Jul 21

Today’s News 21st July 2017

  • Analysis: Advantages And Disadvantages Of US Seaborne Laser Weapon System

    Authored by Andrei Akulov via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    This news hits the world media headlines.

    US Navy has started life-tests of the world's first drone-killing laser reported to move at the speed of light and to be 'more precise than a bullet'. Laser weapons project a coherent ray of directed photons (light) that strike their target virtually instantaneously. The massive amount of energy released from the weapon was able to down the drone by setting its wing on fire. The speed – 50,000 times the speed of an incoming intercontinental ballistic missile – makes it unnecessary to lead the target.

    Silent and generally invisible, as it usually operates at an optical wavelength indiscernible to the human eye, the Laser Weapons System (LaWS) runs off its own electrical generator and needs no ammunition. Highly accurate, it is very effective when used against small, speedy targets, including incoming rockets, small drones and artillery shells. Low maintenance, high safety, and long lifespan are desirable characteristics.

    The cost is «about a dollar a shot». Intended primarily to disable or destroy aircraft and small boats, the 30-kilowatt laser weapon is currently onboard the USS Ponce deployed in the Persian Gulf. It is predicted to be combat ready by 2020. A full-power hundred-kilowatt Free Electron Laser is slated for testing in 2018, and might see use on the Navy’s new Zumwalt-class stealth destroyers. The Navy plans to create 150 kilowatts lasers in more distant future.

    To believe what the media say – the US has made a great stride ahead to acquire a superweapon, giving it a critical advantage over any potential enemy in the world. No doubt, the ongoing tests testify to the fact that the US Navy has achieved some progress in developing small-size laser systems capable of striking small targets at limited ranges. This is a story of success but it also calls for an objective review.

    There are limitations and shortcomings.

    Directed energy weapons are still in their relatively early days. The maximum range is limited as laser energy tends to diffuse in the atmosphere, especially when obstructed by sand, smoke or fog. Atmospheric absorption, scattering, and turbulence prevent shipboard lasers from being all weather weapons.

    A laser beam has difficulty burning through denser materials. It needs time to inflict the damage and disable a heavy projectile. With no kinetic impact, a laser may fail to stop the target. In theory, laser weapons may be used for offensive missions, but the primary function is defensive. The LaWS has a very limited operational range – one to three km. It is no comparison to other combat systems. Lasers are no substitute for guns and missiles. They can add to the defensive capabilities but cannot be used as primary strike weapons.

    The operator of a laser weapon must account for the movement of the target, the movement of the firing platform, decoys, dummies, or multiple war warheads that the enemy may use. Countermeasures to laser guidance also include laser detection systems, smoke screen and anti-laser active protection systems. Targets can be coated with materials that can absorb laser energy. Countering saturation attacks is also a problem.

    Are laser weapons as low price as they are described for advertising purposes? But an infrared laser’s sophisticated optical guidance system and focusing lenses are not cheap. The weapon is fast but still a target must be designated, information processed and communicated to ensure accuracy. It is not done as immediately as media describe, it does take a few seconds. So, it is not exactly “the speed of light”. Besides, a laser weapons is installed on a platform vulnerable to precision-guided weapons.

    There are some legal restrictions: the 1995 Protocol On Blinding Laser Weapons, a part of the United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons – forbids the use of “dazzler” lasers explicitly designed to permanently blind the eyesight of adversaries. It discourages the use of laser combat systems as anti-personnel weapons but it can be used against platforms – aircraft, armor vehicles and ships.

    The LaWS is no game changer. It boasts no dominant role in modern warfare. Besides, with the current tests conducted with a thumb pressed firmly on the scale, the system has never seen combat. With all the limitations mentioned above, the weapon will not likely be ready for prime time anytime soon.

  • Trump Is Looking to Stop Mueller; The Left Prepares for Full Chimp Out

    Content originally published at iBankCoin.com

    If God is truly great, Trump will fire Mueller, seize his documents, and have him arrested for colluding with the media and plotting a coup against the President. If chaos is truly set to rain down upon us, like the ash at Pompeii, we will need Trump to start taking militant action against his enemies.

    This is the end game now — just 6 months into his Presidency.

    You know it’s war, especially since he stopped the CIA project to arm and support ISIS in Syria. I know you cucks will say “they were moderate rebels.” Bullshit. They were ISIS. Now be quiet about it.

    Reports are swirling tonight, after another leak out of Mueller’s stupid investigative committee suggesting they were widening their probe into Trump’s business, the President’s lawyers are now looking to stop him.

    Via McClatchy:

    With the Russia investigation continuing to widen, Trump’s lawyers are working to corral the probe and question the propriety of the special counsel’s work. They are actively compiling a list of Mueller’s alleged potential conflicts of interest, which they say could serve as a way to stymie his work, according to several of Trump’s legal advisers.
     
    A conflict of interest is one of the possible grounds that can be cited by an attorney general to remove a special counsel from office under Justice Department regulations that set rules for the job.
     
    The president is also irritated by the notion that Mueller’s probe could reach into his and his family’s finances, advisers said.
     
    Trump has been fuming about the probe in recent weeks as he has been informed about the legal questions that he and his family could face. His primary frustration centers on why allegations that his campaign coordinated with Russia should spread into scrutinizing many years of Trump dealmaking. He has told aides he was especially disturbed after learning Mueller would be able to access several years of his tax returns.

    When comparing it to the impeachment investigation into President Clinton, one source for McClatchy said it paled in comparison.

    “This is Ken Starr times 1,000,” said one lawyer involved in the case, referring to the independent counsel who oversaw an investigation that eventually led to House impeachment proceedings against President Bill Clinton. “Of course, it’s going to go into his finances.”

     
    The article then veered off the reservation and into lunaticville, discussing scenarios where the President would simply pardon himself. This is pure theoretical nonsense and McClatchy knows it.
     

    Currently, the discussions of pardoning authority by Trump’s legal team is purely theoretical, according to two people familiar with the ongoing conversations. But if Trump pardoned himself in the face of the ongoing Mueller investigation, it would set off a legal and political firestorm, first around the question of whether a president can use the constitutional pardon power in that way.
     
    “This is a fiercely debated but unresolved legal question,” said Brian Kalt, a constitutional law expert at Michigan State University who has written extensively on the question.
     
    The power to pardon is granted to the president in Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, which gives the commander in chief the power to “grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.” That means pardon authority extends to federal criminal prosecution but not to state level or impeachment inquiries.
     
    No president has sought to pardon himself, so no courts have reviewed it. Although Kalt says the weight of the law argues against a president pardoning himself, he says the question is open and predicts such an action would move through the courts all the way to the Supreme Court.
     
    “There is no predicting what would happen,” said Kalt, author of the book, “Constitutional Cliffhangers: A Legal Guide for Presidents and Their Enemies.” It includes chapters on the ongoing debate over whether presidents can be prosecuted while in office and on whether a president can issue a pardon to himself.

     
    Preet Bharara, former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and the left’s new hero because he was fired by Trump — is talking greasy on Twitter. You could see why he got fired. He’s an idiot.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Trump supporters are fairly uniform in their disdain for Mueller. They’d rather see him executed than continue to investigate ‘russian ties.’ The left and the deep staters, are adamant about it — because they know the fix is in. Mueller is staffed with Clinton lawyers, whose sole focus is to destroy Trump and reimplement their neocon schemes of war by any means necessary.

    Tucker Carlson discussed this issue with Krauthammer, who warned that this investigation is heading towards a ‘fishing expedition.’

  • U.S. Cocaine Seizures Are Going Through The Roof

    U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) has almost doubled the amount of cocaine seized this fiscal year compared to the year before.

    Infographic: U.S. Cocaine Seizures Going Through the Roof | Statista

    You will find more statistics at Statista

    As Statista's Dyfed Loesche notes, more than two months before this fiscal year ends on September 30 the agency has seized more than 121,000 million pounds of cocaine.

    As our infographic shows, this year the greater share was seized by the biggest CBP branch, the Office of Field Operations. This arm of CBP mans all 328 ports of entry (seaports, airports, border crossings etc.) while Border Patrol officer operate out in the open between those ports.

  • Washington's "Good Terrorists, Bad Terrorists" Policy In The Middle East

    Authored by Nauman Sadiq vis OrientalReview.org,

    Karl Marx famously said that history repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce. The only difference between the Afghan jihad back in the ‘80s that spawned Islamic jihadists like the Taliban and al Qaeda for the first time in history and the Libyan and Syrian civil wars, 2011-onward, is that the Afghan jihad was an overt jihad: back then, the Western political establishments and their mouthpiece, the mainstream media, used to openly brag that the CIA provides all those AK-47s, RPGs and stingers to the Afghan so-called “freedom fighters” to combat the Soviet troops in Afghanistan.

    A page of British The Independent newspaper, issued Dec 6, 1993

    After the 9/11 tragedy, however, the Western political establishments and corporate media have become a lot more circumspect, therefore this time around, they have waged covert jihads against the Arab-nationalist Gaddafi regime in Libya and Assad regime in Syria, in which Islamic jihadists (aka terrorists) have been sold as “moderate rebels” with secular and nationalist ambitions to the Western audience.

    Since the regime change objective in those hapless countries went against the mainstream narrative of ostensibly fighting a war against terrorism, therefore the Western political establishments and the corporate media are now trying to muddle the reality by offering color-coded schemes to identify myriads of militant and terrorist outfits that are operating in Syria: such as the red militants of the Islamic State and al-Nusra Front, which the Western powers want to eliminate; the yellow Islamic jihadists, like Jaysh al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham, with whom the Western powers can collaborate under desperate circumstances; and the green militants of the Free Syria Army (FSA) and a few other inconsequential outfits, which together comprise the so-called “moderate” Syrian opposition.

    If we were to draw parallels between the Soviet-Afghan jihad of the ‘80s and the Syrian civil war of today, the Western powers used the training camps located in the Af-Pak border regions to train and arm Afghan “Mujahideen” against the Soviet troops in Afghanistan.

    Similarly, the training camps located in the border regions of Turkey and Jordan are being used to provide training and weapons to Sunni Arab militants to battle the Shi’a-dominated Syrian regime with the collaboration of Turkish, Jordanian and Saudi intelligence agencies.

    During the Afghan jihad, it is a known historical fact that the bulk of so-called “freedom fighters” was comprised of Pashtun Islamic jihadists, such as the factions of Jalaluddin Haqqani, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, Abdul Rab Rasul Sayyaf and scores of others, some of which later coalesced together to form the Taliban Movement.

    Similarly, in Syria, the majority of so-called “moderate rebels” is comprised of Sunni Arab jihadists, such as Jaysh al-Islam, Ahrar al-Sham, al-Nusra Front, the Islamic State and myriads of other militant groups, including a small portion of defected Syrian soldiers who go by the name of Free Syria Army (FSA).

    Moreover, apart from Pashtun Islamic jihadists, various factions of the Northern Alliance of Tajiks and Uzbeks constituted the relatively “moderate” segment of the Afghan rebellion, though those “moderate” warlords, like Ahmad Shah Massoud and Abul Rashid Dostum, were more ethnic and tribal in character than secular or nationalist, as such.

    Similarly, the Kurds of the so-called “Syrian Democratic Forces” can be compared with the Northern Alliance of Afghanistan. The socialist PYD/YPG Kurds of Syria, however, were allied with the Baathist regime against the Sunni Arab jihadists for the first three years of the Syrian civil war, i.e. from August 2011 to August 2014.

    At the behest of American stooge in Iraqi Kurdistan, Massoud Barzani, the Syrian Kurds have switched sides in the last couple of years after the United States policy reversal and declaration of war against one faction of the Syrian opposition, the Islamic State, when the latter overstepped its mandate in Syria and overran Mosul and Anbar in Iraq in June 2014, from where, the US troops had withdrawn only a couple of years ago in December 2011.

    Regarding the Western powers’ modus operandi of waging proxy wars in the Middle East, since the times of the Soviet-Afghan jihad during the eighties, it has been the fail-safe game plan of the master strategists at NATO to raise money from the oil-rich emirates of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE and Kuwait; then buy billions of dollars’ worth of weapons from the arms’ markets of the Eastern Europe; and then provide those weapons and guerilla warfare training to the disaffected population of the victim country by using the intelligence agencies of the latter’s regional adversaries. Whether it’s Afghanistan, Chechnya, Libya or Syria, the same playbook has been executed to the letter.

    More to the point, raising funds for proxy wars from the Gulf Arab States allows the Western executives the freedom to evade congressional scrutiny; and the benefit of buying weapons from the unregulated arms’ markets of the Eastern Europe is that such weapons cannot be traced back to the Western capitals; and using jihadist proxies to achieve strategic objectives has the advantage of taking the plea of “plausible deniability” if the strategy backfires, which it often does. Remember that al-Qaeda and Taliban were the by-products of the Soviet-Afghan jihad, and the Islamic State and its global network of terrorists are the blowback of the proxy war in Syria.

    On the subject of the supposed “powerlessness” of the US in the global affairs, the Western think tanks and the corporate media’s spin-doctors generally claim that Pakistan deceived the US in Afghanistan by not “doing more” to rein in the Taliban; Turkey hoodwinked the US in Syria by using the war against Islamic State as a pretext for cracking down on Kurds; Saudi Arabia and UAE betrayed the US in Yemen by mounting airstrikes against the Houthis and Saleh’s loyalists; and once again Saudi Arabia, UAE and Egypt went against the ostensible policy of the US in Libya by destabilizing the Tripoli-based government, even though the renegade general in eastern Libya, Khalifa Haftar, is an American stooge who had lived for two decades in the US right next to the CIA’s headquarter in Langley, Virginia.

    If the US policymakers are so naïve then how come they still control the global political and economic order? This perennially whining attitude of the Western corporate media that such and such regional actors had betrayed them otherwise they were on the top of their game is actually a clever stratagem that has been deliberately designed by the spin-doctors of the Western mainstream media and foreign policy think tanks to cast the Western powers in a positive light and to vilify adversaries, even if the latter are their tactical allies in some of the regional conflicts.

    Fighting wars through proxies allows the international power brokers the luxury of taking the plea of “plausible deniability” in their defense and at the same time they can shift all the blame for wrongdoing on the minor regional players. The Western powers’ culpability lies in the fact that because of them a system of international justice based on sound principles of morality and justice cannot be constructed in which the violators can be punished for their wrongdoing and the victims of injustice, tyranny and violence can be protected.

    Leaving the funding, training and arming aspects of insurgencies aside, but especially pertaining to conferring international legitimacy to an armed insurgency, like the Afghan so-called “freedom struggle” of the Cold War, or the supposedly “moderate and democratic” Libyan and Syrian insurgencies of today, it is simply beyond the power of minor regional players and their nascent media, which has a geographically and linguistically limited audience, to cast such heavily armed and brutal insurrections in a positive light in order to internationally legitimize them; only the Western mainstream media that has a global audience and which serves as the mouthpiece of the Western political establishments has perfected this game of legitimizing the absurd and selling Satans as saviors.

  • Amazon's Phone-Charging Robot Will Spare You The Indignity Of Talking To Strangers

    Amazon is having a rough week.

    The e-commerce powerhouse has celebrated a string of victories this year. Its stock price broke above $1,000 for the first time; it is presiding over an unprecedented retrenchment within the retail space as more than 8,000 brick-and-mortar stores are expected to close in the US this year, and the company announced plans to acquire yuppie favorite Whole Foods Market, promising to transform the company’s stores into laboratories for automation and AI where advanced sensors will perform tasks previously reserved for human cashiers. It also revealed that its “Prime Day” sale was the "Biggest Global Shopping Event in Amazon History", surpassing Black Friday and Cyber Monday sales.

    But the string of good news came to an abrupt halt last week when Reuters reported that the top Democrat on the House antitrust subcommittee, David Civilline, has voiced concerns about Amazon's $13.7 billion plan to buy Whole Foods Market and requested in a letter to the House Judiciary Committee a hearing to examine the deal's potential impact on consumers – the first stirrings of what could metastasize into an anti-trust probe.

    Adding to the antitrust concerns, Reuters reported Thursday that the FTC is investigating the company for allegedly misleading customers about its pricing discounts, citing a source close to the probe. The news sent Amazon shares lower in afternoon trade:

    Amid the negative news, the company’s investors enjoyed a brief moment of levity when career website Ladders reported on a patent that was awarded to the company earlier in the week. The patent, first filed in 2015, revealed the company’s plans to build a robot that, using the company’s massive data-mining apparatus, would be able to track down desperate mobile-device users in crowed public spaces like an airport or concert venue and present them with the greatest gift of all: an opportunity to charge their phones.  

     

     

    Here’s a quick rundown of how it’ll work, courtesy of Ladders:

    “You will make a wireless request (perhaps with your last precious few moments of juice).

     

    The robot will find you in a crowd using sensor data. Through a cloud-based application, the robot can even find you automatically when your power hits below 10%. Nothing, of course is free, so the robot will ask you to watch an ad, complete a survey, or pay some money.

     

    The robot would be designed for public use in airports, hotels, and shopping malls—all locations where losing battery power can be particularly inconvenient. Of course, a device like this would be perfect for business travelers, who have become accustomed to carrying heavy external batteries or even bulky power strips.

     

    Then: the robot provides sweet, precious electricity to your phone or iPad or laptop.”

    As Ladders pointed out, the patent description explains why these robots could be useful, especially for professionals who are increasingly dependent on mobile devices.

    “It can be quite inconvenient to a user when one of these devices runs out of battery power. This is especially true if the user does not have an available charging adapter for the device,” the patent reads. “Users may find themselves asking friends, or even strangers, to borrow a charging adapter.”

    Indeed, as Ladders notes, “there is clearly an unmet market that an army of mobile-charging robots for your personal use can fill.”

    Whether Amazon intends to move forward with production of the robot remains to be seen. The company has yet to comment publicly about the patent. But as it continues to test and refine its army of package-delivering drones, it’s unsurprising that Amazon is finding other uses for robotics.

    But that’s Amazon: Working tirelessly to build a future where your phone battery never creeps below 10%.

    Read the patent below:

     

    2017.07.20amazonpatent by zerohedge on Scribd

     

  • History Repeats: The Continuing Threat To Freedom And Democracy

    Via Jesse's Cafe Americain blog,

    Lately it has been popular in some circles to talk about the US being a 'late stage democracy' that has 'never been more ripe for tyranny.'

    Sometimes they like to drag in Plato to give their thought pieces a gleam of higher learning and a supposed grounding in history.

    But their pieces fall into that trap, that very sort of temporal vanity and self-centered preoccupation to despair that Newman notes so well in saying that "every century is like every other, and to those who live in it seems worse than all times before it."

    Would you be surprised to hear that less than one hundred years ago there was an actual plot, bankrolled by some of the most powerful and famous figures of the American one percent, to use military force to depose a sitting American President and instead install a fascist in the White House who would be more compliant with their greed and lust for power?

