be left of Europe without Italy, which used to be the most pro-European country? Italians trusted Europe more than their own governments. But they were badly treated during the refugee crisis of 2015. That’s when they turned to Salvini’s far-right Lega and the populist Five Star Movement.

      GPS: You sound very pessimistic.

      SOROS: Far from it. I recognize that Europe is facing several existential dangers. That is not a figure of speech; it is the reality. The verdict of Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court is only the most recent challenge. Once we recognize this, we may be able to rise the occasion. We can take exceptional measures that are appropriate to the exceptional circumstances we’re in. That certainly applies to Consols, which should never be issued in normal times, but are ideal right now. As long as I can propose measures like issuing Consols, I won’t give up hope.


      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/12/2020 – 22:05

    • Twitter Takes Its COVID-19 Censorship Into Overdrive
      Twitter Takes Its COVID-19 Censorship Into Overdrive

      It feels like it was just yesterday we pointed out that the Twitter censor machine had gone into overdrive, concerning itself with policing mean comments and curse words. Now, the censorship machine is sliding even further down the slippery slope. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      In a blog post published yesterday, Twitter said it would be “introducing new labels and warning messages that will provide additional context and information on some Tweets containing disputed or misleading information related to COVID-19.”

      In other words, the site’s efforts to police coronavirus discussion using the WHO as a truth rubric – which resulted in Zero Hedge’s permanent ban from the site for accurately predicting that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was likely at the middle of the ongoing global pandemic – hasn’t been enough.

      The site is taking its coronavirus censorship into “Phase II”. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The site says it is now going to append labels to Tweets “containing potentially harmful, misleading information related to COVID-19” and that the change is going to be retrofit to all previous Tweets.

      The labels will link to a “Twitter-curated page or external trusted source containing additional information on the claims made within the Tweet.”

      Warnings could also be applied to Tweets, the site said. The warnings “will inform people that the information in the Tweet conflicts with public health experts’ guidance before they view it.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Twitter said it will take action based on three broad categories:

      • Misleading information — statements or assertions that have been confirmed to be false or misleading by subject-matter experts, such as public health authorities.
      • Disputed claims — statements or assertions in which the accuracy, truthfulness, or credibility of the claim is contested or unknown.
      • Unverified claims — information (which could be true or false) that is unconfirmed at the time it is shared.

      It then posted this vague chart, which does very little to clear up anything:

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Recall, our original post about the Wuhan Institute of Virology that resulted in our ban from Twitter did not include misleading information, disputed claims or unverified claims. We wonder where we would fall on that nebulous-looking chart.

      Twitter also says that the site will identify Tweets that “could cause harm by using and improving on internal systems to proactively monitor content related to COVID-19.”

      Finally, the site said it won’t “amplify” Tweets with warnings or labels, essentially giving the site carte blanche to shadowban its own users as it deems necessary.

      Meanwhile, while Zero Hedge remains permanently banned, comedienne Jena Friedman, who falsely Tweeted out yesterday that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell “has tested positive for Covid-19”, still has an account up and running despite the Tweet being deleted.

      We look forward to continued equal application of the law from the fine Silicon Valley left-wing police at Twitter HQ. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>


      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/12/2020 – 21:45

    • Druckenmiller Turns Apocalyptic: "Risk-Reward For Equities Is As Bad As I've Seen It In My Career"
      Druckenmiller Turns Apocalyptic: “Risk-Reward For Equities Is As Bad As I’ve Seen It In My Career”

      Investing legend Stan Druckenmiller unleashed a firehose of cold water on market bulls today during an interview with the Economic Club of NY (the same venue that will interview Jerome Powell tomorrow on the topic of negative interest rates), when he said the “The risk-reward for equity is maybe as bad as I’ve seen it in my career,” (although “the wild card here is the Fed can always step up their purchases”), that the government stimulus programs won’t be enough to overcome the economic problems, that it makes no sense for the market to jump so much when optimism emerges around certain drugs like remdesivir (“I don’t see why anybody would change their behavior because there’s a viral drug out there”) and, most concerning, that “there’s a good chance that we just cracked the credit bubble that’s the result of free money.”

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      “The consensus out there seems to be: ‘Don’t worry, the Fed has your back’,” Druckenmiller said during Tuesday’s webcast before adding “there’s only one problem with that: our analysis says it’s not true.”