    The model for this takeover would have been similar to Benito Mussolini's infamous 'march on Rome.'

    Would you be further surprised to know that some of these unrepentant financial figures then went on to help bankroll Hitler, and continued doing business with his atrocious regime even as their most vile business partners actively fought the US, their own country, in the war?

    How well does this fit the efficient markets and rational actor models that so much of economic theory, and certain factions in modern political ideology, seems to rely?   If only we can get rid of government, and then people will be free to spread their natural goodness and take wing like angels.  Let us free the pathological and sociopaths from external constraints, and their better natures will surely rise to the occasion.  And if not, we can surely explain it to them with our economic learning.

    It never ceases to amaze how many economic and social models of human behavior are based, not in history, but rather on simplistically convenient constructs and myths that serve the status quo and the power of Big Money.

    A better model perhaps is to think that freedom and truth are always under threat by those who value neither more than their own obsessive lust for power and money,  beyond all reason.   That last is important to remember because the current liberal impulse is to simply blame bad information for some of the most outrageous abuses of power and privilege.  If only we could explain the economic benefits of general prosperity rather than relying on such weak tea as 'moral arguments.'

    Alas, it seems to be the duty of each generation to defend what has been given to them by their forebears against the continuing threats of the perversion of knowledge and reason that is tyranny.  And what is odd about it is that it seems to catch each subsequent generation by surprise.

    I am not sure that I understand why FDR and his administration did not take more dramatic action in pursuing such perfidy as the plot to overthrow the republic by the fortunate few.   It certainly was not for personal gain and power, as it seems to be the case of our more recent betrayers of justice in not pursuing the indictment and public prosecution of financial crimes.

    We may have arrived at that time, that rendezvous with destiny, in which we either stand for truth and justice, or fall one by one in a contemptible struggle against the forces of injustice and duplicity.  But we are certainly not the first, and not even the most distantly distinctive in this challenge, as compared to our parents,  and grandparents, and great-grandparents.

    Freedom is not a prize to be won and held forever.  Rather, it is a continuing commitment and state of mind to view certain principles above others.  And one of them is certainly not personal greed.
     

  • Here Are America's Most Underfunded Corporate Pensions

    We spend a lot of time talking about the public pension crisis because, well, it’s a massive $5 – $8 trillion dollar overhang on the economy and one which will undoubtedly result in some heartache for investors at some point in the future.  Unfortunately, there are some problems that are too large for even U.S. taxpayers to fix and, with an underfunding of $52,000 (mid-point) per household, somehow we suspect this is one of them. 

    Of course, our nation’s various governmental institutions aren’t the only ones to have unwittingly created massive ponzi schemes from which there is no escape.  In fact, as Bloomberg points out today, as of the end of 2016 over 90% of the top 200 corporate pensions in the S&P were unfunded to the tune of $382 billion.

    Here’s a look at the funded status of the top 20:

     

    Meanwhile, just the top 20 corporate pension funds are underfunded by over $100 billion.

     

    So what happens when these massive corporate obligations become so underfunded that they can’t possibly ever be fixed?  As the 400,000 pensioners in the Central States Pension Plans are all too familiar, the obligations get handed over the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC), an entity which is nearly bankrupt itself, at which point payouts are slashed leaving retirees with about half of the monthly income they expected in retirement.  Per CBS:

    February was a bad month for Larry Burruel and thousands of other retired Ohio iron workers. His monthly take-home pension was cut by more than half from $3,700 to $1,600.

     

    Things have been rough in the Rust Belt, but this was a particularly powerful punch in the pocketbook for Burruel, who started in the trade at 19 and worked 36 years before opting for early retirement to make way for younger workers. Unfortunately, this sagging industry doesn’t have enough younger workers to pay for retirees like Burruel, whose pension plan is in what the U.S. Treasury Department calls “critical and declining status.”

     

    Burruel and the 400,000 members of his Central States Pension Fund are the canaries in the coal mine as far as pension cutbacks go. At least 50 Midwestern pension plans — mostly the kind jointly administered by trustees for a labor union and a group of employers — are in this decrepit condition. Several plan sponsors have already applied to the Treasury Department to cut back retirees’ allotments.

     

    This cross-section of America includes more than a million former truck drivers, office and factory employees, bricklayers and construction workers who are threatened with cutbacks that could last the rest of their lives.

    Who could have guessed that the efforts of our government and largest corporations to backstop the investing risk of millions of households across the country would end so poorly?

  • Idaho Embraces Neofeudalism With Its "Noncompete" Legislation

    Authored by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

    Before I begin, I want to mention that my only experience with Idaho (unfortunately), was driving through the southeastern part of the state during my six-week cross country road trip in 2010. It was some of the most majestic and peaceful scenery I had ever seen, and I’d love to return and explore more of the state in the future. I’ve also heard Boise is a pretty cool city. It’s unfortunate that a state with so much potential passed the anti-freedom legislation described below, but I have faith the people will figure it out and reverse course.

    Much of my recent writing has been focused on the need for political decentralization, meaning that states and local communities need to start experimenting more and making decisions for themselves on a wider range of important policy questions. This naturally will lead to some really good outcomes, but also some genuine disasters. Idaho’s noncompete law falls into the latter category.

    Many of you may not be familiar with what I’m talking about, so I’ll start with some excerpts from a very good New York Times article on the subject, and then get into some detailed commentary at the end.

    Here’s a brief overview of the situation from the piece, Noncompete Pacts, Under Siege, Find Haven in Idaho:

    BOISE, Idaho — Idaho achieved a notable distinction last year: It became one of the hardest places in America for someone to quit a job for a better one.

     

    The state did this by making it easier for companies to enforce noncompete agreements, which prevent employees from leaving their company for a competitor.

     

    “We’re trying to build the tech ecosystem in Boise,” said George Mulhern, chief executive of Cradlepoint, a company here that makes routers and other networking equipment. “And anything that would make somebody not want to move here or start a company here is going to slow down our progress.”

     

    Alex LaBeau, president of the Idaho Association of Commerce and Industry, a trade group that represents many of the state’s biggest employers, countered: “This is about companies protecting their assets in a competitive marketplace.”

    By “assets” he means human beings. Just want to make that clear.

    For the most part, states have been moving toward making it easier for people to switch teams, but Idaho went the other direction with legislation that was friendlier to employers. The resulting law was particularly strict because it put the onus on employees to prove that they would not harm their former employers by taking the new jobs.

     

    Proponents note that the statute applies only to “key employees” who tend to have more responsibility and better pay. But employment lawyers say Idaho companies tie down all levels of workers, not just top executives, with tough employment contracts. And indeed, the new law has roots in a yearslong fight waged by a woman who never finished high school but built a career selling tech-training services, only to be sued when she left for a better-paying job.

     

    The most extreme end of the spectrum is California, which prohibits noncompete agreements entirely. Economists say this was a crucial factor behind Silicon Valley’s rise, because it made it easier for people to start and staff new businesses. But as states like Utah and Massachusetts have tried to move closer to this approach, legislators have run into mature companies trying to hold onto their best employees.

     

    A recent survey showed that one in five American workers is bound by a noncompete clause. They cover workers up and down the economic spectrum, from executives to hairdressers. Despite their widespread use, these agreements often catch departing workers off guard because they are rarely highlighted during interviews and are usually tucked inside employment contracts that are full of impenetrable legalese few people can understand.

    They hate us for our freedom.

    Now here’s an example of what can happen when noncompetes aren’t enforced. Workers tend to win.

    Two years ago, TSheets hired a pair of engineers from a smaller software company called Zenware. Jody Sedrick, Zenware’s chief executive, was hurt and disappointed. He contacted a lawyer to see if it was possible to prevent his employees from leaving for a rival, but instead of spending money on legal costs, he decided to try something else: He gave each of his remaining employees a raise.

     

    “I said, ‘You know what, we’re going to double down internally,’” he said in a recent interview.

     

    The result for the Idaho economy was that TSheets hired two people — but in doing so got 12 other people a raise. Had Mr. Sedrick decided to sue his two departing employees, something Idaho’s new law made easier, those raises might never have happened.

    Now here’s an example of what can go wrong.

    Three years ago Ms. Nolan quit and started working at ExecuTrain — LeapFox’s main competitor — where she negotiated a $65,000 salary. LeapFox sued her for violating her exit agreement, setting off a three-year legal battle that was settled out of court but inspired Ms. Nolan to get a tattoo that sits just under her collarbone and reads: “Trust No One.”

     

    After Ms. Nolan’s defection, Codi Galloway, who owns LeapFox with her husband, Scott, became an outspoken advocate for amending state law to make it less expensive for businesses to block an employee from going to work for a rival. The result was a bill that shifted the burden from companies to employees, who must now prove they have “no ability to adversely affect the employer’s legitimate business interests.”

     

    The bar for that is so high that Brian Kane, an assistant chief deputy in the Idaho attorney general’s office, wrote that this would be “difficult if not impossible” for an employee to do.

     

    Ilana Rubel, one of the few Democrats in Idaho’s House of Representatives, became the bill’s fiercest critic. Ms. Rubel, a Harvard-trained lawyer who does intellectual property litigation for the Silicon Valley-based law firm Fenwick & West, described the proposal as “toxic to a good business ecosystem.”

     

    “This bill was a giant thumb on the scale in favor of old established business at the expense of start-ups,” Ms. Rubel said.

    The reason I find the above legislation so important is because it’s a perfect microcosm for one of the most pernicious trends in U.S. society, which must be eradicated as soon as possible. Namely, the concept that corporations deserve more rights than actual human beings. It doesn’t take much thought to recognize just how egregiously this sort of legislation stacks the deck against actual human beings in favor of entrenched companies and their profits. A person has to prove they have “no ability to adversely affect the employer’s legitimate business interests,” but does a company have to prove that when they fire a person? Does it have to prove that it doesn’t affect the fired human being’s life prospects?

    Of course not, because pretty much any time someone is fired there is a clear detrimental impact to that person’s life. Which is fine, but why should an employee who’s offered more money somewhere else have to prove the new job won’t affect the company he or she left? This is a twisted modern form of indentured servitude, and stacks the playing field in favor of not just companies generally, but entrenched companies, who apparently consider their employees property. This is sick.

    To give just another example of this mentality at play, take a read of this paragraph from David Dayen’s recent piece published at The Nation,   Trump’s Renegotiation of NAFTA Is Starting to Look a Lot Like the TPP:

    Governments always claim that they’ll enforce labor and environmental standards: In 1993, Ron Wyden called a vote for NAFTA “a vote for less pollution.” But in this case workers or green groups would have to rely on a notoriously anti-labor, anti-environment regime in Washington to police violations by foreign exporters. They could not sue over NAFTA breaches directly.

     

    Investors, however, would still have that ability under the controversial investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system, a secret extra-judicial court that gives corporations monetary awards for lost profits due to changes in law that run counter to trade agreements. While the document states that ISDS would have to be more transparent (hearings and judgments would be public) and “consistent with U.S. legal principles and practice,” it still exists, meaning corporations could still functionally overturn sovereign laws outside of the court system, and win billions of damages when governments try to write rules in the public interest.

    We need to all come together and recognize there’s an ongoing assault on the human being by powerful oligarchs and their politician puppets. Until we accept this and fight back, it will only get worse.

  • Government "Flabbergasted" After Elon Musk's Most Bizarre Claim Yet

    Elon Musk set the interwebs ablaze this morning when he tweeted out that he somehow got every major city on the eastern seaboard to “verbally approve” a “NY-Phil-Balt-DC Hyperloop” to be built by his Boring Company.

    “Just received verbal govt approval for The Boring Company to build an underground NY-Phil-Balt-DC Hyperloop. NY-DC in 29 mins.”

     

    “City center to city center in each case, with up to a dozen or more entry/exit elevators in each city.”

     

    “Still a lot of work needed to receive formal approval, but am optimistic that will occur rapidly.”

     

    “If you want this to happen fast, please let your local & federal elected representatives know. Makes a big difference if they hear from you.”

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

     

    Of course, if you’re like us, the first question that came to mind after reading those tweets is whether Musk is really just that naive, if he thinks we’re all really just that dumb or if he’s just gone completely batshit crazy…mix of all three?

    Now, we don’t have a Masters in Government from Harvard, but we’re almost certain there is no such thing as a “verbal agreement” when it comes to massive public projects that span multiple states and cost billions, if not trillions, of taxpayer dollars.  And while Musk may be permitted to unilaterally make decisions to burn through hundreds of millions of dollars worth of shareholder money at Tesla, municipalities are specifically designed to prevent granting such powers to individuals when it comes to blowing through taxpayer funds.

    Not surprisingly, it didn’t take long before various “government” officials took to twitter to point out that they hadn’t the faintest clue what Musk was even talking about…

    New York City’s mayoral press secretary apparently wasn’t in the loop…

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Meanwhile, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) in New York didn’t even know who Elon Musk was…which is not a good sign for that “verbal agreement” getting converted to a ‘contractual’ agreement at any point in the near future.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    But, it wasn’t just New York City that was flabbergasted by Musk’s announcement as government officials from NYC to Washington D.C., and everywhere between, were forced to spend their entire day laughing off calls from anxious reporters about his imaginary project.  Per The Guardian:

    “Who gave him permission to do that?” asked a spokesman with the Maryland department of transportation.

     

    “Elon Musk has had no contact with Philadelphia officials on this matter,” said Mike Dunn, the city spokesman. “We do not know what he means when he says he received ‘verbal government approval’. There are numerous hurdles for this unproven ‘hyperloop’ technology before it can become reality.”

     

    A spokesperson for the state of Pennsylvania confirmed that neither the governor nor the state’s department of transportation had been contacted by Musk or his company.

     

    Ben Sarle, a spokesman for the New York City mayor’s office, said in an email: “Nobody in City Hall, or any of our city agencies, has heard from Mr Musk or any representatives of his company.”

     

    “The New York state department of transportation did not give verbal approval for a hyperloop,” said spokeswoman Jennifer Post.

     

    Anthony McCarthy, the spokesman for the Baltimore mayor, Catherine Pugh, said: “Mr Musk’s announcement on Twitter was the first that the city heard of the Hyperloop project. ” However, Pugh said in a statement that she was “excited” to hear about the idea, which could “create new opportunities for Baltimore and transform the way we link to neighboring cities” – if it becomes a reality.

     

    Similarly, LaToya Foster, the spokeswoman for Washington DC mayor Muriel Bowser, said: “This is the first we heard of it . We can’t wait to hear more.”

    Does anyone else feel like they’ve seen this proposal somewhere before?

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Jul 20

Today’s News 20th July 2017

  • Bill Blain: Here Is Southern Europe's Next Tipping Point

    By Bill Blain of Mint Parnters

    “The Braavosi have a saying too. The Iron Bank will have its due….”

    One of the things that’s been niggling me for years has been the question of just how unfixed the European banking sector is.

    This morning I’ve attached a note my associate Ben Stheeman and I have put together on Non-Performing Loans (NPLs) in Second Tier European Banking. It’s a simple look at the publically available numbers.

    Nobody will be surprised a North/SouthWest line divides Europe into good banks and less good banks. North of the line there are a few issues. Italy remains the problem – 16 out of 19 Italian banks don’t meet European standards on NPLs! We conclude the Italian second tier banks need to raise some €32 bln of new capital just to cover their existing holes. (€32 bln isn’t a massive number any more, but it’s a very large number for what are essentially very small banks – meaning further calls on Italian tax-payers look likely!) 

    In recent weeks we’ve seen a gamma burst of activity across European banking: the resolution and bail-in of Banco Popular, the bailout and transfer of the Veneto banks, and a number of completed NPL sales by Italian banks. However, this morning, the FT highlights how new European Securitisation laws may kill the market for Hedge Funds and PE Funds to buy NPL and fund them via Securitisation.

    That sums up much of the confused thinking on European banks.

    The Eurocrats have made grand assumptions, plans and visions for European Banking Union, including a single regulator, rules and definitions. But the reality is European banks remain very national in their characteristics and outlook. They have little in common that would define a “European Bank”.  

    Readers may recall European banks were barely touched by the initial outbreak of banking uncertainty in 2007 and 2008. I remember being told how stupid the British banks were in comparison to the clever European names that hadn’t got involved in structured and secured debt. And then the Lehman moment changed everything and the Global Financial Crisis went critical. Then we tumbled into the European Sovereign Debt Crisis and European banks became mired in a deepening crisis. A collapse in sovereign confidence triggered worries across weaker European banking names.

    Since then we’ve seen multiple rescues, bailouts, handouts, defaults, restructurings, recapitalisations and bail-ins across Europe. Regulators and politicians talk big about banks being fit to fail without recourse to taxpayers – therefore they should have lots and lots of capital.

    But, it’s never a lack of capital that kills a bank. Its access to liquidity – which depends on confidence.  Folk will keep depositing in a bank as long as they are confident they will get their money back. When confidence unwinds, the bank will fail. Simples.

    Regulators have made the assumption you can solve the confidence problem by putting in enough capital to cover any event. Because of the importance of national banking systems, pre-2008 investors read that as a bail-out charter, correctly anticipating banks would be bailed out.

    Now it’s changed – but only slightly. The Veneto and MPS events demonstrated the Italians have little choice but to continue bailing out their banks because there was no large private sector to help out.

    Otherwise, the reasons confidence in banks collapses is different every time. It might be because of fears a massive mismatch on the derivative book will trigger overnight crisis (watch this space), or might be something more simple. Some of the triggers are obvious – like how certain Irish banks got sucked into unwise property games because they thought they understood the market and the politics of property better than anyone else. Or it might be German and Austrian banks overwhelmed by toxic investments. Some names were simply swept away in the Netherlands. I watched a sinking property market trigger crisis in Spain. (On the other hand, I’m still struggling to understand how the French banks seemed to skate across the thin ice largely unscathed – a story for another day perhaps..)

    What became quickly apparent is that there is no such thing as a European Bank. That was particularly true before the ECB became the regulator across the Eurozone. National self-interest trumped Europe every time – still does in many countries. National Characteristics and Politics still define the way in which banks operate.

    Post crisis there has not been a clean banking sweep across Europe. Some countries; notably Spain and Ireland, addressed the crisis and have come out with stronger banks. Selective names were rescued, rebuilt and rebranded. Some names were mercy-killed.

    But in most cases the symptoms of chronic unwise lending and resulting undercapitalisation were treated with sugar lumps, lashings of free ECB money and a general hope banks would recover as/when/if the European economy recovered.

    In the US, banks were put on diet of forced recapitalisation and clean up – it worked.

    There has been much talk about European Banking Union – trying to create common rules and practice to make real the illusion European banks are homogenous group. But they aren’t – and won’t be if the rules only apply to large banks. 

    Years of regulation, and selective memory gives us a European Systemically Important Financial Instututions (SIFI) Banking sector of some 30 core banks that could be described as healthy(ish). They all meet the core capital tests. They are recapitalising themselves to the levels determined as appropriate by the regulators.

    But, there still isn’t any standard definition of European capital, and there is still no single Pan-European banking champions! The German banks seem to be retreating into their home market. The Dutch are focused on their domestic markets. Only the French show any real ambition – and even they have learnt caution from just how doomed they would have been if Greece, Portugal or Ireland had actually exploded! (Now I wonder how large French exposures to Turkey might play out…)

    I could ramble on for paragraphs about how national banks reflect national outlook – The UK banks as mercantile commercial funders and mortgage providers, the German banks as instruments of regional economic policy, French banks as lending conduits for the State’s industrial policy, or Italian banks as SME lenders.. Too simplistic – but bear with.. 

    Let’s not worry about the big banks. Sure there is a chance the next European financial crisis might be spawned within one of them.. but, it’s far more likely we’ll continue to see a series of smaller crisis gestate in lower down the European banking food chain. There are simply far too many of them..

    We’ve looked at European banks with a balance sheet of €10bln plus. We didn’t worry about subsidiaries. Most of Europe’s second and third tier banks are perfectly fine. But a worrying number aren’t – they have flashing red signal lights screaming Danger, Danger! I suspect many depositors (including investors in their bond issues) to these second tier banks continue to lend because, contrary to the evidence, they think they are safe. Maybe it’s national interest, politics or implied government support – but a significant number of Southern European banks still look in crisis, but still attract deposits.

    After looking at capital, management, and focused on NPLs, guess what? The bulk of Europe’s smaller banking problems are bound up in Southern Europe – Italy in particular. Surprised? Thought not.

    We’d be interested in any feedback on the attached file.

  • Raw Sugar (SB) Testing Weekly Chart Descending Wedge Resistance

    Raw Sugar (ICE SB Oct17) Weekly/Daily/4hr/Hourly

    Raw Sugar (SB) surged almost 3% yesterday, completing 3 days of consolidation (just above the daily chart’s downchannel resistance) and resuming a 3 week plus bounce off just below 1300.  SB is firmly above downchannel resistance (on the 4hr chart) as well, and is now testing descending wedge resistance (on the weekly chart).  Due to the significant gap between this wedge’s support and resistance, there’s a decent chance for SB to be rejected and pushed lower towards wedge support.  Nevertheless, with weekly, daily and 4hr RSI, Stochastics and MACD rallying or bottomish, odds favour SB breaking above this wedge resistance.  I am looking to enter long in the green zone (of the daily chart), targeting the red zone for Friday.  The amber/yellow zone is where I might place a stop if I was a swing trader (although in my personal account with which I seldom hold overnight I set my stops tighter).

     

    SB (Raw Sugar) Technical Analysis

     

    Click here for today’s technical analysis on Cocoa, Ethereum

     

     

    Tradable Patterns was launched to demonstrate that the patterns recurring in liquid futures, spot FX and cryptocurrency markets can be analyzed to enhance trading performance. Tradable Patterns’ daily newsletter provides technical analysis on a subset of three CME/ICE/Eurex futures (commodities, equity indices, and interest rates), spot FX and cryptocurrency markets, which it considers worth monitoring for the day/week for trend reversal or continuation. For less experienced traders, tutorials and workshops are offered online and throughout Southeast Asia.

  • Judge Halts Shkreli Trial

    The trial of former Turing Pharmaceuticals CEO Martin Shkreli has been temporarily halted by Judge Kiyo Matsumoto after Shkreli’s lawyer objected emphatically as the prosecution planned to show jurors documents it claims are evidence of fraud committed by Shkreli, without calling witnesses to back them up, according to CNBC.

    The documents allegedly detail payments that Shkreli's drug company made to investors in two hedge funds he ran, as well as supposedly bogus consulting agreements he signed with some of his former investors entitling them to a salary and shares in Retrophin, a pharmaceutical company he co-founded and briefly led, according to CNBC. Jurors were given the rest of Wednesday off, as well as Thursday, to allow both the defense and prosecution time to file legal briefs on their arguments for and against requiring witnesses for the relevant documents. Testimony is expected to resume Friday, CNBC reported.
    Benjamin Brafman, the celebrity defense attorney representing Shkreli, said denying him the opportunity to cross examine people involved with the documents would be tantamount to denying Shkreli his constitutional right to confront witnesses against him.

    The documents included settlement agreements that Shkreli reached with investors at two of his hedge funds, as well as consulting agreements with some of those investors. Among the settlement agreements in dispute Wednesday included the terms of what investors received from Retrophin in exchange for dropping any claims against Shkreli and his hedge funds.

    Shkreli is facing eight counts of wire and securities fraud stemming from his brief stint as a hedge-fund manager. Specifically, the prosecution is examining communications between Shkreli and several former investors in his fund for evidence Shkreli misled them about his qualifications, investment returns and other details like his investing track record and the amount of money he managed.  The prosecution also alleges that Shkreli falsified documents and backdated payments to corroborate his lies. Finally, prosecutors claim Shkreli defrauded Retrophin, which he founded in late 2012 just as his career as a money manager, CNBC reported.

    Many of the witnesses called by the prosecution so far have described feeling betrayed by Shkreli. Some described Shkreli’s repeated evasions – he allegedly told one witness that he was “too busy” to give him his money back after starting Retrophin. Judging by the witnesses who’ve testified so far, it appears that many of Shkreli’s investors were small business owners who had invested between $100,000 and $300,000. After several investors threatened to sue, Shkreli allegedly offered to repay them using Retrophin’s resources. In addition to criticizing Shkreli for his dishonesty and strange behavior, many of the witnesses also admitted that they ultimately made money investing with Shkreli.

    Matsumoto, the judge, indicated that she was sympathetic to the defense's argument that settlement and consulting agreements should only be shown to jurors if a person who received those agreements takes the witness stand.

    "I do think the fundamental right to confront the witnesses and question the witnesses is important," Matsumoto said.

    If prosecutors are allowed to introduce the documents to jurors without calling related witnesses, they could rest their case soon. The trial began late last month, and is expected to last as long as six weeks. But if Matsumoto bars that method, prosecutors could be forced to call additional witness stand, meaning they would be unlikely to rest their case until next week sometime.

  • Don't Be Fooled – The Federal Reserve Will Continue Rate Hikes Despite Crisis

    Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,

    Though stock markets in general are meaningless and indicate nothing in terms of the health of the economy they still function as a form of hypnosis, or a kind of Pavlovian mechanism; a tool that central bankers can use to keep a population servile and salivating at the ring of a bell. As I have mentioned in the past, the only two elements of the economy that the average person pays attention to in the slightest are the unemployment rate and the Dow. As long as the first is down and the second is up, they aren't going to take a second look at the health of our financial system.

    Historians and economists often wonder after the fact how it was possible for so many "experts" and others to miss the flashing red lights leading into market implosions like that which occurred in 2008. Well, this is exactly how; within any casino there is an inherent bias towards false hope. Meaning, many people will invariably ignore all negative factors and past experience because positivism is more pleasant. Central bankers are keen to take advantage of this condition.

    When observing from the outside-in, this attitude rings of desperation. Investors, with no positive fundamental data to turn to in the economy, have now been relegated to scouring press releases and speeches for ANY indication that the central bank might not take the punch bowl away as they have been doing slowly over the past few years. In fact, in most cases negative data has actually triggered spikes in equities because the assumption on the part of investors is that bad data will cause the Fed to second-guess its stimulus reduction policies. In this way, central bankers can, at least for now, fake-out investors with a simple word or phrase released in a strategic manner.

    An example of this occurred last week as Fed Chair Janet Yellen threw investors and aglo-trading computers a bone with an admission (finally) that inflation (as the Fed measures it) may not be as strong as the Fed had hoped. Investors cheered. Their assumption now is that the Fed will not continue with its steady interest rate increases. But, if one examines the central bank's past behavior this is a foolish assumption.

    The Fed will indeed continue its interest rate hikes unabated, and here's why…

    The tone set by the central bank on interest rates has been overwhelmingly "hawkish" over the past six months. Minutes from the Fed's June meeting mention a concern over stocks being "too high," and the potential for "market risks." Fed officials also cite concerns that markets have been ignoring rate hikes with blind exuberance. The Fed has continued rate hikes through 2017 despite a constant barrage of negative data, causing confusion in the financial world.

    I covered elements of this deluge of bad data in my article 'Peak Economic Delusion Signals Coming Crisis'.

    First, it is important to understand that everything the Fed does and says publicly is highly calculated. When there is confusion surrounding Fed rhetoric, it is often strategic, not random. Yellen's admission to the U.S. House Financial Services Committee that low inflation is a concern conflicts with numerous Fed statements made previously.

    For example, last month Yellen surprised analysts with her claim that she "expects no new crisis in our lifetimes." This is an extremely confident and hawkish sentiment on top of numerous other arguments in favor of interest rate hikes regardless of low inflation. Only weeks later, inflation is suddenly a concern?

    Investors immediately interpreted Yellen's mention of low inflation to mean that the Fed was backing away from its hard stance on rate hikes, as well as its pursuit of reductions in its balance sheet. What they completely ignored was the fact that Yellen also reiterated to the same Financial Services Committee the Fed's intention to CONTINUE rate increases at the current pace.

    The Fed has used this method of mixed messages before. During the lead up to the taper of quantitative easing, central bankers sent mixed messages to the investment world leading everyone to believe that the taper was a no-go. Investors, of course, celebrated, while many alternative analysts were patting themselves on the back for their prediction that the Fed would "never" taper QE.

    In the midst of rising potential for interest rate increases, the Fed pulled a fast one on analysts once again. Citing growth concerns, Yellen bamboozled mainstream economists and alternative economists alike, sowing the seeds of assumption that rate hikes were going to fall by the wayside.

    In every case, the Fed insinuated it had "doubts", while at the same time stating that the removal of stimulus will march onward. This time will be no different. Interest rates are going up up up, and the only question is, how long will it take before market investors accept this as reality and equities crash in response?

    I believe that Yellen's latest pronouncement of "no new crisis within our lifetimes" is a signal that this reversal in the stock bubble will take place very soon. I am reminded immediately of these quotes from prominent names in the economic world just prior to the crash of 1929:

    John Maynard Keynes in 1927: "We will not have any more crashes in our time."

     

    H.H. Simmons, president of the New York Stock Exchange, Jan. 12, 1928: "I cannot help but raise a dissenting voice to statements that we are living in a fool’s paradise, and that prosperity in this country must necessarily diminish and recede in the near future."

     

    Irving Fisher, leading U.S. economist, The New York Times, Sept. 5, 1929: "There may be a recession in stock prices, but not anything in the nature of a crash." And on Sept. 17, 1929: "Stock prices have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau. I do not feel there will be soon if ever a 50 or 60 point break from present levels, such as (bears) have predicted. I expect to see the stock market a good deal higher within a few months."

     

    McNeel, market analyst, as quoted in the New York Herald Tribune, Oct. 30, 1929: "This is the time to buy stocks. This is the time to recall the words of the late J. P. Morgan… that any man who is bearish on America will go broke. Within a few days there is likely to be a bear panic rather than a bull panic. Many of the low prices as a result of this hysterical selling are not likely to be reached again in many years."

     

    Harvard Economic Society, Nov. 10, 1929: "… a serious depression seems improbable; [we expect] recovery of business next spring, with further improvement in the fall."

    Yellen seems to be echoing the bewildering rhetoric of past economic catastrophe; offering prophecies which she knows are false while purposely increasing instability through interest rate hikes. As I have noted many times, this is the classic modus operandi of the Fed. The Fed raises rates into economic decline and ignores all evidence that they are bursting a bubble they engineered — this is what they do.

    During recessionary conditions in 1927, the Fed increased the money supply exponentially through open market purchases and a reduced discount rate, which many economists argue was a primary catalyst for the artificial liquidity that created the stock market bubble of 1929. Once the crash occurred and the depression set in, the Fed RAISED RATES and made matters worse (as openly admitted by Ben Bernanke decades later in 2002). The Fed thus prolonged the depression for years beyond the normal deflationary cycle.

    Using history as our guide, central bankers like to conjure an environment of fiscal dangers, then they warn of those danger too little too late, and then claim ignorance of their own activities after the crash.

    This is nothing new in our era. Former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan publicly admitted in an interview that the central bank knew an irrational bubble had formed, but claims they assumed the negative factors would "wash out."

    Once they are ready to allow their planned implosion to occur, the central bankers are more than happy to throw investors to the wolves. That is to say, the investment world's optimism is only useful to the Fed for a time. If rhetoric and behaviors previous to the crash of 1929 are any measure, today we are only meager months away from a similar event. For further explanation, I outline in detail the reasons why the globalists would instigate a fiscal crisis in my article 'The Federal Reserve Is A Saboteur — And The "Experts" Are Oblivious.'

    I suspect that the central banks and the globalists that control them are hoping to bide their time in terms a complete equities crash in preparation for a geopolitical event — a distraction massive enough to draw attention away from the bankers and their culpability for any economic disaster. They certainly will not allow stocks to crash in a vacuum.

    In conclusion, I would like to leave readers with a quote from Great Depression era Federal Reserve chairman Roy Young. Perhaps investors should consider that they are being duped by central bank ploys, and that they are useful idiots in a game designed to keep the public under control with fraudulent markets until the Fed is ready to pull the plug. When the crash takes place, the Fed will find a way to remove itself from any blame. In the meantime, make no mistake, the interest rate hikes will continue into next year and the Fed's balance sheet will be reduced.

    Addressing the Indiana Bankers Association, before the Stock Market Crash of 1929, Fed Chairman Roy Young had this to say:

    "Many people in America seem to be more concerned about the present situation than the Federal Reserve System is. If unsound credit practices have developed, these practices will in time correct themselves, and if some of the overindulgent get 'burnt' during the period of correction, they will have to shoulder the blame themselves and not attempt to shift it to someone else."

  • Purchases Of US Real Estate By Foreigners Hit All-Time High In 2016

    In a testament to Chinese oligarchs, criminals, money launderers and pretty much anyone who is desperate to park their cash as far away from the mainland as possible, purchases of US real estate by foreign buyers surged to an all-time high in 2016, according to data from the National Association of Realtors via CNBC.

    Foreign purchases of US residential real estate surged to the highest level ever in terms of number of homes sold and dollar volume last year, with Chinese buyers leading the pack, followed by buyers from Canada, the United Kingdom, Mexico and India. Meanwhile, Russian buyers made up barely 1 percent of the purchases.

    Foreign buyers closed on $153 billion worth of US residential properties between April 2016 and March 2017, a 49 percent jump from the period a year earlier, according to the NAR. That surpasses the previous high, set in 2015. Foreign sales accounted for 10 percent of all existing home sales by dollar volume and 5 percent by number of properties. In total, foreign buyers purchased 284,455 homes, up 32 percent from the previous year.

    According to CNBC, the increase in home sales comes as a surprise, given the dollar’s relatively expensive valuation versus both developed and emerging-market currencies. Half of all foreign sales were in just three states: Florida, California and Texas.

    Aging Canadians buying property in Florida and other warmer climates were responsible for the largest increase of buying activity from any one country.

    “But the biggest overall surge in sales in the last year came from Canadian buyers, who scooped up $19 billion worth of properties, mostly in Florida. They are also spending more, with the average price of a Canadian-bought home nearly doubling to $561,000.

     

    ‘There are more [baby] boomers now than ever before. It's the demographic,’ said Elli Davis, a real estate agent in Toronto who said she is seeing more older buyers downsize their primary home and purchase a second or third home in Florida. ‘The real estate here is worth so much more money. They all have more money. They're selling the big city houses that are now $2 million-plus, where they went up so much in the last 10 to 15 years, so they're cashing in.’”

    Mexican buyers nearly doubled their purchases by dollar volume from a year earlier, coming in third behind China and Canada. Though Adam DeSanctis, economic issues media manager at the National Association of Realtors, said "you could easily make the point that perhaps their uptick was wanting to buy now before new immigration policy was in place.”

    In general, though, Mexicans have been buying less expensive homes.

    “The average purchase price of buyers from Mexico came in at about $327,000, compared with the $782,000 average among Chinese buyers and $522,000 for Indian buyers. Mexicans overwhelmingly favored homes in Texas, while Chinese buyers opted more for California and, increasingly, Texas.

     

    ‘The environment is much more Asian-friendly than it used to be with churches, grocery stores and schools that cater to their tastes,’ said Laura Barnett, a Dallas-Fort Worth area Re/Max agent. ‘I have been told they target good schools and newer homes. Yards are not a high priority, but rather community parks.’”

    In a sign that home valuations in America’s most populous state might be nearing a peak, some Chinese are being priced out of California, forcing them to buy property in…Texas.

    “It's also possible that Chinese buyers are being priced out of California. The average price of a home purchased by a buyer from China fell from about $937,000 to $782,000, even as the number of properties purchased jumped to nearly 41,000 from 29,000. The drop in purchasing power likely stems from tightened regulations in China with regards to capital outflow.”

    As we’ve reported, Chinese authorities trying to stem the capital flooding out of their country adopted new currency controls specifically aimed at stopping Chinese nationals from illegally repurposing money to buy real estate. Those took effect early this year. Because of the new restrictions, CNBC says Chinese demand is beginning to wane – which could be catastrophic for home prices. Luxury markets in cities like New York City are already struggling with high vacancy rates. The recovery in home prices since the crisis has been uneven, but expensive coastal markets like New York and San Francisco experienced massive home-price inflation as younger Americans flocked to urban areas. However, if foreign demand weakens, these markets could be poised for a crash as fewer residents can afford to own their homes.

    And of course, there’s the Trump factor…

    "Stricter foreign government regulations and the current uncertainty on policy surrounding U.S. immigration and international trade policy could very well lead to a slowdown in foreign investment," said Lawrence Yun, chief economist for the NAR.

    But if Chinese oligarchs are now out of the US real-estate game, who’s going to pay $150 million for this 14-acre parcel of beachfront property in the Hamptons?

  • How Government Helped Create The Coming Doctor Shortage

    Authored by Logan Albright via The Mises Institute,

    For the last five years, attempts to reform America’s health care system have focused primarily on the demand side of the market, and specifically on the market for insurance. Yet, these reforms have not achieved significant improvements in health care outcomes, nor reductions in cost. As health care specialist John C. Goodman has pointed out in Forbes, the slowed growth of health care spending in the United States is a trend that correlates most closely with supply side reforms such as the availability of health savings accounts. Reductions in spending or costs are certainly not an effect of the Affordable Care Act.

    One of the most critical supply side issues in health care is the supply of qualified doctors. The Wall Street Journal has reported that the number of doctors per capita is in decline for the first time in two generations, and the American Association of Medical Colleges has predicted a shortage of 45,000 primary care physicians and 46,000 specialists by 2020.