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Furthermore, while traders think there is “massive” liquidity and that the stimulus programs are big enough to solve the problems facing the U.S., resulting in stratospheric P/E multiples, the economic effects of the coronavirus are likely to be long lasting and will lead to a “slew” of bankruptcies, Druck said, agreeing with our observations from last week that the underlying problems are shifting from illiquidity to insolvency, as a “biblical” wave of defaults is coming:

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      “I pray I’m wrong on this, but I just think that the V-out is a fantasy,” the trading legend said, crushing hopes for a V-shaped recovery, assuming anyone still harbored those, and added that the recent increase in unemployment in the U.S. stunning. The official U.S. unemployment rate is at 14.7%, the highest level since the Great Depression.

      As Bloomberg summarizes, “Druckenmiller’s remarks are among the strongest comments yet by a Wall Street heavyweight on the bleak outlook facing the U.S.” Druck’s apocalyptic outlooks also sharply contrasts to the optimism that has pushed the S&P 500 Index to rally 30% since its March low even as the pandemic has brought the economy to a standstill, seized up credit markets and ended the longest bull market in history, all thanks to the now ubiquitous Fed backstop and moral hazard.

      And speaking of the Fed, Druckenmiller said that the Fed’s $2.3 trillion move to shore up markets in March, was “somewhat puzzling and aggressive” adding that the Fed “may not have had to take such extreme measures to shore up the U.S. economy in March had they acted earlier to normalize interest rates”, which it of course can’t as the stock market has been in one giant post-financial crisis bubble, and why the Fed’s modest attempt to normalize rates ended in catastrophe in 2018.

      Worse, Drucknemiller said that the Fed’s $3 trillion in stimulus programs aren’t likely to spur future economic growth: “It was basically a combination of transfer payments to individuals, basically paying them more not to work than to work. And in addition to that, it was a bunch of payments to zombie companies to keep them alive.”

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      And with the US set to introduce negative rates over the next 6-12 months much to Donald Trump’s delight, discussing negative rates Drucknemiller said that “I don’t understand even what the argument is.”

      Touching on another source of stimulus – which it now appears is indispenable for the US economy not to collapse in cardiac shock – Druck then discussed the “record low” unemployment headed into the Covid-19 crisis, Druckenmiller said that unemployment may have been at a record low going into  Covid-19, but to me it was a result of reckless fiscal spending and huge leveraging on the government side.”

      Which also explains why the Fed and Treasury effectively merged to unleash helicopter money, as the economic and market performance before the covid-crisis were already the result of one giant monetary and fiscal bubble, so the only possible resolution would have been an even more gigantic monetary and fiscal bubble. And that’s precisely what we got.

      That said, Druckenmiller did agree with David Zervos that “liquidity is going to move markets more than earnings during this period”, which means that for better or worse, fundamentals are indeed dead. The silver lining is that the former Soros chief strategist said he thinks that the current liquidity will soon shrink as US Treasury borrowing crowds out the private economy and even overwhelms Fed purchases. Indicatively, Deutsche Bank believes the US will issue over $5 trillion in debt this year.

      Commenting on the coronavrisis response, Druckenmiller said that neither Taiwan or Hong Kong had to lockdown their economies to fight Covid-19, while in the US “this is one of the most bizarre decision making processes I’ve ever seen” elaborating that the economically cripplling shutdown is a bad idea, and adding that “I can guarantee you poverty kills.”

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      The investing legend spared no words for his criticism of the Trump administration’s response to the coronavirus outbreak, saying he would not be surprised if it becomes the “poster child for the worst public policy decisions ever made from a cost-benefit analysis.”

      Probably so, but when the money helicopters are now in the air paradropping cash who cares? Incidentally, that may explain why Druck was quick to point out that gold is now 28% higher than it was a year ago. Separately, Drucknemiller, said that on a relative basis, he’s as bullish on long-short strategies as he’s been in 10 years. “That’s partly because I’m worried about everything else.”

      Finally, Druckenmiller is also bullish on Amazon.com, saying people should be thankful that the company exists right now given the number of jobs created and that it has “made all of lives better. I think it’s an amazing company. I get a little emotional when politicians attack it.”


      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/12/2020 – 21:24

    • China Auto Sales Fall 5.6% YOY In April Despite Sizeable Bounce Back From March
      China Auto Sales Fall 5.6% YOY In April Despite Sizeable Bounce Back From March

      The auto market in China is a widely watched economic gauge and leading indicator for the rest of the world, not only because the country is the number one seller of vehicles worldwide, but now also as a litmus test as to how the country’s coronavirus re-opening is faring.