    In light of these statistics, it would seem prudent to adopt policies that streamline entry into the health care market, while keeping regulatory costs to a minimum. Regrettably, this is far from the case, with states erecting numerous barriers to would-be health care providers that contribute to the high prices and limited access currently set to cripple the American market. While some of these are familiar and even seem natural to most people, some of the ways in which governments act to restrict doctor supply will come as a surprise to many.

    Monopolistic Medical Boards

    We are generally brought up to believe that monopolies are bad. The very word conjures up images of tight-fisted tycoons in top hats and monocles squeezing employees and consumers alike for all they are worth. While natural monopolies resulting from superior business models get an unfairly bad rap, people’s capacity for critical thought seems to inexplicably switch off when confronted with those monopolies which are created and supported by government.

    The case of health care regulations is an interesting one, as state governments have empowered private medical boards with unilateral authority to set the rules for the medical profession, including the issuing and revoking of medical licenses. These boards effectively function like government regulatory agencies, with the important difference that they lack the opportunity for public comments, and thus are immune from any political pressure from citizens.

    If the EPA or the IRS implements a regulation that the public doesn’t like, there is a political process by which they can voice their discontent and theoretically make an impact on the decision. In fact, this happens rather frequently, and although there is still too little accountability for regulatory czars, at least the opportunity exists for political action.

    With state medical boards, no such process exists, and there is little transparency in the rule-making process that determines how doctors must operate. If a particular regulation is harmful, doctors and patients have no real alternative other than moving to a different state with different requirements, an impractical solution to say the least.

    The fact that these medical boards are private rather than public entities is supposed to make us feel more free, but in fact, most members of these boards are appointed by state governors. When state laws forbid competition among regulators, and signal that the government will regard as binding anything the medical board decides to do, the distinction between public and private becomes meaningless.

    For example, the California Business and Professions Code (Section 2220.5) states that “The Medical Board of California is the only licensing board that is authorized to investigate or commence disciplinary actions relating to physicians or surgeons” and charges the board with investigating any and all complaints from the public, other doctors, or health care facilities, or from the board itself. Although the board is technically private, the government sanctioned monopoly on enforcement stands as a barrier to entrants of the medical profession, who are forced to comply with a monolithic set of “take ‘em or leave ‘em rules,” with which they have no choice but to comply, or risk being barred from practicing their trade.

    Limits on Nurse Practitioners

    Nurse practitioners represent a less expensive alternative to fully licensed doctors for patients with minor, day-to-day complaints. Frequently operating out of walk-in clinics or pharmacies, these health care providers offer convenience, competition, and innovation in a market in desperate need of all three. In response to the Affordable Care Act, many states have been loosening regulations on nurse practitioners, which is a step in the right direction, but more needs to be done if we are to truly encourage competition and increase supply.

    Midwives, physicians’ assistants, and other alternative practitioners also have a key role to play in medical care, and should be permitted to practice without physician supervision. Midwifery in particular was once a vibrant industry, that has since been crippled by costly regulations.

    Restrictions on Retail Clinics

    Retail clinics, pharmacies, and even supermarkets are capable of offering routine medical services to patients with a convenience and regularity impossible in traditional physicians’ offices. Unfortunately, the American Medical Association (AMA) has aggressively lobbied against the availability of this type of facility.

    In this, the AMA has been mostly successful. While pharmacists are permitted to administer injections to patients in Louisiana, the vast majority of states still have strict prohibitions on this sort of thing. Still, where retail clinics are permitted to operate, the effects have been dramatic. Wal-Mart has recently begun opening a series of in store clinics in a handful of states. The big-box store is boasting charges of just $40 for an office visit, about half of the industry standard, and has expanded its services to treat chronic conditions as well as the acute complaints in which most retail clinics have exclusively specialized. Additionally, the company has driven the cost of generic prescription drugs down to just $4.

    Wal-Mart is leading the way in this area, by offering primary care services in fairly rural locations, where access to quality medical care can be particularly problematic. Retail clinics simply offer another option to patients, and restricting those options will always result in higher costs. Wal-Mart’s efforts offer only a glimpse at the potential for cheaper, more available medical care if states would relax their restrictions on retail clinics.

    Licensing Requirements

    Every student wishing to practice medicine must pass the United States Medical License Examination, and all states impose additional requirements from state licensing boards. These are frequently lengthy and expensive procedures. Medical organizations such as the AMA have an incentive to limit the number of licensed doctors practicing in the marketplace, in order to protect high wages for established incumbents.

    Just as the system of taxi medallions has long hindered the transportation industry, burdensome licensing requirements are still another barrier standing in the way of expanding the doctor supply.

    There is an argument to be made that stricter licensing requirements result in higher quality doctors. Whether or not this is true is debatable, depending on which studies you read, but regardless of what the answer is, there is no reason not to allow various gradations of quality in the health care market. A system, or multiple systems, of voluntary certification instead of, or in addition to, traditional licensing would offer consumers a broad array of services with corresponding differences in price.

    In virtually every other market, from food, to clothing, shelter, to transportation, consumers are permitted to select a level of quality appropriate for their budget constraints. If every car was mandated to be of Cadillac quality, a lot fewer people would have the means to drive. The availability of beat up old jalopies allows consumers to trade quality for affordability and expands access to transportation for everyone. There is no reason why medical access shouldn’t work the same way.

    Importing Doctors

    Many nations other than the United States turn out qualified physicians, but American Licensing Boards do not fully recognize the credentials of doctors immigrating from abroad. This means that a fully capable physician from the United Kingdom or Germany will still have to serve a four year residency and go through the onerous licensing procedures.

    About 15 percent of residency positions go to foreign medical graduates. If there were an alternative method of recognizing existing credentials, these slots could be filled by domestic medical students, resulting in more practicing doctors.

    The Length of Schooling and the Small Number of Medical Schools

    There are currently only 129 accredited medical schools in the United States, too few to turn out enough doctors to meet the demand. In order to gain accreditation, a school must undergo an eight-year process overseen by the U.S. Department of Education.

    The number of residency positions available is only 110,000, a number which is determined by the way Congress chooses to fund Medicare. But directly tying the number of available residencies to Medicare funding ignores the economic realities of the health care market, and fails to provide any measure of adaptability to changing conditions.

    The deficit of residency slots also contributes to the length of time it takes to become a doctor. It can take as many as ten years from the time someone begins studying medicine to when they are allowed to practice. The result of this is a remarkable lack of flexibility for the health care market to adapt to changes in demand.

    Conclusion

    All of these supply side restrictions make it more difficult for the labor market for medical providers to respond to consumers’ needs. When a change in demographics occurs, such as the Baby Boomer generation entering retirement, or when legal reforms such as the Affordable Care Act alter incentives, it can take decades for supply to catch up to demand.

    By reducing the regulatory burden on physicians, providing more competition among medical boards, and permitting more autonomy for alternative practitioners, patients could see both relief from the coming doctor shortage, as well as lower prices across the board for medical care.

  • Drowning Our Sorrows: These Are Americans' Favorite Alcoholic Beverages

    Americans are increasingly choosing healthier food options like quinoa, kale and avocado over chicken wings, chips and other unhealthy snacks. But when it comes to alcohol, a longstanding favorite continues to dominate, despite new, low-cal options: Beer.

    According to a recent Gallup poll, Americans who drink alcohol continue to prefer beer (40%) over wine (30%) and liquor (26%) – a trend that has persisted since Gallup started taking the survey 25 years ago.

    Unsurprisingly, beer is particularly popular among men, with 62% of male drinkers saying they prefer beer, compared with 19% of female drinkers. Less-educated and middle-income Americans also tend to choose beer.

    However, Americans aren’t the world’s heaviest beer drinkers – not even close. Another report released earlier this month shows the average European consumes between one and four drinks a day, enough to notably increase the risk of colorectal and esophageal cancers. Americans drink 20 percent less alcohol each year than Europeans.

    Here’s a quick summary of Gallup’s findings:

    •    Four in 10 alcohol consumers say they most often drink beer
    • 30% prefer wine, while 26% opt for liquor
    • 62% of Americans drink alcohol, consistent with historical trend

    Beer has been Americans’ alcoholic beverage of choice for decades, Gallup said.

    "For the past two decades, at least three in 10 drinkers have said they prefer wine, peaking at 39% in 2005. Wine was slightly less popular in the early to mid-1990s. Women are significantly more likely than men to prefer wine, at 50% vs. 11%, respectively. This beverage is also preferred more among college-educated adults."

    However, liquor is rising in Americans’ estimation. The number of Americans saying they prefer liquor reaching its highest level in the 25 years since Gallup started taking the survey.

    The percentage of those surveyed who selected liquor as their drink of choice ticked higher to 26%, the highest level in the poll’s history. However, the increase over the past 13 years – up from 24% in 2004 – is negligible. The 26% of drinkers who named liquor as their beverage of choice is the highest in Gallup's 25-year trend, but similar with the 24% recorded in 2004. The percentage naming liquor has typically been closer to 20%. Future measurements will help determine whether the current figure marks the beginning of a trend toward an increased preference for liquor.

    A solid majority of Americans say they drink alcohol at least occasionally.

    “The majority of American adults consume alcohol at least occasionally, with the current 62% figure nearly matching the 63% historical average in Gallup's trend dating back to 1939. The percentage of Americans who drink has been fairly steady over nearly eight decades, with a few exceptions. The drinking percentage held near 70% in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The figure dipped below 60% at several points between the 1930s and 1950s, as well as in select polls from 1989 to 1996.”

    Though the number of Americans who are willfully abstinent is perhaps the most surprising data point from the survey was the number of Americans who say they don’t drink.

    “Meanwhile, 38% of U.S. adults totally abstain from alcohol. That figure has remained below 40% since 1997.”

    As Gallup notes, many of the Founding Fathers enjoyed beer, and it remains the most popular alcoholic beverage in the US today. Meanwhile, the brewing industry has seen tremendous growth in recent decades. Americans have thousands of breweries to choose from in 2017, compared with fewer than 100 in the early 1980s.

    And, judging by Americans' insatiable appetite for craft beer, those numbers will likely continue to climb.

  • LEFTISTS ONLY: You're Cordially Invited to This Post — Tea and Crumpets Will Be Served

    Content originally published at iBankCoin.com

    Courtesy of the Philadelphia Tea Society, I give thee a generous serving of tea and crumpets. Enjoy them with my compliments.


    Tea and Crumpets

    Now that you’re comfortably situated, I’d like you to take a peek through this aperture, into the hideous minds of the leftist elite.

    Oh, it’s plain to see that she’s mentally ill. You only need to view her Twitter timeline for a few seconds to realize that. But the former member of the British parliament and homewrecker, is a hero on the left these days. After being outed in the Wikileaks for working for the Hillary campaign, all the while pretending to be a conservative at Heat St., she’s gone ape.

    But it’s not just her. In my entire life, I’ve never seen so many democrats beholden, genuflecting even, to the deep state and American intelligence services. The left has been ardently anti-CIA for decades. Yet, now, because it’s politically advantageous for them — they love them.

    How sweet.

    Tucker Carlson superbly documents the hysteria on the left — showing grown adults fat shame Trump — calling into question his physical condition — ringing alarm bells for having discussions with Putin because an eavesdropper wasn’t present to take notes and leak them to the media.

    There are enemies amongst us, a great many of them. Look around, maybe in the mirror, and you will find them.

  • 10 Things You Never Knew About Orwell's 1984

    Authored by Anna Matthews via The Foundation for Economic Education,

    George Orwell’s novel 1984 was incredibly popular at the time it was published, and it remains incredibly popular to this day. With multiple stars citing the book as one of their favorites – including Stephen King, David Bowie, Mel Gibson, and Kit Harrington – 1984 has been growing in popularity in recent years. The book reappeared on best-seller lists in early 2017, as some argued Orwell’s dystopian vision had finally arrived.

    Below are 10 facts you might not know about Orwell’s dark novel.

    1. Before he wrote 1984, Orwell worked for the British government during World War II as a propagandist at the BBC. (Perhaps seeing the propaganda industry up close led to his critical portrait in 1984.)

     

    2. Orwell initially named the novel 1980, and then 1982 before settling on 1984. Since it was written in 1948, some think that Orwell devised the title by inverting the year the book was written. Additionally, he thought about naming the novel The Last Man in Europe.

     

    3. While writing the novel, Orwell fought tuberculosis. The disease ultimately consumed him and he died seven months after 1984 was published, with tuberculosis as the sole cause of death. 

     

    4. In addition to fighting tuberculosis, Orwell almost died while writing the novel. On a recreational boating trip with his children, he went overboard. Fortunately, neither this episode nor the tuberculosis prevented him from finishing his novel.

     

    5. On an ironic note, Orwell himself was under government surveillance while writing his novel warning about government surveillance. The British government was watching Orwell because they believed he held socialist opinions. This surveillance started after he published The Road to Wigan Pier, a true story about poverty and the lower class in England. 

     

    6. The slogan “2 + 2 = 5” originated from Russia, where the Communist regime used it as a motto of sorts in an effort to help them accomplish the goals of their five-year plan in only four years. Though the slogan is still used to point out the ills of totalitarian brainwashing today, it was not coined by Orwell.

     

    7. In addition to borrowing a piece of Russian propaganda, Orwell also borrowed some Japanese propaganda for his novel. The “Thought Police” are based on the Japanese wartime secret police who literally arrested Japanese citizens for having “unpatriotic thoughts.” Their official name was the Kempeitai, and they officially named their pursuit the “Thought War.”

     

    8. When Orwell worked as a propagandist for the BBC, there was a conference room there numbered 101. This room was the room of which he based the location for some of his more horrifying scenes, making the scenes themselves all the more horrifying.

     

    9. According to Orwell’s friends and families, his second wife Sonia Brownell was the model off of which he based the love interest (Julia) of the book’s main character, Winston Smith.

     

    10. Though his book may be popular, Orwell’s novel also makes the list of the world’s top ten most frequently banned books. Some ban it for what they claim are pro-communist points of view, and others have banned it because it is anti-communist. Regardless, it is ironic that a book warning against totalitarianism is often an item for censorship.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Jul 19

Today’s News 19th July 2017

  • Why People Love And Hate Trump

    A Washington Post/ABC News poll released Sunday put President Trump’s six-month approval rating at a historic 70-year low amid controversy over connections between the White House and Russia. Interestingly, as Statista’s Niall McCarthy notes, most of Trump’s detractors actually dislike him due to his personality and character, rather than specific issues and policy, according to a Gallup poll published late last week.

    Infographic: Why People Love And Hate Trump | Statista

    You will find more statistics at Statista

    When the same research was conducted in 2009, it found that Obama’s disapprovers primarily lacked faith in the president’s policy and stance on specific issues. Gallup found that people who approve of Trump generally give him the thumbs up on a range of broad issues including the president’s general performance, as well as policies and personality.

    Broken down, the polling found that 29 percent of disapprovers said that Trump is either not presidential, has a bad temperament, is arrogant or obnoxious, Inexperience was cited by 10 percent while 7 percent of those polled said he is doing a poor job.

    When it comes to approval, 12 percent of respondents said Trump is doing a good job or the best he can under difficult circumstances. 11 percent said that the president is keeping his promises and 10 percent think he is doing what’s best for the United States.

    Trump’s low approval ratings are being driven by his unconventional style and non-normative pattern of White House behaviour rather than his actual policies and views. According to Gallup, the president is highly unlikely to alter his behavior and style, meaning his detractors are unlikely to change their minds about him. However, this could be influenced if Trump enjoys some major international and domestic successes that overshadow his behaviour.

  • North Korea's Fuel Prices Soar After China Suspends Exports

    Authored by Tsvetana Paraskova via OilPrice.com,

    Diesel and gasoline prices in North Korea have jumped since China National Petroleum Corp (CNPC) halted sales of fuel to Pyongyang, Reuters reported on Monday, citing data on prices collected by North Korean defectors. 

    At the end of last month, reports emerged that CNPC, the main supplier of diesel and gasoline to North Korea, has suspended fuel sales to North Korea because it is worried that it may not receive payments.

    North Korea imports all the oil and oil products it consumes – mostly from China – and a prolonged suspension by CNPC would choke out supplies at a time when the international community is increasing pressure on North Korea to stop its nuclear and missile ambitions, and is intensifying checks over Chinese business relations with Pyongyang.

    According to a Reuters analysis of data by the Daily NK website – which is run by North Korean defectors who collect price data via phone calls with fuel traders in North Korea – private dealers in the north were selling gasoline at US$2.18 per kilogram, or US$2.92 per liter, as of July 5, a 50-percent surge compared to US$1.46 per kg on June 21. Gasoline prices fell slightly to US$2.05 per kg by July 12, but still, they were more than double compared to prices at the beginning of the year, Reuters’ analysis of the data shows. 

    Diesel prices jumped by 20 percent in the three weeks to July 12. After the initial price surges in early July, prices of both diesel and gasoline have stabilized, probably because North Korea has encouraged fuel smuggling across the Chinese border, according to defector Kang Mi-jin who is in communication with traders in North Korea.

    “After North Korea’s frequent missile tests including its very first ICBM test, the international community has vowed to tighten sanctions and China simply cannot exclude itself from the recent movement, although it probably does not want to indefinitely cut off fuel sales to the North,” Kang told Reuters.

    China said in February that it was suspending until the end of this year all imports of coal from North Korea as part of its effort to implement United Nations Security Council sanctions aimed at stopping the country’s nuclear weapons and ballistic-missile program.

    In April, gas prices in North Korea jumped on reports that China may be mulling an oil embargo.

  • As Farmers Go Broke, John Deere Ramps Up It's Captive Financing Operation To Keep The Ag Party Going

    So what do you do when your John Deere and your entire business revolves around selling really expensive equipment to farmers who have been absolutely decimated financially by low crop prices and can no longer convince commercial banks that they’re worthy of additional debt needed to buy fancy new tractors?  Well, you take some plays from the automotive industry, that’s what.  Here’s how it works:

    Step 1:  Setup a captive financing arm to underwrite all of the credit risk that no reasonable commercial ag bank would touch with a 10 foot pole.

     

    Step 2:  Boost your tractor sales volumes by financing every farmer who walks through your door with a soybean dream and pulse.

     

    Step 3:  When you run out of farmers willing to buy your brand new shiny green tractors then just start selling all your production volume to yourself and then lease it to customers at an attractive price.  This way you can still show sales growth and never have to cut production volume.

     

    Step 4:  Finally, when it all goes horribly wrong because used tractor prices crash due to the flood of off-lease volume and brings down the new market with it then you take a one-time charge to write-off the losses, wall streets forgives you...it was just a 1x charge, right…and then you promptly rinse and repeat.

    From the looks of the charts below, we’d say John Deere is currently on the tail end of ‘Step 3’ as loan and lease balances are soaring and write-offs are just starting to spike.