      For now, despite a questionable miraculous-looking rebound, sales are still falling.

      April’s auto sales numbers came in down 5.6% compared to last year, despite rising 37% from March numbers, according to data released Sunday by the China Passenger Car Association and MarketWatch

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      The CAAM claims that declines are moderating although we have a tough time believing (pardon our skepticism of China) that such a V-shaped recovery is possible in the country where the outbreak first began.

      According to China’s data, the YOY growth rebound is pronounced and April’s drop pales in comparison to a 40% YOY drop in March and a 79% YOY drop in February. 

      The Chinese government is going to attempt to spur demand with new policies aimed at enticing buyers, according to Bloomberg, citing an unnamed automotive industry group in China. 

      Recall, we have recently noted that U.S. auto manufacturers are teeing up sizeable incentives to get buyers back into showrooms. Europe is following suit, with Volkswagen starting a sales initiative to revive demand, including improved leasing and financing terms. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Meanwhile, optimism for May in China is already muted.

      Not only is the country still struggling with lockdowns, but the first five days in May were a labor holiday that could have a negative impact on sales. 

      Outlook for the year is also less-than-optimistic. The CAAM predicts that sales will drop 15% to 25% for the year, depending on whether or not the country is able to further slow the spread of the virus.


      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/12/2020 – 21:05

    • Indian Cops Use Metal Tool To Grab Social Distancing Dissidents
      Indian Cops Use Metal Tool To Grab Social Distancing Dissidents

      Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

      A video out of India shows police officers using a bizarre metal contraption to grab dissidents who violate coronavirus social distancing rules.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      “Hands up!” barks a police officer at a man during a demonstration of the tool, which looks like a kind of cattle prod but presumably isn’t electrified (yet).

      The dissenter is then entrapped by the mechanism, which closes around his body like some kind of venus fly trap for humans.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      It could also be described as a sort of handcuff for the entire body.

      The officer then uses the tool to push the man towards the back of a van.

      “Thanks to this over-sized pick-up reacher, the police can now arrest Covid dissidents without risking infection,” writes Toby Young.

      While Singapore’s robot dog is a significantly more high tech way of enforcing social distancing, India seems to prefer going old school.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      *  *  *

      My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me. Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.


      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/12/2020 – 20:45

    • Futures Slide After Senators Propose Legislation To Sanction China If No "Full Accounting" For Coronavirus Outbreak
      Futures Slide After Senators Propose Legislation To Sanction China If No “Full Accounting” For Coronavirus Outbreak

      Just hours after futures tumbled following a report that Republican Senator Graham and GOP Senators have introduced a bill sanctioning China for human rights abuses and over its treatment of Uighurs, moments ago futures took another leg lower on the back of an AFP report that Republican senators proposed legislation that would empower President Donald Trump to slap sanctions on China if Beijing does not give a “full accounting” for the coronavirus outbreak.

      In other words, unless there was something lost in translation, Trump will have a carte blanche to sanction China on two account: the Uighurs and Beijing’s secrecy over the origin of the coronavirus pandemic.

      “The Chinese Communist Party must be held accountable for the detrimental role they played in this pandemic,” said Senator Jim Inhofe, one of the sponsors of the “COVID-19 Accountability Act”, adding that China’s “outright deception of the origin and spread of the virus cost the world valuable time and lives as it began to spread.”

      The legislation will give Trump 60 days to certify to Congress that China has provided a full accounting on the COVID-19 outbreak to an investigation that could be led by the United States and its allies, or a United Nations body like the World Health Organization. Of course, China has repeatedly refused to allow any such “accounting” to the WHO; one can imagine how it will respond when a US body demands similar “accounting.”

      As a reminder, yesterday Beijing banned roughly 35% of Australian beef imports due to the country’s demand a probe into the coronavirus origins be launched.

      But wait, it gets better: In an act that China would see as violating its sovereignty, Trump must also certify that China has closed its highest-risk wet markets and released Hong Kong activists arrested in post-COVID-19 crackdowns. Without certification, Trump would be authorized under the legislation to impose sanctions like asset freezes, travel bans and visa revocations, as well as restricting Chinese businesses’ access to US bank financing and capital markets.

      “China refuses to allow the international community to go into the Wuhan lab to investigate,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, another sponsor of the bill.

      “They refuse to allow investigators to study how this outbreak started. I’m convinced China will never cooperate with a serious investigation unless they are made to do so.”

      Following the report, futures whic had already legged sharply lower on Tuesday afternoon, tumbled to session lows, as traders now await China’s less than diginified response and as it becomes all too clear that launching a full on assault on China will be a core aspect of Trump’s re-election campaign.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

       

       


      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/12/2020 – 20:25

    • In Unprecedented Move, Two Fund Giants Liquidate CLO Warehouses
      In Unprecedented Move, Two Fund Giants Liquidate CLO Warehouses

      Yesterday we laid out how the magic of modern monetary alchemy (not to be confused with the blunt brain trauma that is the magic money tree of helicopter money) works, by showing how a CLO takes 96% junk rates loans and by repackaging this portfolio, or “warehousing” it into a CLO, the product were tranched bonds of which 87% were rated investment grade.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      And while in theory this works by “diversifying” away individual credit risk, in practice the whole exercise is nothing but smoke and mirrors which crumbles the moment an adverse systemic event – such as a global viral pandemic – reveals that the investment grade emperor is really wearing junk-rated clothes.

      Of course, it is the very process of warehousing that made all this possible and resulted in record demand for leveraged loans for the past few years, with CLOs becoming the biggest source of demand for the $1 trillion leveraged loan market, because as we concluded in our article, this CLO sleight of hand “worked splendidly as long as nobody questioned the “alchemy” behind the biggest magic trick Wall Street pulled in the past decade. Alas, alchemy does not exist, and just like all those buying “gold” from carnival charlatans eventually realized they were holding on to lead, so all those who naively believed they had purchased investment grade securities are about to learn the hard way that what they really owned was, aptly-named, junk.”

      Fast forward to today, when investors finally appear to be asking what good are CLOs, and what is the point of tranching cash flows, if virtually all underlying junk loans will soon end up – true to their name – in default, with no cash flows left to tranche.

      Bloomberg reports that two funds that aimed to bundle leveraged loans into bonds decided instead to liquidate the loans they had bought, a rare step reflecting just how the pandemic has cooled the market for securities known as collateralized loan obligations.

      At a time of massive downgrades of both underlying loans and resulting CLO bonds, Steele Creek Investment Management and AXA Investment Managers both sold off loans they had planned to package into CLOs, according to Bloomberg citing people familiar with the matter. The funds had paid for the loans using temporary lines of credit known as warehouses.

      With leveraged loan prices plunged to their lowest level in more than a decade in March, CLOs have been left scrambling to find buyers for their securities, and as a result Steele Creek and AXA Investment Managers decided to instead liquidate their warehouses, a move that some investors fear may become increasingly common, and could push loan prices even lower.

      Steele Creek, a Moelis Asset Management company, put a $177 million warehouse loan portfolio up for sale on May 4, the people said. A spokesperson for Steele Creek declined to comment. AXA’s asset management arm sold a warehouse for a CLO it was arranging with Citigroup, said the people, asking not to be identified discussing a private matter.

      As Bloomberg notes, selling loans held in warehouses may make more sense now after prices have recovered somewhat from their March levels amid growing Federal Reserve support for credit markets, making potential losses relatively manageable, investors said.

      In keeping with the intricacies of structured credit, a CLO warehouse is often funded in part by outside investors who bear the initial pain if the loans go bad, known as the first loss, similar to the equity tranche of the final CLO itself. They usually choose to roll their investment into the riskiest securities of a CLO when the deal is ready to close, known as the equity portion. AXA Investment Management’s decision was made in conjunction with, and in the best interests of the first loss provider, according to Yannick Le Serviget, the firm’s global head of leveraged loans and private debt. AXA IM declined to comment on specifics of the transaction.

      “Given the large repricing of the loan market, specifically good quality portfolios, it did make sense to take advantage of the upward pricing,” Le Serviget said.

      While such liquidations are extremely rare, fears of CLO warehouse unwinds emerged in March once pandemic fears started hammering corporate debt markets broadly. The, as we reported last month, ratings firms downgraded a wave of loans as the pandemic weighed on companies’ sales. The average loan price plummeted to around 76 cents on the dollar in late March, before rebounding to around 87 cents.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      What makes the liquidation scenario especially concerning is that most CLO warehouses aren’t forced to sell loans if prices fall below particular levels, and since the facilities usually mature in 12 to 18 months, fund managers and investors have breathing room to decide whether to liquidate or go through with the CLO. Unwinding a facility at depressed prices could force some CLO investors to bear losses, making them less inclined to push for an unwind.