     

    As the Wall Street Journal points out today, John Deere has literally become the 5th largest agricultural lender in the country behind commercial banks Wells Fargo , Rabobank, Bank of the West and Bank of America, according to the American Bankers Association. But it’s not just equipment financing risk the John Deere is underwriting these days as they’ve also started financing short-term working capital loans to help farmers buy everything from seed to chemicals and fertilizers and equipment spares. 

    Since 2013, the total value of equipment leases held by Deere is up 87%. Loans for farm equipment purchases, meanwhile, have fallen 10% since peaking in 2014, reflecting sliding machinery sales.

     

    Short-term credit accounts for farmers—used for items such as crop supplies and equipment parts—are up 38% since the end of 2015. As of early 2017, the bank operation of Deere Financial had handed out about $2.2 billion. It is close on the heels of the No. 4 agricultural lender, Bank of America, which has about $2.6 billion out.

     

    “Deere Financial is a massive force,” said Robert Wertheimer, a Barclays analyst. Deere, which accounts for about two-thirds of all the big tractors sold in the U.S., “is able to influence this market. They have more market power than most companies.”

    Of course, the best possible thing for an industry plagued by oversupply and below market commodity prices is for someone to step in and subsidize even more production…it’s just basic economics really.

    In shoring up the ailing sector, Deere’s loans may be helping draw out the pain for farmers, allowing them to continue to rack up debt despite a glut of grain world-wide that is keeping a lid on crop prices. The increase in equipment leasing, meanwhile, is weakening Deere’s own market for sales.

     

    If crop prices remain subdued, “you’re just prolonging the agony and potentially building up [farm] losses instead of cutting the pain, cauterizing the wound and stanching the flow of financial blood now,” said Scott Irwin, an agricultural economist at the University of Illinois.

    Meanwhile, John Deere shareholders have been handsomely rewarded for the company’s strict adherence to the 4-step plan we outlined above which would seemingly serve to prove that selling extremely expensive equipment into and extremely cyclical end market is, in fact, recession proof and immune from the ag cycle…who knew?

    “Our core mission is to support sales of equipment,” said Jayma Sandquist, vice president of marketing for the U.S. and Canada for John Deere Financial, the company’s financing unit. “It’s a cyclical industry. We’ve built a business that we can manage effectively across all cycles, and our performance would indicate we can do that.”

     

    The financing arm has shielded the Moline, Ill., company from the worst of the farm slump, keeping factories and dealers intact and investors satisfied with profits. Despite a 37% drop in sales of its farm equipment since a record high in 2013, Deere’s stock price is up 72% from its recent low in early 2016 and up 22% since the start of 2017.

    Deere

     

    Of course, we’ve seen how this movie ends before.  As it turns out, there’s a step-by-step guide to that process as well:

    Step 1:  A flood of off-lease volume crushes pricing for used ag equipment

     

    Step 2:  New sales and lease volumes tank due to more attractive deals for used equipment

     

    Step 3:  John Deere buries its head in the sand and refuses to cut production volumes because that would be an admission to shareholders that recent volume declines were something more than ‘transitory.’  So production is maintained and new dealer inventories around the country surge.

     

    4.  Now, it’s only a matter of time before new equipment prices crash as well….

     

    5.  …and that’s when the write-downs start…

    Then again, maybe we’re wrong and ‘everything actually is awesome’. 

  • Zombies R Us: "We, The People" Are The Walking Dead Of The American Police State

    Authored by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

    RIP George Romero (1940-2017).

    Romero – a filmmaker hailed as the architect of the zombie genre – is dead at the age of 77, but the zombified police state culture he railed against lives on.

    Just take a look around you.

    “We the people” have become the walking dead of the American police state.

    We’re still plagued by the socio-political evils of cultural apathy, materialism, domestic militarism and racism that Romero depicted in his Night of the Living Dead trilogy.

    Romero’s zombies have taken on a life of their own in pop culture.

    Zombies also embody the government’s paranoia about the citizenry as potential threats that need to be monitored, tracked, surveilled, sequestered, deterred, vanquished and rendered impotent.

    Case in point: in AMC’s hit television series The Walking Dead and the spinoff Fear the Walking Dead, it’s not just flesh-eating ghouls and cannibalistic humans that survivors have to worry about but the police state “tasked with protecting the vulnerable” that poses some of the gravest threats to the citizenry.

    Why the fascination with zombies?

    Perhaps it’s because zombie fiction provides us with a way to “envision how we and our own would thrive if everything went to hell and we lost all our societal supports.” As Time magazine reporter James Poniewozik phrases it, the “apocalyptic drama lets us face the end of the world once a week and live.”

    In other words, zombies are the personification of our darkest fears.

    Fear and paranoia have become hallmarks of the modern American experience, impacting how we as a nation view the world around us, how we as citizens view each other, and most of all how our government views us.

    The propaganda of fear has been used quite effectively by those who want to gain control, and it is working on the American populace.

    Despite the fact that we are 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist, we have handed over control of our lives to government officials who treat us as a means to an end—the source of money and power.

    We have allowed ourselves to become fearful, controlled, pacified zombies.

    Most everyone keeps their heads down these days while staring zombie-like into an electronic screen, even when they’re crossing the street. Indeed, a Nielsen study reports that American screen viewing is at an all-time high.

    Psychologically, such screen consumption is similar to drug addiction, transforming viewers into a more passive, nonresistant state. Historically, television has been used by those in authority to quiet discontent and pacify disruptive people. Prisons officials actually use TV to keep inmates quiet.

    We are being controlled by forces beyond our control.

    This is how the police state takes charge.

    As the Atlantic notes, “The villains of [Fear the Walking Dead] aren’t the zombies, who rarely appear, but the U.S. military, who sweep into an L.A. suburb to quarantine the survivors. Zombies are, after all, a recognizable threat—but Fear plumbs drama and horror from the betrayal by institutions designed to keep people safe.”

    What we are experiencing is a betrayal of the very core values—a love of freedom, an adherence to the rule of law, a spirit of democracy, a commitment to accountability and transparency, and a recognition that civilian rule must always trump military methods—that have guided this nation from its inception.

    The challenge is not whether we can hold onto our freedoms in times of peace and prosperity, but whether we can do so when all hell breaks loose.

    Anyone who has been paying attention knows that it will not take much for the government—i.e., the military—to lock down the nation in the event of a national disaster.

    The government is not out to keep us safe by monitoring our communications, tracking our movements, criminalizing our every action, treating us like suspects, and stripping us of our means of defense while equipping its own personnel with an amazing arsenal of weapons.

    No, this is not security. It is an ambush. And it is being carried out in plain sight.

    For example, for years now, the government has been carrying out military training drills with zombies as the enemy. In 2011, the DOD created a 31-page instruction manual for how to protect America from a terrorist attack carried out by zombie forces. In 2012, the CDC released a guide for surviving a zombie plague. That was followed by training drills for members of the military, police officers and first responders.

    The zombie exercises appeared to be kitschy and fun—government agents running around trying to put down a zombie rebellion—but what if the zombies in the exercises are us, the citizenry, viewed by those in power as mindless, voracious, zombie hordes?

    “We the people” or, more appropriately, “we the zombies” are the enemy in the eyes of the government.

    So when presented with the Defense Department’s battle plan for defeating an army of the walking dead, you might find yourself tempted to giggle over the fact that a taxpayer-funded government bureaucrat actually took the time to research and write about vegetarian zombies, evil magic zombies, chicken zombies, space zombies, bio-engineered weaponized zombies, radiation zombies, symbiant-induced zombies, and pathogenic zombies.

    However, in an age of extreme government paranoia, this is no laughing matter.

    The DOD’s strategy for dealing with a zombie uprising using surveillance, military drills, awareness training, militarized police forces and martial law is for all intents and purposes a training manual for the government in how to put down a citizen uprising or at least an uprising of individuals “infected” with dangerous ideas about freedom.

    If there is any lesson to be learned, it is simply this: as I point out in my book, Battlefield America: The War on the American People, whether the threat to national security comes in the form of actual terrorists, imaginary zombies or disgruntled American citizens infected with dangerous ideas about freedom, the government’s response to such threats remains the same: detect, deter and annihilate.

    It’s time to wake up, America, before you end up with a bullet to the head (the only proven means of killing a zombie).

  • 3 California Counties File Multi-Billion Dollar Lawsuits Against "Big Oil" Over Rising Sea Levels

    Just when you think you’ve seen it all, the snowflake capital of the world finds new, creative and amazing ways to shock your system.  In it’s latest attempt to do just that, three California counties, two in the Bay Area and one in Southern California, have filed a lawsuit against 37 of the world’s biggest oil and coal companies alleging they’re ultimately responsible for the public’s usage of fossil fuels and the greenhouse gas emissions they create which will ultimately contribute to rising sea levels and lay waste to their cities…at least that seems to be the ‘logic’ as far as we can tell.

    According to The Chronicle, Marin County, San Mateo County and Imperial Beach (located in San Diego County) filed separate but nearly identical lawsuits in their respective Superior Court offices that seek to tie fossil fuel development to climate-related problems in coastal areas. Attorneys for the three counties worked together on their lawsuits and noted that their residents have already experienced more frequent flooding and beach erosion as well as the possibility that water will eventually inundate roads, airports, sewage treatment plants and other real estate.

    Of course, we would love to know just how many polar bear-killing private flights these taxpayer-funded legal teams took back and forth between San Francisco and San Diego while drafting their highly practical lawsuit.

    Moreover, wouldn’t it be more appropriate to sue the owners of the 27 million, give or take, vehicles registered in California, more than any other state by a very wide margin by the way, who are shamelessly destroying the planet by commuting back and forth to work each day?  Afterall, if there were no demand for fossil fuels then none of these companies would exist.

    California

     

    Of course, the lawyers contend that the oil companies knew about the damage their actions were causing, denied it and sought to discredit scientific findings that greenhouse gas emissions were heating the Earth’s atmosphere.

    The suits are just the latest in a small but growing effort to hold Chevron, ExxonMobil, BP, Shell and other major energy companies accountable for the effects of climate change. Legal experts say the challenge is more comprehensive than previous endeavors, and is based on ‘better climate science’ and more evidence to support a claim of conspiracy among oil company executives.

    “This is a long-anticipated move in climate litigation,” said Michael Burger, executive director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University. “You’ll find pieces of it in other cases, but bringing it together like this is different than what’s been done before. You can expect there will be a great deal of interest in how this litigation proceeds.”

     

    “There’s tremendous concern for us as a county on how do we address these issues,” said Marin County Supervisor Kate Sears. “This case is about fairness and accountability and standing up for our residents and businesses.”

     

    “We think we meet the elements of the public nuisance,” Beiers said, “but obviously we recognize this as the first lawsuit of its kind.”

    Climate change

     

    So how much are these snowflake havens seeking in damages?  Well the exact cost of the total death and destruction that will ultimately befall America’s left coast has apparently not yet been calculated with any level of specificity but it’s at least $55 billion according to San Mateo and Marin counties. 

    The two Bay Area counties and Imperial Beach are seeking reimbursement for current and future losses caused by climate change, as well as punitive damages. The suits don’t specify the value of losses so far, but estimate that the total will be in the billions of dollars over coming decades.

     

    San Mateo County says the Bayshore Freeway, BART lines, San Francisco International Airport and $39 billion worth of assessed property are threatened by projected sea-level rise. Marin County counts $15.5 billion worth of North Bay real estate in harm’s way, along with ferry terminals, SMART rail tracks and Highway 101 and Interstate 580.

    Of course, if you discount that $55 billion at 7%, the same rate the CalPERS uses to discount their pension obligations, for a period of 250 years to adjust for when the damages are actually expected to occur then the present value of the asserted damages is roughly $2,500.  Perhaps Exxon and Chevron should just split the cost and move on…

  • How To Solve The Healthcare Conundrum: "Make 'Them' Pay"

    Authored by Mark St.Cyr,

    Over the last decade there’s been no other subject more debated and central to people’s lives, than the current healthcare debacle making its way through the economy. Since the inception of what is colloquially known as Obamacare, the entire complex that was once the envy of the world seems to now be circling around the edge of some giant sinkhole before it renders itself to the forces of gravity, and finally descends into the abyss, taking everything with it in some horrifying sucking sound.

    If you try to garner any information on how to solve this current debacle (and people like to gloss over this very point) from any of the so-called “smart crowd.” All one gets are mumbo-jumbo filled constructs about why the issue is so difficult to fix and more. It’s moved beyond resembling any sense of intellectual type arguing. Now – it’s pure emotional screaming, crying, and incoherent mumblings making kindergarden look scholarly in comparison. It’s beyond pathetic. Yes – on both sides.

    I don’t get into politics and I’ve always stated: “You should not know which side of the political aisle I stand on if I’m making my arguments correctly.” Today is no different, for this isn’t about politics per se – this is about business, especially small business, the life blood of America , its economy, as well as the nations main employer. And the current draconian measures being thrust upon them gets little to no attention via the main stream press is not only appalling – it’s damn near criminal.

    Why? Because it’s killing not only them, but with them goes, as it destroys, the areas of the economy that most people get their first leg up into the economy. This is where people looking for decent work, or chances to prove themselves, or maybe try to put back together, or reinvent from a recently shattered past or life: rebuild, relaunch, or reinvent. Sometimes themselves- sometimes the business itself. All for the better.

    This is where people go apply for a job face-to-face to an owner looking for a chance as to prove their worth. Or if they can’t find one – invent one. Not send 100’s of applications to H.R. computer screening black-holes that will disqualify an applicant for not dotting some i, or crossing a t, literally.

    Think: your local market, retailer, sub shop, distributor, manufacturer et al with about 50 or 100 employees give or take. The Small Business Administration has different criteria as in up to “500 employees” and more, but for this discussion, it’s about what most understand as “small.” It’s these businesses that are the dynamism for most towns.

    Without the relief that was expected (and sold) to the entire small business community – it is at risk, even more so, than it already is. That alone should make politicians on both side take notice, but currently it’s like they’re (small business) screaming in a vacuum. And no one seems to care. Not the politicians, and certainly not the Chamber of Commerce.

    Small business used to look to agents such as this for help in having their voices heard. But now? It’s more like lip service, then, “Have you sent in a donation?” It’s now moved beyond pathetic.

    So in this vein I’m going to wave my usual fees (and I don’t do that lightly) and will now detail precisely how to fix the entire healthcare question and return it, along with its once lofty reputation, for being the best in the world. To wit:

    1. As has already been suggested: Repeal the current law (Obamacare) in its entirety today, with a two-year delay for full compliance.

     

    2. Make all politicians, staff, along with all government employees: to have to purchase and acquire insurance plans that are available to the general public. No special provisions, no special carve-outs. If the general public can’t purchase it? Neither can a politician or other government employee. And if for any reason “insurance” or “healthcare” is part of their compensation? A stipend equivalent to, and no more than: the median or average of available plans. No work around, no exceptions. Period.

    If those two solitary provisions were met – the entire healthcare/insurance fiasco would be solved at a minimum “on time”, and probably for the first time – ahead of schedule.

    Everyone would benefit near immediately (and would be covered regardless of anything prior or existing) the moment the politicians had to pay, and abide, by what their constituents have, especially if full payment was only for “the median.” This would take the “median” or “average” plan standards to stratospheric heights (along with pushing down its costs via the competitive model and market) making today’s “gold” standard look more like fools-gold.

    Again: Make that second item in the list above into law? America begins getting back to work far faster, and far healthier, than we have in decades.

    The above is worth $Trillions, upon $Trillions of potential GDP gains along with employing many of the millions currently being forced off jobs everywhere just because they are number 50 in the employee roster. And the effects, along with affects, would be felt throughout the nation with near immediacy. All at no charge from me – and more importantly – no charge to the nation.

    In fact: The only “charge” will be; what is heard from America’s business sector once the shackles of Obamacare are cast aside. Something they’ve been wanting to scream for years.

  • Most Americans Are Unwilling To Pay More For "Made In The USA" Products, Poll Finds

    President Donald Trump swept into office in November after promising to protect downtrodden American manufacturers by imposing trade barriers that would make US goods more competitive in the US, and around the world.

    Yet to the relief of US retailers, Trump has, for now, at least, shelved his threats to impose strict tariffs on Chinese goods – assuming President Xi Jinping follows through with his promise to help the US curb North Korea’s nuclear capabilities. And just yesterday, US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer 17-page outline of a "tough negotiating strategy" to revise the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement, meant to reduce trade imbalances with Mexico and Canada. In the early days of his presidency, Trump repeatedly criticized companies – car companies in particular – for moving production outside the US.

    But while many blue-collar Americans lament the loss of their once reliable manufacturing jobs, a recent poll by Reuters belies the perception that Americans want to see the shelves of local retailers piled high with goods that were made in the US. To wit: While most Americans support Trump’s “buy American” conceit, few are eager to shoulder the higher costs typically associated with goods both manufactured and sold in the states.

    “A Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Tuesday found 70 percent of Americans think it is “very important” or “somewhat important” to buy U.S.-made products.

     

    Despite that sentiment, 37 percent said they would refuse to pay more for U.S.-made goods versus imports. Twenty six percent said they would only pay up to 5 percent more to buy American, and 21 percent capped the premium at 10 percent.”

    On Monday, Trump released a state-by-state "Made in America Product Showcase" that included AMES wheelbarrows, according to Reuters. Yet at the AMES Companies Inc. factory in Harrisburg, Penn., the wheelbarrows coming off the assembly line once every six seconds cost the company more to there than abroad, but US retailers generally will not charge more for them because consumers would balk, AMES President Mark Traylor said.

    Ironically, lower-income Americans were the most enthusiastic about buying US goods, the poll showed, despite being the least able to afford them.

    The biggest U.S. retailer is well aware of the priority buyers place on price above all else. A spokesman for Wal-Mart Stores Inc said customers are telling them “that where products are made is most important second only to price.”

    Nearly all US manufacturers face the same squeeze.

    As Reuters points out, domestic manufacturers could be in trouble if they fail to capitalize on perceptions about the quality of their products while also keeping a tight lid on costs. That perception is American-made goods are sturdier, and tend to outlast and outperform cheap imports.

    “We don’t have to be as cheap as imports,” says Traylor, who estimated he sells his wheelbarrows to U.S. retailers for about 10 percent more than importers.

    Factors like cheaper domestic freight and a desire among retailers to carry lower inventories can help make up some of the cost differential.

    AMES is also better positioned than overseas suppliers to help retailers who need products on short notice. When spring comes early, for example, AMES can respond quickly to ship goods to stores, Traylor said, something importers can't do.

    Another strategy embraced by manufacturers is likely to disappoint Trump and his supporters. They might find that, even if Trump succeeds in enticing US firms to move their factories back to the US, that those factories will be staffed mostly by machines, not humans.