      But investors in the CLO who are among the first to take losses might become more inclined to liquidate a warehouse if i) the loans become impaired, or if ii) they see little scope for price recovery over the medium term. In some cases it may also make more economic sense not to proceed with a transaction if there is a buyer for the loans in the warehouse, investors say. Banks may also pressure CLO managers to end deals if assets are sitting in a warehouse for too long.

      The concern is that if despite the recent rebound in both loan prices and various CLO tranches, as per the Palmer Square index, two fund giants decided to unwind warehouses, then the signal is clear: this is as good as it will get for the leveraged loan market – i.e., this is the apex of the dead cat bounce – and what is coming will be much uglier.

      * * *

      The stunning move by Axa and Steele Creek may explain why on Tuesday, the Fed revised its Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility to allow CLOs that hold a broader range of leveraged loans to be used as collateral. According to a Fed statement, the central bank will now accept new AAA CLOs with leveraged loans, including refinanced loans, that priced as far back as January 2019, compared to the previous term sheet where eligible CLO could only hold newly-originated loans.

      Still, the Fed’s involvement is largely superficial to the CLO market which until now had not benefited much from the central bank’s effort to boost credit liquidity: as Bloomberg notes, the terms still require eligible CLOs be static vehicles wherein managers can’t actively trade the loans underpinning the deals, a structure that makes up only a small portion of the market. “It’s not going to open up the floodgates, but it can have some measured effects,” said Gregg Jubin, a partner at Cadwalader. “This looks certainly better than the first iteration.”

      It is hardly a coincidence that the Fed announcement comes just as a warehouse was liquidated. According to Jubin, the changes may benefit existing CLO warehouses that hold qualifying loans. On the other hand, some pointed out to the prohibitive interest rate demanded by the Fed under TALF , which will be 150 bps over 30-day average SOFR, making the facility quite expensive .

      It’s “a positive sign for the market that the look back for eligible collateral extends back to the beginning of 2019 and also includes refinancings since that time, as is the fact that the Fed appears to have taken into consideration certain detailed aspects of how the CLO market operates,” said Nick Robinson, a partner at Allen & Overy LLP. And while this may be good news for investors in recent AAA CLOs tranches – mostly Japanese retirees – everyone else, i.e., all those who hold to AA and lower rated tranches, remain in the cold and will have to wait for the next crash in hopes the Fed expands the scope of TALF again, or else have no choice but to sell now that the AXAs of the world have suggested this is as good as it will get.


      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/12/2020 – 20:07

    • The Billion-Dollar Buyer Of Cohiba, Romeo y Julieta, And Montecristo Cigar Brands Remains A Smoky Mystery
      The Billion-Dollar Buyer Of Cohiba, Romeo y Julieta, And Montecristo Cigar Brands Remains A Smoky Mystery

      The consortium of buyers of Imperial Brands’ cigar business, who will be acquiring the world renowned Cohiba brand, have mostly remained under the radar. The deal itself has also been “shrouded in a smoky veil of secrecy”, according to Bloomberg

      However, one group of investors is being led by an Asian Gambling Executive who helps run operations in Macau, it is now being reported. Imperial has continued to decline comment on who is buying the business, simply calling them “the right long-term owners” for the brands. 

      Imperial decided last month to sell its premium cigar business for $1.1 billion to Allied Cigar Corporation. Imperial’s brand portfolio also includes Romeo y Julieta and Montecristo.

      Allied Cigar is a private firm that was incorporated in Hong Kong on March 10, according to registry filings. Chiu King-yan, who is the CFO of Macau’s biggest junket operator, SunCity Group Holdings Ltd., was listed as a board member. 

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Chiu is also a director of Summit Ascent Holdings Ltd., the Hong Kong-listed firm behind a hotel and casino complex near Vladivostok, Russia.

      SunCity owns a majority stake in Summit Ascent and has been expanding outside of Macau in recent years. It has opened a resort project in Vietnam and is currently looking for projects in places like Cambodia and Japan. 

      Other board members include Chiu Ping-shun and Joyce Lam. There is little information available on them in the public domain and there has been no additional evidence to suggest that SunCity is involved directly in the acquisition. 

      It’s unusual for an acquisition this large to go off without transparency on who the acquirer is.

      This is complicated by the fact that the deal includes Imperial’s 50/50 joint venture in Cuba, which distributes and sells the Cohiba, Romeo y Julieta and Montecristo brands. Cuba has been isolated by U.S. sanctions for decades, making it tough for the two countries to do business, Bloomberg concludes.

      We’ll continue to keep a close eye on this story as it develops.  


      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/12/2020 – 19:45

    • Is This A Bear Market Rally Or A New Bull? BofA Has The Answer… And What Happens Next
      Is This A Bear Market Rally Or A New Bull? BofA Has The Answer… And What Happens Next

      With the S&P trading nearly 800 points – or a whopping 30% – above its March 23 lows, the divergence in opinions whether this is a new bull market or merely a massive – and the fastest ever – bear market rally ever, propped up by trillions in central bank liquidity and fiscal stimulus, has never been greater.

      We won’t go into details covering the key arguments of either camp (we have done that on numerous occasions in the past, and urge readers to read the latest reports by the chief equity strategists of Goldman, David Kostin, and Morgan Stanley, Michael Wilson  to compare just how stark the variance in outlooks is among the two most widely followed Wall Street strategists) and instead we will go straight to what may be a remarkably accurate answer to this dilemma that is keeping Wall Street up at night.

      In determining whether March marked the beginning of a real bull market (like March of 2009, March of 2003 and Jan of 1991) or a bear market rally (Nov 1989, June 2000 and Dec 2008), BofA’s quant team conveniently notes that factors can help. Consider that during the early stages of each of the prior real bull markets, the bank’s Low Price factor –  read “dollar stocks”, or “distressed equities” – was the best performing factor, but did not lead in bear market rallies.

      Alternatively, prior bear market rallies saw mixed leadership, and “Low Price” traditionally was outperformed by such factors as Value, Momentum and Growth.

      How about the current rally?

      Since 23 March lows, Value (Price/Book and Fwd P/E) and Risk (Estimate Dispersion and Beta) have led. But it is the mediocre performance of Low Price stocks, i.e. distressed equities from the bottom, which to BofA suggests that this is, indeed, just another bear market rally.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      BofA’s conclusion is validated by a recent report from SocGen’s Solomon Tadesse, who notes that “after a record low in March, the market has surged in a short order, registering a stunning 31% gain in a matter of a month. Given the overall negative undertone from the economic challenges ahead, the dramatic reversal of global markets after the pandemic lows is more puzzling, as it also implies an all clear victory against the silent enemy and a return back to the pre-pandemic normality.”

      And while moves of such magnitude have been observed in the past, furious overshoots such as the current one tend to be – almost entirely – bear market rallies, because as Tadesse notes, a look through the annals of market history and a study of bear markets in the last 150 years…

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      … reveals that “a return to recovery from a bear market bottom, both cyclical downturns and sudden market crashes, has often been gradual, with frequent adjustments along the way, reflecting the weight of uncertainty surrounding economic recovery out of the ashes of crises.

      In that respect, the ongoing surge in global markets strikes as an oddity (chart below) even after factoring in the massive bridges of support from monetary and fiscal stimulus.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      As Tadesse then points out, “based on an exhaustive analysis of bear markets of the last century and half, under the most conservative scenario – that the market has indeed reached cyclical bottom in the March sell-off – the S&P 500 would finish at about 2715 by year-end, a 7-8% cumulative correction from the current level of 2,939.”

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      But wait, there’s more, because as Tadesse concludes, “the above analysis assumes critically that the 23 March bottom indeed reflects the cyclical bottom and assesses only the market’s speed of ascent during the eventual recovery. Yet, history is also replete with many instances of flimsy bear rallies that eventually succumbed to yet another, lower bottom” and reminds us of the “classic case” of the staggering 47% rally over the  four months immediately after the bear bottom of the 1929 market crash. After peaking, the market then reversed its ascent in April 1930, and went through a harrowing tailspin of decline for the next two years until it hit its ultimate bottom in June of 1932 during the Great Depression, wiping out 83% of its value at the peak in April 1930.

      His parting warning: “With the current fallout from the complete shutdown of economic life in terms of disruptions in supply chains and collapse of aggregate demand, as well as the uncertainty on the post-lockdown path to recovery, new market bottoms are possible, although the unprecedented massive policy response could provide the backstop to a worsening case of deflationary spiral.”