    “Traylor said another secret to success for U.S. manufacturers is investing in technology to cut costs.

     

    AMES, a subsidiary of New York-based Griffon Corp, is pouring $50 million into upgrades at several locations. The Harrisburg factory, built in 1921, is dotted with aged machinery that has been fitted with robotic attachments to reduce reliance on human labor.

     

    AMES' annual sales are $514 million.”

    AMES told Reuters that it recently convinced a major retailer, who they did not want to identify, to switch from Mexican-made wheelbarrows to carry its products.

    The company added that business is so strong it’s hiring 100 employees across its five Pennsylvania locations, including the Harrisburg factory. However, despite its plans to expand, bringing more workers back from overseas could be difficult.

    The company said it recently convinced a major retailer, who they did not want to identify, to switch from Mexican-made wheelbarrows to carry their product.

    In late April, Trump marked his 100th day in office with a visit to the AMES plant. He asked if every part of the wheelbarrows was made in America. Everything, he was told, except the Chinese-made tires.

    That’s because US manufacturers stopped large-scale production of air-filled tires for garden equipment years ago, and the cost of setting up production now would be hard to justify for the low-margin product. Some rubber makers still manufacture solid rubber tires in the US, Reuters reported, but the last time AMES bought any they cost nearly twice the roughly $7 they pay for a Chinese tire, a big added cost for a wheelbarrow that often retails for less than $100.

    “Is it feasible to get U.S.-made tires?” asked Mark D’Agostino, the company’s vice president for supply chain. “We don’t know yet.”

    To be sure, some manufacturers can command a big premium for American-made products.

    “Klein Tools Inc, a privately held company based outside Chicago with annual sales of $500 million, makes hand tools that are highly sought after by electricians and other workers.

     

    A pair of 9-inch Klein pliers sells for about 30 percent more than a comparable import.”

    But betting on the allure of American-made goods can be risky.

    In 2012, High Point, North Carolina-based Stanley Furniture Co brought back production of cribs and other baby furniture from China to a U.S. plant, wagering that parents worried about a string of Chinese factory quality scandals would pay $700 for cribs nearly identical to imports selling for $400.

    Customers refused to bite, however, and the High Point factory closed in 2014.

    Still, Stanley Chief Executive Glenn Prillaman said the Trump administration’s emphasis on American-made goods is a hopeful sign that resonates with “people that work for a living,” because they can see how it impacts their own jobs.

    "The lower-end consumers certainly care, and that’s a good thing,” he said. “But they’re also not in a position to pay the premium.”

    The Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted online in English throughout the US between May 24 and May 31. It gathered responses from 2,857 people, including 593 adults who made less than $25,000 per year, 1,283 who said they earned between $25,000 and $74,999, and 805 people who earned more than $75,000. The poll has a credibility interval of 2 percentage points for the entire group, 5 points for the low-income respondents, 3 points for the middle-income respondents and 4 points for the high-income respondents.

  • Snyder Rages "We Need To Build Trump's Wall, And We Need To Build It Tall & Strong"

    Authored by Michael Snyder via The American Dream blog,

    Did you know that Mexico is the second deadliest nation on the entire planet? The drug war down there continues to spiral completely out of control, and often the violence spills over to our own side of the border. Thanks to President Trump, security along the border is improving, but we still have a long, long way to go. Ultimately what we need is a physical barrier, because large numbers of illegal immigrants continue to pour through the soft spots in our border security.

    I know that a lot of liberals don’t like the idea of a wall, but that is the only way that we are going to make sure that everyone comes into this country through the front door.

    The United States is a nation of immigrants, and we will always need a certain level of immigration from other nations. But prior to the Trump administration, our approach to immigration policy was absolutely insane. We had made the legal immigration process an extremely costly and complicated nightmare that hardly anyone could understand or navigate, and yet we had kept the back door completely wide open for drug dealers, gang members, terrorists, sexual predators and anyone that just wanted to take advantage of the system.

    We have got to make our legal system of immigration less costly and less complicated, and at the same time we need to slam the back door completely shut so that everyone is forced to come in to the U.S. through the front door.

    To illustrate why this is such an incredibly important issue, I would like to share the story of Estefania Soto with you. Thanks to a drunk illegal immigrant, Soto lost her boyfriend and her baby recently in a horrific traffic accident…

    Estefania Soto has spent her days in various hospital rooms since the crash on June 10. She and her boyfriend, 28-year-old Raul Diaz, Jr., were on a motorcycle on Farm to Market 973 near FM 969 in east Travis County when they were hit head-on by a truck.

     

    The crash killed Diaz and resulted in the premature birth of their child. Soto, 26, was only six months pregnant. Their baby was delivered through a C-section after the crash and passed away shortly after.

     

    Soto has had 15 surgeries over the past month including a leg amputation.

    If Trump’s wall had already been in place, 38-year-old Cesar Corona-Quiterio may have never had the chance to enter this country illegally and Estefania Soto may still be looking forward to a new life with her husband and her baby.

    Another tragedy that could have potentially been averted by a wall on the southern border was the brutal rape of a 14-year-old girl at a high school in Rockville, Maryland. The following comes from Fox News…

    Jose O. Montano, 17, from El Salvador, and Henry E. Sanchez-Milian, 18, from Guatemala, were charged with first-degree rape and two counts of first-degree sexual offense after they allegedly attacked the girl at 9 a.m. last Thursday.

     

    “The victim was walking in a school hallway when she met two male students, identified as Montano and Sanchez. Montano asked the victim to walk with him and Sanchez. Montano asked the victim to engage in sexual intercourse. She refused,” Montgomery County Police said in a statement.

     

    “Montano asked the victim again and then forced her into a boy’s bathroom and then into a stall. Montano and Sanchez both raped the victim inside the bathroom stall.”

    How would you feel if that was your own daughter?

    I don’t understand how people can be against the wall. We literally have a war zone on the other side of the border, and CNN has reported that the drug war down in Mexico claimed an astounding 23,000 lives last year…

    It was the second deadliest conflict in the world last year, but it hardly registered in the international headlines.

     

    As Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan dominated the news agenda, Mexico’s drug wars claimed 23,000 lives during 2016 — second only to Syria, where 50,000 people died as a result of the civil war.

    And the rising violence in Mexico and much of the rest of central America has been slowly spreading to communities all across the United States. For example, just check out what has been happening on Long Island…

    With MS-13 blamed for a trail of 11 corpses of mostly young people found since the start of the school year in Brentwood and Central Islip, the nation’s focus has turned on how the Central American street gang built such a presence here.

     

    The bloodshed in the two blue-collar towns has gotten the attention of President Donald Trump, who says the killings are the result of lax immigration policies that let too many criminal ‘scum’ slip through.

     

    Attorney General Jeff Sessions gave a speech Friday not far from a park where the bodies of four young men were found this month bearing MS-13’s hallmarks: repeated slashes from a blade that left the victims nearly unrecognizable.

    Are you starting to understand why I am so adamant about building Trump’s wall?

    We need to build it high, we need to build it strong, and we need armed guards patrolling every inch of it.

    One of the fundamental duties of the federal government is national security, and for decades prior to the Trump administration we had leaders that absolutely refused to secure our borders.

    Thankfully, now we have a president that is determined to do something about this national crisis, but we still have a Congress that is intent on blocking him every step of the way.

    Every member of Congress that doesn’t want Trump’s wall needs to go, and they need to be replaced by new blood that is ready to do whatever is necessary in order to protect the American people.

  • Fighting inflation with FX, a real traders market

    (GLOBALINTELHUB.COM) Dover, DE — 7/18/2017 — Hidden in plain site, as the Trump administration finally released something of substance regarding the so called promised “Trade Negotiation” we see FX take center stage in the global drama unfolding.  As noted on a Zero Hedge article:

    The much anticipated document (press release and link to full document) released by U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said the Trump administration aimed to reduce the U.S. trade deficit by improving access for U.S. goods exported to Canada and Mexico and contained the list of negotiating objectives for talks that are expected to begin in one month. Topping Trump’s list is a “simple” objective: “improve the U.S. trade balance and reduce the trade deficit with Nafta countries.” Among other things the document makes the unexpected assertion that no country should manipulate currency exchange to gain an unfair competitive advantage,which according to Citi’s economists was the only notable surprise in the entire document: That line of focus centers on FX: “Through an appropriate mechanism, ensure that the Nafta countries avoid manipulating exchange rates in order to prevent effective balance of payments adjustment or to gain an unfair competitive advantage.”  ..While Canada and Mexico are not formally considered currency manipulators by the US Treasury, the reference in the list of objectives will likely set a template for future trade deals such as the pending negotiation to modify a 5 year old free trade deal with South Korea, a country in far greater risk of being branded a currency manipulator as it sits on the Treasury’s monitoring list for possible signs of currency manipulation.

    As we have explained in previous articles and in our book Splitting Pennies – Trade is FX.  Tariffs can discourage trade, but so can a high price – effectively they are the same thing.  Conversely, a cheap price encourages trade.  This is why Japan has logically and rationally destroyed the value of its own currency in order to boost trade, in their case – exports – because Japan is not only a net exporter, they are a near 100% OEM manufacturer.

    But it’s not clear that whoever wrote this document understands FX – every currency is currently a ‘manipulator’ – including Japan, and the US Federal Reserve Bank.  In fact, the global FX market has become a race to the bottom, with each currency competing with each other who can go down more, faster.  It’s a race into oblivion.  Contrary to what you may read in the current doom journalism popular online, the global financial collapse is happening right before our eyes – over a long time horizon.  The big mistake that many economists, analysts, and investors have made in the ‘doom and gloom’ crowd is that they all expected a ‘date’ or a ‘time’ when everything would ‘collapse’ – they didn’t think that it can happen over a period of 50 years.  We are in the demise, it’s happening right before our eyes.

    Today someone asked me if Bitcoin can really be 500,000 – and why not?  My answer was that, it isn’t that Bitcoin is going UP it’s that the value of the US Dollar is going DOWN.  So if Bitcoin is 500,000 – that property in the hamptons that’s listed for $150 Million, it will be listed for $15 Billion, or why not $1 Trillion.  There is no limit to the amount of money the Federal Reserve can create – but there is a limited amount of Bitcoin.  Those who have lived in exSSR countries or Russia for example, understand how quickly money can be worthless.  Quantitative Easing is itself a global ‘reset’ if you understand how it works, and it happens over a long timeframe.

    So where is one to invest, to protect from the deteriorating value of FX?  Bitcoin is by itself not a solution and by no means even something that should be part of any portfolio, it’s a test of the new world order’s global currency payments and monetary control system, whatever you want to call it – and it’s very volatile – just as it goes up 100% it can go down 90%.  The answer is that even with Bitcoin – the point is to TRADE it not INVEST in it.  Let’s dissect FX to understand this.  Take a look at this Daily EUR/USD chart going back 3 years:

    eur usd

    The EUR/USD goes up, it goes down.  There’s an election in France, an election in the US.  It’s practically one currency.  But the ECB has a similar QE program that’s destroying the value of the Euro as well.  So the way to protect yourself here is to ‘trade’ this.  For example, take a look at a snapshot from 2016 of Magic FX Strategy, that has returned on average 1.5% per month for the last 4 years:

    magic

    This is not a solicitation of this particular strategy, simply it provides a good example of how to ‘trade’ FX for a consistent profit, to combat inflation.  Investing in CDs and other interest rate products are not going to give you the 15%+ per year needed to stay ahead of the Fed.  This is the game of hot potato that Elite bankers have designed that’s built into the modern electronic financial system.  The stock market is great unless there’s a down year, but still just barely keeps you ahead of the game (if you stick to the traditional blue chips, industrials, utilities, etc) and certainly is not going to give you the 15% – 30% per year returns needed to really grow your portfolio.  30% + is the magic number Elite portfolios target (ironically, it’s about a 2x allocation to Magic FX strategy, in line with the natural fluctuations of the FX market, using reasonable, modest leverage).

    If you’re not making 15% + per year inflation is eating you away.  So where can you invest and get 15% with reasonable risk?  The answer is practically no where in the markets, maybe in the private equity world, complex real estate, and other special situations but clearly there is no vanilla answer like “Buy Gold” or “Buy Bitcoin” as there may have been post 9/11.  This will be more and more true as QE matures, because QE is distorting asset prices in complex ways.  This is the ‘trap’ which has been set.  Not only does it cull the herd, as the Elite like to do every 20 years or so, it forces investors into a situation where they have to take more risk – if they don’t, their assets will ultimately be eaten away by inflation.  They have to play the game because if they sit on the sidelines they will lose out.  Of course it’s not fair – but that is the nature of the global capitalist financial system, at the moment, and it’s not going to change in our lifetime, so one can understand it and master it, or be the victim of it, SIMPLE!

    And in the case of FX it’s not so complex to understand.  Let’s look quickly at the last currency of investment, the Swiss Franc.

    Here’s a historical chart of CHF/USD (usually it’s quoted USD/CHF which is the inverse – opposite)

    Investors in Swiss Francs over this period – which includes Americans just sending their money to Switzerland, enjoyed a 400%+ return over the 40 year period, non-compounded, without considering interest (just FX).  The small blip in the 80s when this investment declined was due to the US Dollars aggressive double digit interest rates, but that ended in 1986 when Swissie just took off and never looked back.  That was until the post 2008 world, where Switzerland became the target of a number of investigations by hungry US agencies looking for someone to blame and money to pay for damage done by the credit crisis, including the IRS, FBI, and DOJ in general, but there were a number of other US interests interested in financially ‘toppling’ the Gnomes of Zurich – namely, by closing the only way out of QE.  The Swiss Franc (CHF) was really the only currency that had any value, it was 40% backed by Gold, and upheld by a 1,000 + year banking tradition, a stable economy, and banking privacy laws.

    In order to solidify the US Dollar as the primary world’s reserve currency, that had to be smashed.  So they did it in a number of ways, including but not limited to activating assets there such as corrupt central bankers (which really was a non-issue) and squeezing the Gnomes back into submission.  So the conclusion to this drama is now the CHF previously being the only real currency to invest in for the long term and forget about it, is now a central bank manipulated currency that is subject to SNB interventions, caps, trading ranges, and other direct central bank manipulation (like all other currencies).

    So the reason for that story is simply that there is no where to just ‘invest’ your money and forget about it anymore (there was, such as the example of the Swiss Franc).  The good news though, FX is a traders market.  If investors are not too greedy, there’s a number of strategies in FX that can return the 15% + needed to beat inflation and possibly even grow.  Magic FX is certainly not the only strategy in the world with such low-volatility and consistent returns.  But due to the recent Dodd-Frank regulations such strategies are only available to ECP investors, which is a step above being accredited – basically you need to be liquid for $10 Million.  Oh, and to make fighting inflation really fun for the retail US investor, you aren’t allowed to hedge (no buying and selling of the same currency) and you must exit your positions in the same order in which you entered them (FIFO) and you have reduced leverage.  Basically, the Fed is creating pressure forcing the hand of investors to trade to stay ahead of the game, and the regulators are making it difficult (and in fact, more risky) to trade.  With US rules it’s a miracle any US retail investor can be profitable.  The rules have really turned FX into the casino that people are afraid of, because they are literally telling you when to exit your trades (FIFO).

    In conclusion – FX is a real traders market.  It’s better than stocks, bonds, options, futures, etc.  Now with the influx of Cryptocurrencies FX is about to get even more interesting.  By trading FX successfully, or finding a manager who can do it for you – it’s the only way to fight inflation, to at least maintain the value of your hard earned dollars.  As we mentioned earlier in the article, there are of course other methods such as private equity and niche businesses (such as lawyers selling rights to settlements) that can generate the 30% + needed to grow a portfolio – but it’s not available publicly, in the markets.  But FX is there – it’s there for the taking – and it’s not going away anytime soon.

    Open a Forex Account or Learn Forex with Fortress Capital Trading Academy.

    Article written by Elite E Services for Global Intel Hub.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Jul 18

Today’s News 18th July 2017

  • Recovery? Italy's Poor Population Has Tripled In Last Decade

    Is it any wonder the Italians are revolting against the European Union?

    Italians living below the level of absolute poverty almost tripled over the last decade as the country went through a double-dip, record-long recession. As Bloomberg reports, the absolute poor, or those unable to purchase a basket of necessary goods and services, reached 4.7 million last year, up from almost 1.7 million in 2006, national statistics agency Istat said Thursday. That is 7.9 percent of the population, with many of them concentrated in the nation’s southern regions.

    For decades, Italy has grappled with a low fertility rate — just 1.35 children per woman compared with a 1.58 average across the 28-nation European union as of 2015, the last year for which comparable data are available.

     

    “The poverty report shows how it is pointless to wonder why there are fewer newborn in Italy,” said Gigi De Palo, head of Italy’s Forum of Family Associations.

     

    “Making a child means becoming poor, it seems like in Italy children are not seen as a common good.”

     

    The number of absolute poor rose last year in the younger-age classes, reaching 10 percent in the group of those between 18 and 34 years old. It fell among seniors to 3.8 percent in the age group of 65 and older, the Istat report also showed.

    Just a good job the government spent the equivalent of its entire defense budget bailing-out the bankers…

  • Fusion: Will Humanity Ever Harness Star Power?

    Fusion is the epitome of “high risk, high reward” scientific research.

    If we were to ever successfully harness the forces that power the stars, mankind could have access to power that is almost literally too cheap to meter. However, as Visual Capitalist's Nick Routley notes, reaching that goal will be a very expensive, long-term commitment – and it’s also very possible that we may never achieve a commercially viable method of fusion power generation.

    Today’s video, by the talented team at Kurzgesagt, explains how fusion works, what experiments are ongoing, and the pros and cons of pursuing fusion power generation.

    HOW FUSION WORKS

    Fusion involves heating nuclei of atoms – usually isotopes of hydrogen – to temperatures in the millions of degrees. At extreme temperatures, atoms are stripped of their electrons and nuclei move so quickly that they overcome their “mutual repulsion”, joining together to form a heavier nucleus. This process gives off massive amounts of energy that investors and researchers hope will propel mankind into an era of cheap and abundant electricity, but without the downsides of many other forms of energy.

    I would like nuclear fusion to become a practical power source. It would provide an inexhaustible supply of energy, without pollution or global warming.

     

    – Stephen Hawking, award-winning theoretical physicist

    Stars are so large that fusion occurs naturally in their cores – but here on Earth, we’re trying a number of complex methods in the hopes of replicating that process to achieve positive net energy.

    The Cost of Bottling a Star

    The International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), an experimental reactor currently being built in the south of France, will house the world’s largest ever tokamak – a doughnut-shaped reactor that uses a powerful magnetic field to confine plasma. Construction of the facility began in 2013 and is expected to cost €20 billion upon completion in 2021.

    iter fusion reactor funding

    Source: Visual Capitalist

    Research organizations see ITER as a crucial step in realizing fusion. Though the facility is not designed to generate electricity, it would pave the way for functional reactors.