      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/12/2020 – 19:35

    • China: Coexistence Or Cold War II?
      China: Coexistence Or Cold War II?

      Authored by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org,

      Under fire for his handling of the coronavirus pandemic, President Donald Trump, his campaign and his party are moving to lay blame for the 80,000 U.S. dead at the feet of the Communist Party of China and, by extension, its longtime General Secretary, President Xi Jinping.

      “There is a significant amount of evidence” that the virus originated in a Wuhan lab, said Secretary of State Mike Pompeo last week.

      Trump himself seemed to subscribe to the charge:

      “This is worse than Pearl Harbor. This is worse than the World Trade Center. There’s never been an attack like this… It could have been stopped in China. It should have been stopped right at the source.”

      There is talk on Capitol Hill of suspending sovereign immunity so China may be sued for the damages done by the virus that produced a U.S. shutdown and a second Great Depression where unemployment is projected to reach near the 25% of 1933.

      The Trump campaign has begun to target the Democratic nominee as “Beijing Biden” for his past collusion with China and his attack on Trump for “hysterical xenophobia” when Trump ended flights from China.

      What is the historical truth?

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      On China, Trump is the first realist we have had in the Oval Office in decades. But both parties colluded in the buildup of China as she vaulted over Italy, France, Britain, Germany and Japan to become the world’s second power in the 21st century.

      Both parties also dismissed Chinese trade surpluses with the U.S., which began at a few billion dollars a year in the early 1990s and have grown to almost $500 billion a year. Neither party took notice until lately of our growing dependency on Beijing for products critical to our defense and for drugs and medicines crucial to the health and survival of Americans.

      The mighty malevolent China we face today was made in the USA.

      But what do we do now? Can we coexist with this rising and expansionist power? Or must we conduct a new decades-long Cold War like the one we waged to defeat the Soviet Empire and Soviet Union?

      The U.S. prevailed in that Cold War because of advantages we do not possess with the China of 2020.

      From 1949-1989, a NATO alliance backed by 300,000 U.S. troops in Europe “contained” the Soviet Union. No Soviet ruler attempted to cross the dividing line laid down at Yalta in 1945. Nor did we cross it.

      East of the Elbe, the Soviet bloc visibly failed to offer the freedoms and prosperity the U.S., Western Europe and Japan had on offer after World War II. America won the battle for hearts and minds.

      Moreover, ethnic nationalism, the idea that separate and unique peoples have a right to determine their own political and cultural identity and destiny, never died in the captive nations of Europe and the USSR.

      China today does not suffer from these deficiencies to the same degree. Unlike the USSR, China has four times our population. Where the USSR could not compete economically and technologically, China is a capable and dynamic rival of the U.S.

      Moreover, if we begin a Cold War II with China, we would not be starting with the advantages Truman’s America, undamaged at home in World War II, had over Stalin’s pillaged and plundered land in 1945.

      Where ethnic nationalism tore the USSR apart into 15 nations, today’s China is more of an ethno-nationalist state with Han Chinese constituting 1 billion of China’s 1.4 billion people.

      There are millions of Tibetans, Uighurs, Kazakhs in southwest and west China, and tens of millions of Buddhists, Christians, Muslims, Falun Gong and other religious minorities. But China is unlike the multiracial, multiethnic, multicultural, multilingual Moscow-centered and Russian-controlled Soviet Empire and USSR that shattered after 1989.

      China’s weaknesses?

      She is feared and distrusted by her neighbors. She sits on India’s lands from the war of the early 1960s. She claims the whole South China Sea, whose waters and resources are also claimed by Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, the Philippines and Taiwan.

      The peoples of Hong Kong and Taiwan fear that Beijing intends to overrun and rule them.

      Even Vladimir Putin has reason to be suspicious as Beijing looks at the barren but resource-rich lands of Siberia and the Russian Far East, some of which once belonged to China.

      China is thus a greater rival than the USSR of Stalin and Khrushchev and Brezhnev, but the U.S. is not today the nation of Ronald Reagan, with its surging economy and ideological conviction we would one day see the ideology of Marx and Lenin buried.

      Three decades of post-Cold War foolish and failed democracy-crusading have left this generation not with the conviction and certitude of Cold War America, but with ashes in their mouths and no stomach to spend blood and treasure converting China to our way of life.


      Tyler Durden

      Tue, 05/12/2020 – 19:25

    Digest powered by RSS Digest