    Competition is Heating Up

    There are some who claim that the bureaucracy of government-funded labs is hampering the process. As a result, there is a pack of private companies, fueled by high-profile investors, looking to make commercially-viable fusion into a reality.

    Tri Alpha, a company in southern California, is hoping their method of spinning magnetized plasma inside a containment vessel will be a lower-cost method of power generation than ITER. In 2015, they held super-heated hydrogen plasma in a stable state for 5 milliseconds, which is a huge deal in the world of fusion research. The company has attracted over $500 million in investment in the past 20 years, and has the backing of Microsoft co-founder, Paul Allen.

    Helion Energy, located in Redmond, Washington, believes they are only a few years away from creating nuclear fusion that can be used as a source for electricity. Their reaction is created by colliding two plasma balls made of hydrogen atom cores at one million miles per hour. Helion Energy’s ongoing research is funded in part by the U.S. Department of Energy’s ARPA-E program, which the Trump administration slated for elimination. Thankfully, Helion still counts Peter Thiel’s Mithril Capital and Y Combinator as supporters.

    General Fusion, located in Burnaby, B.C., is taking a different approach. Their piston-based reactor is designed to create energy bursts lasting thousandths of seconds, rather than a sustained plasma reaction. Heat recovered bursts would be used to generate electricity much like nuclear power plants, minus the long-term radioactive waste. General Fusion has attracted millions of dollars in funding, including investment from Bezos Expeditions and the Business Development Bank of Canada.

    Time Horizon

    Though commercially viable fusion is still a long way off, each new technological breakthrough brings us one step closer. With such a massive payoff for success, research will likely only increase as we get closer to bottling a star here on Earth.

    fusion timeline

    Source: Visual Capitalist

  • Bank Of Italy Warns Citizens Against "Creating Your Own Currency"

    Authored by Louis Cammarosano via Smaulgld.com,

    Citizens Claim Right to Create Scriptural Euros.

    Citizens conjure Euros out of thin air, just like banks.

    Create Your Own Currency!

    Because the top cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin and Ethereum are open source, any one can create their own cryptocurrencies.

    While the proliferation of cryptocurrencies has central banks concerened, another more insidious and perhaps greater threat to central banks’ monopoly on money creation is the issuance of scriptural euros by citizens.

    What are Scriptural Euros?

    Scriptural Euros are Euros issued by citizens under a “theory of the autonomous creation of scriptural currency” based on the idea of collective property of money that affirms the right of every citizen to autonomously create “scriptural” money (Euros) via their own accounting records. The theory of autonomous creation of scriptural currency holds that just as banks can conjure debt based money out of thin air, so can citizens.

    Money thus created by citizens can then be used to extinguish their own debts.

    Apparently, citizen-created euros have been accepted as payment. @marcosabait (Marco Saba) shared his experience on twitter whereby his scriptural Euros were accepted by Facebook as payment for advertising. This correspondence between @marcosabait and Facebook shows how @marcosabait created 25 Euros as payment to Facebook and Facebook accepted the citizen issued Euros as payment.

    In the correspondence, @marcosabait informs Facebook Italy (in English) that banks AND citizens can create new Euro in electronic form and that he had just done so in the amount of 25 Euros and was submitting it as payment. He also referred Facebook to his Facebook page for more information on citizen created scriptural Euros.

    Facebook responded in Italian by accepting @marcosabait payment of his self-created scriptural Euro, while noting his payment was being accepted this time, but such payments may not be honored in the future.

    According to @marcosabait, Italian citizens have created more than 1 billion scriptural Euros since October 2016.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Internet Urban Legend?

    Citizens conjuring money out of thin air and having that money accepted as payment all seems like internet urban legend. Perhaps, in the example above, the Facebook employee didn’t want to argue over 25 Euro and was just humoring @marcosabait. Or maybe, the correspondence itself was spurious. Certainly, the claim that more than 1 billion scriptural Euro have been created seems far fetched and that any large sum of scriptural Euros being accepted as payment seemed even further afield.

    However…

    The Bank of Italy Responds

    Despite what might appear to be a ludicrous ploy to convince citizens they have the right to create their own Euros, the Bank of Italy is taking scriptual Euros seriously. Last month, the Bank of Italy issued a warning about the creation of scriptual Euros. Attached to the warning was a PDF that explained the Bank of Italy’s position on scriptual Euros.

    The position paper is entitled “Scriptural Money Created by Citizens”. The paper notes that its purpose is to avoid “dangerous misunderstandings” involving scriptural Euros. The paper claims that only the Bank of Italy can issue the form of legal currency based on international and national legislation and that it is necessary for the Bank of Italy to have this power in order to guarantee overall confidence in currency and the stability of its value over time. The paper further notes that payment services through scriptwriting is an activity allowed by law only to authorized persons, such as banks, electronic money institutions and other payment institutions.

    The paper concludes that “initiatives for the creation of a autonomous scriptural currency have no legal basis” and calls on citizens not to use such forms of currency.

    The scriptural Euro issue may have more people asking questions about the creation of money out of thin air – if banks can do it, why can’t we?

  • 3/4 UK Graduates Will Never Repay Student Loans

    With tuition costs rising more than twice as quickly as consumer prices, a generation of recent college graduates are struggling to strike out on their own, burdened by a $1.4 trillion pile of debt that ineligible to be erased by the tonic of bankruptcy protection. Tuition costs have been blamed for nearly all of the ills facing the millennial generation. The rate at which re cent graduates are moving back homme with mom and dad has never been higher, with nearly a third retreating back to the basement as they struggle to jobs with adequate pay. Household format ion rate have plummeted as women put of childbirth. Meanwhile, those who have made it out are clustering in popular urba like NYC, San Francisco or DC where they’re spending more than 50% of their income on rent.

    There’s no question that US graduates have it rough, but a recent study by the UK-based Institute for Fiscal Studies suggests that students in the UK are facing obstacles that’re even more overwhelming than their peers in the US. As the Financial Times reported earlier this month, Three-quarters of UK university leavers will never pay off their student loans, even if they are still contributing in their 50s.

    This means the UK government will have to write off some or all of the debt taken out by 77% of students because they will not earn enough to repay their loans within 30 years of graduating, according to the study, which was written up in the Financial Times.

    The study amounts to more unwelcome news for the UK college students, who will soon contend with an interest-rate increase of more than a third, to an annualized 6.1%, slated for September. That increase, experts say, is a byproduct of the UK’s decision to leave the European Union –  a decision that resulted in a more than 10% drop in the British pound’s value relative to the dollar and euro, according to the Guardian.

    “Graduates in England were saddled with the highest student debt in the developed world, the IFS said, adding that the benefits of earlier reforms to the tuition fee system — which took pressure off the lowest-earning students — had been wiped out by subsequent changes such as the replacement of maintenance grants with loans.

    The IFS said that because graduates repaid their student loans at 9 per cent of their earnings, above a certain threshold, and over a 30-year period, in many cases interest accrued on their debt too fast for repayments to keep up.

    One key finding is that because interest rates on student debt are very high — up to 3 per cent above RPI — the average student accrues £5,800 of interest while studying, meaning they borrow £45,000 but have a debt of £50,800 on the day of graduation.

    By contrast, the average debt burden on students in the US is far lower at $36,000 (£27,900), even though the cost of tuition varies far more at US institutions.”

    Financial researher researcher Martin Lewis, who runs his own personal-finance website moneysavingexpert.com, says he has been “swamped” by UK graduates terrified by new statements that show their debt spiraling in size after interest is added later this year, he told the Guardian.

    “Many graduates are starting to panic. First they look in shock at their student loan statements after noticing interest totalling thousands has been added. Then they read the headline interest rate for the 2017-18 academic year will increase from 4.6% to 6.1%. It’s no surprise I’ve been swamped with people asking if they should be trying to overpay the loans to reduce the interest.”

    Counterintuitively, Lewis warns these graduates that there’s little benefit in paying off their loans early thanks to a government program that will pay off the remaining balance after 30 years. Only if the student lands a job earning £40,000 a year on graduation, and then enjoys big pay rises after, should they consider repaying their loan early, says Lewis. Here’s why:

    A graduate earning £36,000 a year will repay £40,500 of a £55,000 total student loan over 30 years, said Lewis, at the current repayment rates. The remaining debt will be wiped clean after 30 years. If the same graduate cuts the total £55,000 balance to £45,000 with an overpayment of £10,000, they will still have to repay the same amount of student loan over 30 years, making the overpayment entirely pointless.

    Just like in the US, student-loan debt in the UK has been soaring. Its total value rose above £100 billion ($131 billion) for the first time earlier this year, according to figures released by the Student Loans Company.

    Lewis says students might as well “rip up their loan statements” and just accept the fact that they will be paying a tax equivalent to 9% of their income above £21,000, thanks to a UK government program ostensibly meant to assuage the student-loan hysteria by spreading around the cost of debt repayments.

    "'For most university leavers, the student loan’ is a misnomer – it should be renamed the more accurate term: a ‘graduate contribution’ system. That doesn’t mean it’s cheap or fair, simply that people would make better financial decisions if they focus on the fact they’ll have to pay the equivalent of 9% extra tax above £21,000 for 30 years,' Lewis said.”

    As the FT notes, the 2012 reforms, carried out by David Cameron and Nick Clegg, tripled tuition fees to £9,000 and increased average university funding by a quarter. But the majority of the cost rises were borne by richer graduates, resulting in the lowest-earning third of graduates benefiting by an average of £1,500.

    Recent reforms have eroded this advantage: cutting maintenance grants has reduced the government deficit but meant students from low-income families are graduating with the highest debt levels, often over £57,000.

    Laura van der Erve, one of the report’s authors, said told the FT that universities are “undoubtedly” better off under the current system than they were before the 2012 reforms. But she warned that the changes had shifted incentives towards institutions offering low-cost arts and humanities courses, which now attract 47 per cent more income per student than they did in 2011. By contrast, the highest-cost subjects only attract 6 per cent_more income. “This does not sit comfortably with the government’s intention to promote typically high-cost [science, technology, engineering and maths] subjects,” she said.

    Intensifying student-debt burdens have been blamed for helping Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn won support from a swath of young voters on the back of his election promise to abolish £9,250 annual tuition fees altogether.

    One Conservative heavyweight noted the most pressing issue related to college costs: The question of whether these costly educations represent an adequate value for students. One study in the US revealed that graduates at large state flagship universities are often leaving college with worse cognitive skills than they had upon enrolling.

    “Damian Green, the Conservatives’ first secretary of state, told the FT earlier this month that the debt burden on young people was “clearly a huge issue” and something his party would have to address. “I think in the long term we’ve got to show that [students] are getting value for the money,” he said.

    Even liberal politicians criticized the government’s plan to focus student debt reforms on percentages and interest rates.

    “Responding to the research Sarah Stevens, head of policy at the Russell Group, said that increased undergraduate fees have been “crucial” to universities at a time of cuts to government teaching grants. She suggested that in order to make higher education more affordable for students, ministers should address concerns over the interest rates applied to loans.

    Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute, agreed that issues such as interest rates, repayment thresholds and the period allowed for repayment affect graduates far more than the “sticker price” of university courses, which receive far more political attention.

    ‘The debate about fee levels is a bit of a red herring because what matters is what you are paying back later,’ he said. ‘The point at which you feel it in your pocket is when you’re in your 30s, with a mortgage and childcare costs, and 9 per cent of your salary above a certain threshold is going to pay back your student loan.’”

    Judging by the IFS report, and other the recent warnings about the metastasizing consumer-debt crisis issued by the BOE, most contemporary students and recent graduates will be feeling this burden until they’re just about ready to retire.   Let’s hope, for their sakes, that they can find some way to afford it.
     

  • How "Nothing To Hide" Leads To "Nowhere To Hide" – Why Privacy Matters In An Age Of Tech Totalitarianism

    Via The Daily Bell,

    Would you allow a government official into your bedroom on your honeymoon? Or let your mother-in-law hear and record every conversation that takes place in your home or car – especially disagreements with your husband or wife? Would you let a stranger sit in on your children’s playdates so that he could better understand how to entice them with candy or a doll?

    Guess what? If you bring your phone with you everywhere, or engage with a whole-house robo helper such as Alexa or Echo or Siri or Google, you’re opening up every aspect of your life to government officials, snooping (possibly criminal) hackers, and advertisers targeting you, your spouse and your children.

    The following is not a screed against technology. But it is a plea to consider what we’re giving up when we hand over privacy, wholesale, to people whom we can neither see nor hear… people whose motives we cannot fathom.

    The widened lanes of communication, and the conveniences that Smart Phones, wireless communities, Big Data and Artificial Intelligence (AI) have fomented are indeed helpful to some extent. They allow, for example, for remote working, which allows people to spend more time with their families and less time commuting. In areas such as the energy business, the field of predictive analytics, born of Big Data and the Industrial Internet, helps mitigate the danger of sending humans to oil rigs at sea. 

    And on a personal level, of course, the conveniences are innumerable: Grandparents living far away can “see” their grandchildren more often than they could in years past, thanks to technology such as FaceTime and Skype.

    People save money: As you walk by a restaurant, a lunch coupon suddenly appears on your phone.

    And they can save time: Someday soon, the Internet of Things might tell your coffee maker and alarm clock to go off before its normal time, because bad weather is coming and your son’s school bus will arrive 15 minutes early to avoid the fog.

    But there’s a corollary we must think about. (Two corollaries, actually, one being the long-term effects of Electromagnetic Fields on our health, and especially on our brains. But so far, few studies have been funded to examine this.)

    We must acknowledge that we’re gaining all this convenience at the expense of our privacy.

    When you ask Siri or Echo or Alexa or Google (and others of their ilk) something, it’s great to get an immediate answer… but the corollary is that Siri and Echo and Alexa and Google are listening to every conversation you’re having with your spouse, every fight you’re having with your kids, and every bit of heavy breathing that might be taking place in the dark.

    That response inherently grants legitimacy to the search in the first place. The implication is that if you have nothing to “hide,” then the tech companies, the advertisers, the government, etc. should indeed have full access to every aspect of your life. 

    Note that the word in the phrase is “hide” and not “protect”, thereby implying that all that is not shared with any intrusive party must be something nefarious, something you’re trying to keep from those who have a right to it.

    And if you think about it, “nothing” is the wrong word, too: Forgive the vulgarity here, but would you use the toilet in front of your mother-in-law? Would you allow an IRS official into your bedroom at night? Or to move into your home and record every conversation that takes place? Would you open your private diary to your spouse’s ex or to your children? Clearly, there are some things we do indeed wish to keep private.

    In other words, if it’s OK to want to protect the privacy of one’s genitals or one’s private thoughts, why is it wrong to want to protect one’s conversations or whereabouts?

    Totalitarianism and Tech – Caveat Emptor

    Privacy is the first thing that a totalitarian state attempts to destroy.

    Ask anyone who lived behind the Berlin Wall or in Stalinist Russia. If you know what parents are teaching their children, you can intervene and destroy the family, a primary goal of totalitarianism. If you know someone’s secrets or vulnerabilities, you can manipulate him. Knowledge truly is power, especially if you are a big state wanting to control people.

    As a child, I was a huge fan of figure skating, and in particular of the great, then-East German champion Katarina Witt. In an interview a few years ago, she revealed her shock that the Stasi collected thousands of records of all her comings and goings and private conversations. The spies even noted when she had been intimate with her boyfriend. When the government knows all, no one is immune, and everyone can be controlled.

    And just think, they were documenting Miss Witt’s activities and conversations by hand, back in the 1970s and ‘80s. Now, nearly every single aspect of our lives is being recorded in real time. Every email, every text, every phone conversation. Every time you allow your phone to know where you are, your whereabouts are noted. Soon, that Internet of Things — IoT — which already connects 50 billion “things” through an internet of its own, will be coming to your refrigerator, your dishwasher, your coffeemaker. Happy Alexa and GE “smart fridge” commercials are airing as we speak.

    And not only are we letting all of this happen, we’re welcoming it. Twenty years ago, it was Miss Witt’s friends who recorded her personal conversations, and strangers who spied on her. But as she has noted, these days, we give a lot of our privacy away of our own free will. If someone were parked outside your house, surveilling you day and night, it would be unnerving, no? But we’re fine keeping our phones on us 24/7, and telling Facebook personal details about ourselves.

    We do this because of the convenience, which will be increasing in scope as quickly as do the various surveillance mechanisms. Will it be convenient when your fridge tells your phone that you’re running low on orange juice (as the bottle will have a sensor, too)? Perhaps.

    But will it be convenient when that same fridge tells your health insurance company that you’ve got ice cream in the freezer? And when your rates go up because of it?

    Worse – will it be convenient when that fridge listens to your kitchen conversations and tells the government that you’ll be organizing a political discussion group on Tuesday? Or when it tells that bizarre man you went on one date with, who hacked your system, that your daughter has a recital this Friday night?

    This is not a conspiracy theory. This is an extrapolation of what happens when people who crave power gain access to vast amounts of personal information.

    The more you tell Facebook, or Siri, or Google, or FourSquare, or your phone, or your washing machine, then the more of your own personal power and privacy you’re giving up. (And the more photos you post of your young children, the more of their power you’re relinquishing. So, parents — stop. Now.) 

    Bottom line: Once the state (or a company) knows your weaknesses, they can exploit them. They can go after you in myriad ways. And I don’t just mean to “punish” you… I mean to manipulate you.

    If a politician has access to your personal proclivities, then he can easily craft, via Artificial Intelligence, a targeted campaign that caters to exactly what the data tell him you want to hear. In the future, he could even warp news stories, video and even audio in real time to appeal to you for gain.

    If a potential employer is considering you for a job, then she can (already) access every YouTube video you’ve ever watched, every public post you’ve ever made, and, soon, everything else you’ve put online. In the future, she might be able to access everything you’ve ever said in your home or in your car, or every video of you taken by your television when you think it’s off. 

    Those conversations and images will be sold as commodities. “Data” = “money” and “power.” Companies will soon specialize in mining all that personal data; they’ll be paid to flag “inappropriate” conversations, texts or images. Think about it.

    A private banker I spoke to in Asia is proud of the fact that his bank is working in concert with FinTech to develop Know Your Customer technology on steroids: It will find every single email, text message, photo, post, and even online search that you’ve ever done so that it can (and this sounds so innocuous) “paint a holistic and predictive picture of client needs.”

    That predictive part is critical. Not only do data tell those who hold them where you’ve been, but AI and Big Data analysis can predict where you’re going (both physically and psychologically)… and here’s the really scary part… before you know it.

    That gives the data holders real powers of manipulation. The winners of a battle are nearly always the ones with the advanced information, the ones who can launch the surprise attack.

    Technology can lead to convenience, but it can also lead to abuses of power. In its extreme, that is called totalitarianism.

    In the end, we must take precautions if we’re to have anything close to liberty. Some of you have, no doubt, read Jonah Goldberg’s excellent book from 2007, Liberal Fascism, the hardcover of which features a smiley face graphic with a Hitler mustache. In the introduction, Mr. Goldberg quotes a segment from a Bill Maher show in which George Carlin says, in essence, (and I’m paraphrasing) that “when fascism comes to America it will be wearing a smiley face.”

    I’d go a step further — it will be cloaked in an emoji… seemingly innocuous, friendly, and ubiquitous.

    We must stop giving away our privacy. We must start thinking about personal “data” as the commodity that it already is, and even as a weapon that can be used against us.

    If we don’t stop and reconsider what we’re giving away, not only will there be nothing to hide, but nowhere to hide.

     

  • "It's Raining Needles" Locals Frustrated As Opioid Addicts Litter Ground With Syringes

    Drug-overdose deaths rose 19% in 2016 to 52,000, making drugs the leading killer of American adults under 50. And all evidence suggests these totals have continued to climb in 2017, propelled by the worsening opioid epidemic or the fact that more dangerous opioid analogues like fentanyl and carfentanil are findng their way into the drug supply.

    Indeed, the US has a higher rate of drug related deaths than any other developed country in the world. As we’ve reported previously, the epidemic is straining public resources like hospitals, local police departments, and child services which in many states have seen a surge in cases where the parents are addicted to opioids. To that list, we can now add local public health department in areas hit hard by the epidemic, which are struggling to clean up a flood of used and possibly infected needles discarded by addicts. 

    “They hide in weeds along hiking trails and in playground grass. They wash into rivers and float downstream to land on beaches. They pepper baseball dugouts, sidewalks and streets. Syringes left by drug users amid the heroin crisis are turning up everywhere.

     

    In Portland, Maine, officials have collected more than 700 needles so far this year, putting them on track to handily exceed the nearly 900 gathered in all of 2016. In March alone, San Francisco collected more than 13,000 syringes, compared with only about 2,900 the same month in 2016.”

    People, often children, risk getting stuck by discarded needles, raising the prospect they could contract blood-borne diseases such as hepatitis or HIV or be exposed to remnants of heroin or other drugs. It's unclear whether anyone has gotten sick, but the reports of children finding the needles can be sickening in their own right. One 6-year-old girl in California mistook a discarded syringe for a thermometer and put it in her mouth; she was unharmed, according to NBC Boston.

    “‘I just want more awareness that this is happening,’ said Nancy Holmes, whose 11-year-old daughter stepped on a needle in Santa Cruz, California, while swimming. ‘You would hear stories about finding needles at the beach or being poked at the beach. But you think that it wouldn't happen to you. Sure enough.’

     

    They are a growing problem in New Hampshire and Massachusetts — two states that have seen many overdose deaths in recent years.

     

    ‘We would certainly characterize this as a health hazard,’ said Tim Soucy, health director in Manchester, New Hampshire's largest city, which collected 570 needles in 2016, the first year it began tracking the problem. It has found 247 needles so far this year.”

    Needles turn up in places like parks, baseball diamonds, trails and beaches, places where drug users can gather and attract little attention. They toss the needles out of carelessness, or the fear of being prosecuted for possessing them.  One child was poked by a needle left on the grounds of a Utah elementary school. Another youngster stepped on one while playing on a beach in New Hampshire. Even if these children did't get sick, they still had to endure a battery of tests to make sure they didn't catch anything. The girl who put a syringe in her mouth was not poked but had to be tested for hepatitis B and C, her mother said.

    Some community advocates have started helping out, organizing patrols to dispose of illegally discarded needles. 

    "Rocky Morrison leads a cleanup effort along the Merrimack River, which winds through the old milling city of Lowell, and has recovered hundreds of needles in abandoned homeless camps that dot the banks, as well as in piles of debris that collect in floating booms he recently started setting.

     

    He has a collection of several hundred needles in a fishbowl, a prop he uses to illustrate that the problem is real and that towns must do more to combat it.

     

    'We started seeing it last year here and there. But now, it's just raining needles everywhere we go,' said Morrison, a burly, tattooed construction worker whose Clean River Project has six boats working parts of the 117-mile (188-kilometer) river."

    Still, children continue to find, and sometimes accidentally stick themselves with, the discarded needles – it’s another way in which the worsening public-health crisis that is the opioid epidemic disproportionately impacts the young. Some parents in Santa Cruz, Calif. even talk about the first time children find a needle as a rite of passage.

    Among the oldest tracking programs is in Santa Cruz, California, where the community group Take Back Santa Cruz has reported finding more than 14,500 needles in the county over the past 4 1/2 years. It says it has gotten reports of 12 people getting stuck, half of them children.

    "It's become pretty commonplace to find them. We call it a rite of passage for a child to find their first needle," said Gabrielle Korte, a member of the group's needle team. "It's very depressing. It's infuriating. It's just gross."

    Along the Merrimack, nearly three dozen riverfront towns are debating how to stem the flow of needles. Two regional planning commissions are drafting a request for proposals for a cleanup plan. They hope to have it ready by the end of July.

    "We are all trying to get a grip on the problem," said Haverhill Mayor James Fiorentini. "The stuff comes from somewhere. If we can work together to stop it at the source, I am all for it."

    While the crisis’s epicenter is in Ohio and the Rust – opioid-related deaths in Ohio jumped from 296 in 2003 to 2,590 in 2015 – Northeastern states like Massachusetts, New Jersey and even Vermont and New Hampshire have been especially hard hit.

    In Ohio, resources have been spread so thin that one city council member has proposed a controversial solution: When people who dial 911 seeking help for someone who's overdosing on opioids, they may start hearing something new from dispatchers: “No.” Dan Picard, a city councilman in Middletown, Ohio, population 50,000, floated the idea.

    Picard and others have described his proposal as a cry of frustration.

    “It’s not a proposal to solve the drug problem,” Picard said this week. “My proposal is in regard to the financial survivability of our city. If we’re spending $2 million this year and $4 million next year and $6 million after that, we’re in trouble. We’re going to have to start laying off. We're going to have to raise taxes,” he told the Washington Post.

    But as death tolls rise, and local morgues run out of room for more bodies, Picard's proposal begs the question: What, exactly is our plan for dealing with this crisis?

  • Meet DiDi: China's Answer To Uber

    For better or worse, just about everybody has heard of Uber. Over the last few years, the ride-haling company has grown to dominate the market in the U.S. and beyond, currently operating in over 400 cities around the globe – despite significant resistance and outright bans in some places. DiDi, on the other hand, is unlikely to be on your radar. Having bought out Uber’s operations in China last year, the company currently enjoys 95 percent market share in its home country.

    As Statista’s Martin Armstrong notes, the infographic below shows if it were to come to a game of Top Trumps, DiDi wouldn’t be such a bad card to hold.

    Infographic: Meet DiDi: China's Answer to Uber | Statista

    You will find more statistics at Statista

    Founded in 2012, and working on the basis of almost $16 billion worth of funding, it has amassed 38.5 million monthly users (compared to Uber’s 40), is active in around 400 cities and is valued at $50 billion.

    As illustrated in the Statista report ‘The Chinese Passenger Car Market Outlook’, revenue from ride sharing in China is projected to see a CAGR of 32 percent from 2016 to 2021. Likewise, the number of users is expected to grow by 15 percent.

    As Uber begins to falter and face stiffer competition from alternatives like Lyft, it might not be long before DiDi is the biggest ride hailing company in the world.

  • Car-Theft Ring In The Netherlands Has Stolen Nearly A Dozen Teslas

    Earlier this month, Tesla CEO Elon Musk unveiled the firs production model o the Tesla Model 3,  the company’s first sedan marketed toward  broader cohort of working Americans who had presumably balked at the price tag of the company’s older model. Musk sees a truly “mass market” car as insurance against the types of sales declines that briefly sent the company’s shares into bear-market territory about a week and a half ago.

    Musk has said he hopes to go from manufacturing 100,000 cars a year to 500,000 with the launch of the Model 3 – but one has to wonder whether or not this is actually possible. However, some unscrupulous Tesla enthusiasts have aparently decided they don’ feel like waiting around to find out.

    As Jalopnik reports, there have been a rash of Tesla thefts across Europe as thieves, apparently undeterred by the controversy surrounding the company’s autopilot assisted-driving software, are trying to snatch up as many of them as possible.

    It’s unusual to hear about a rash of thefts involving Tesla vehicles—they’re not Hondas after all—but a group of thieves in the Netherlands have managed to steal nearly a dozen of the luxury cars, according to Jalopnik, and no one’s sure why just yet.

    As anyone who’s at least seen the first few seasons of the Sopranos will recognize the tactics of a sophisticated, multinational car-theft ring.

    “Whatever’s happening, reports suggest it’s part of an intricate operation – or it’s simply being handled by thieves who know their shit. The Dutch news site nrc.nl reports that “at least eleven” Tesla vehicles have been recently stolen in the country.

     

    Once they’re lifted, local police reportedly said that the vehicles are dismantled within a couple hours of being purloined. How they’re managing to pull it off is left to speculation, for now. The news site said the most plausible theory is the use of a relay device that can connect to the key and unlock the car door. One Tesla owner reportedly captured a man on film “lingering” around his vehicle with a laptop, before driving away with it.”

    The thefts are occurring as sales of electric vehicles (which include plug-in hybrids) in Q1 of 2017 grew briskly across much of Europe: they rose by 80% Y/Y in eco-friendly Sweden, 78% in Germany, just over 40% in Belgium and grew by roughly 30% across the European Union.

    However, one data point was particularly revelatory, and might speak to the thieves’ motivation for the grand-theft auto spree. Sales in Denmark cratered by over 60% as the local government phased out taxpayer subsidies for electric vehicles. More recently, Tesla stock climbed on Monday as the company miraculously fended off another PR nightmare:  

    On Sunday, the Kandiyohi County Sheriff’s Office in Minneapolis released a statement that said a 2016 Tesla Model S ended up flipped over on its roof after the car sped out of control while its autopilot system was engaged. The accident left all five occupants in the car with minor injuries.

    However, as Jalopnik reported Monday, the driver of the vehicle at the time of the crash has withdrawn his accusation that the software was responsible for the wreck. Musk took to twitter shortly after to defend the driver, claiming the accusation was an honest mistake, but his words did little to ameliorate the 2.5% drop in the company’s shares triggered by the initial reports of the crash. Though the curious timing of his decision to recant almost makes one wonder if there was a vigorous back and forth "settlement" negotiation behind the scenes between the driver, David Clark, and Musk which prompted the former to radically change his story.

    Turning back to the string of thefts, rumors circulated in international media that the company is developing software update to help deter thieves, though Tesla execs appeared unwilling to comment on the matter.

    Jon McNeill, Tesla’s president of sales and service, told nrc.nl that the “method used by the thieves is also used to steal other cars,” but didn’t elaborate.

    Regardless of your feelings about Tesla, we should all hope that the spike in thefts isn’t a harbinger of the economic collapse described by Musk during his speech at the National Governors Association Summer Meeting in Rhode Island. The ultimate irony here would be if the thieves turn out to be displaced industrial workers who lost their jobs as their old factory laid off most of its human workers and switched to a “lights out” format.
     

  • San Francisco's Dirty Little Secret

    It's one of the most racially segregated cities in North America…

    Via Elaine's Idle Mind blog (h/t Climateer Investing),

    Good Zoning Laws Make Good Neighbors

    Three years ago, FT had an article praising Tokyo’s laissez-faire zoning laws. Landowners can build and demolish as they see fit; the rules are set at the national level, so local governments have no say in the matter.

    The article suggests that San Francisco could learn a thing or two from relaxed development rules. Ha. Hahahahaha. Why on earth would San Francisco residents want to liberate housing development??

    In Japan, a housing development is the developer’s business. In San Francisco, it’s everyone’s business. Neighbors appeal building permits based on traffic considerations, shadow effects, environmental impact, historic preservation, and all manner of other stuff.

    Here’s what they really want to preserve:

    The upper blue area is North Beach and Little Italy. The red cluster to the right of that is Chinatown, port of entry for Chinese immigrants during the railroad and Gold Rush years. The red blocks on the west are the second, third, and fourth Chinatowns, formed after 1965. The orange area is the Latino Mission District; the dense blue spot down south is the Jewish retirement community. Source: Dotmap

    San Francisco is culturally diverse, but the diversity is strictly segregated. We call this historical character, and character can only be maintained by keeping outsiders out. Neighborhoods can’t exactly come out and impose cultural segregation, but they can enforce zoning laws. By blocking new buildings and preventing the renovation of old ones, residents ensure that the demographic makeup stays the same year after year.

    When policy initiatives aren’t enough, diversity can be preserved in other ways. In Chinatown, landlords often advertise vacancies only in Chinese newspapers and sites, ensuring that incoming residents are also Chinese. The Mission District promotes gentrification resistance movements such as the Yuppie Eradication Project and Causa Justa, which tracks the number of Latino households displaced by white residents.

    In any other city, we might start slinging the r-word around. Here in San Francisco, it’s a reasonable fear of displacement. I suspect that most of what we call racism today is this same type of fear.

    City residents are right to be scared: The Fillmore District used to be known as the center of West Coast jazz, the Harlem of the West, until it was targeted for redevelopment in the 1960s. Urban renewal destroyed the Fillmore’s low rent housing, forcing tens of thousands of diverse residents out of the neighborhood. The development was widely criticized as a “N…. Removal” project. Today, the Fillmore District is just another place where rich tech workers live.

    The area formerly known as the Harlem of the West

    San Francisco is frequently charged with NIMBYism, in which wealthy landlords are accused of blocking development to uphold property prices. While it’s easy to rip on the landed gentry, low income residents are actually some of the most vocal opponents of new development.

    75 percent of San Francisco’s rental stock is under rent control, and many units are priced so far below market rates that no amount of free market development could keep these tenants in their homes. The locals don’t want to compete with newcomers for business and housing because they know they can’t.

    It’s these charming pockets of xenophobia that have preserved San Francisco’s historical character and made it such a desirable place to live. If SF were to liberate its zoning regulations, it might turn into San Jose.

    Don’t get me wrong; San Jose is a lovely metropolitan area — I practically live there myself. San Jose is an older city with a history that goes back to the 18th century Spanish pueblos, but its historical character has long been displaced by the urban developments that rich hipsters are now trying to shoehorn into San Francisco.

    Site of California’s first pueblo-town in downtown San Jose. We have the Fairmont Hotel, a Sheraton, and the Silicon Valley Capital Club, a private club for rich people.

    So we can either have a bunch of segregated areas with rich cultural history and strict zoning plans, or a culturally dispossessed Frappuccino. It’s worth noting that, despite offering lower rent and easier access to the likes of Facebook and Google, Silicon Valley tech workers would rather not live in San Jose.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Jul 17

Today’s News 17th July 2017

  • The US Deep State: Sabotaging Putin-Trump Ceasefire Agreement In Syria

    Authored by Federico Pieraccini via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    The meeting between Trump and Putin at the G20 in Hamburg injects new hope into the complicated relationship between the United States and Russia. Only time can confirm whether there is any basis for this hope.

    The most eagerly anticipated meeting of the year, that between Putin and Trump, lasted far more than the scheduled 20 minutes, extending past two hours. This is not too much of a surprise given the points of friction that needed to be discussed, the many outstanding issues in international relations, and the fact that this was the first official meeting between the two world leaders. The results achieved exceeded initial ambitions, and the personal chemistry between Putin and Trump seems to have been sufficient to reach an important agreement in Syria as well as to conduct discussions surrounding cyber security. Trump even asked Putin about the alleged Russian hacking in the US presidential election as a way of appeasing detractors back home. The statements of both presidents following their meeting underlined their positive intentions. Putin called Trump a very different person from the one portrayed in the media, mentioning that he was reflective and very attentive to details. Trump, for his part, praised the meeting with Putin, stating the importance of dialogue between nuclear-armed superpowers.

    The most important agreement concerned a ceasefire in southern Syria along the border with Israel and Jordan. This is a very active area of fighting, and so the ceasefire obviates the possibility of dangerous confrontations between the United States and Russia, as well as between Syria and Israel, which could escalate out of control as seen when the US Air Force shot down a Syrian Su-22 jet as well an Iranian drone. Israel, from its position in the occupied Golan Heights, has repeatedly struck the Syrian Arab Army (SAA), in a desperate effort to halt its gains against al Qaeda and Daesh terrorists.

    In their first meeting, within less than two hours, Putin and Trump came to an agreement on potentially the most volatile situation in the region, saving hundreds of civilian lives in the process. The agreement on Syria now has to run the gauntlet of the deep state and all the other interests arrayed against Trump. Just four days following a similar agreement reached in 2016 between Obama and Putin, everything was upended by the US Air Force bombing and killing nearly a hundred soldiers of the Syrian Arab Army in Deir ez-Zor, shredding the ceasefire agreement that had just been reached.

    Trump is dealing with the same occult forces that sabotaged Obama’s ceasefire agreement. It is impossible to know how much strategic support the US deep state has for the ceasefire decision. Ever since the SAA reached the Iraqi border north of al-Tanf, the space available for the US and her allies to maneuver has been dramatically diminished. With al-Tanf isolated, Washington's ceasefire does not change or shift the already heavily altered balance of power in that area of Syria. For all these reasons, the ceasefire does not appear to be a concession by either party but merely a commonsense move to lessen the possibility of a direct confrontation between super-powers.

    The military apparatus seems to be focused on the situation in northern Syria, with Raqqa and Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) being the central pivot for the US to reach Deir ez-Zor and its associated oilfields. The US State Department, as well as the US military wing involved in Syria, hope to balkanize Syria, dismembering it in different regions and putting Raqqa under the control of a puppet authority in Damascus. However, such American hopes of imposing a Brennan-style governorate as in Iraq is forlorn, as Damascus is the only authority recognized on Syrian territory, and once Raqqa is filled with returning Syrian citizens, such American plans will fall apart. Moreover, the Baghdad authorities have already made clear on two occasions how reluctant they are to support Americans in their military operations. In the case of Mosul, they reiterated that the US deployment and involvement be minimal, while the Iraqi authorities have already announced that they want to place under their full control their border with Syria, in effect hobbling Washington’s plan to leave chaos and instability along the borders of the two countries. The US deep state finds in chaos the ideal way to channel conflict and foment instability. One of the most important objectives of the Syrian and Iraqi armies is therefore to isolate the borders and control the flow of human traffic from one country to the other, nixing in the process what has hitherto been a strategic advantage for Daesh and other terrorist organizations, where they have been free to cross borders with weapons and whatever else they please.

    Trump and all the actors involved in this negotiation are finally able to make an agreement between Moscow and Washington stand. Unlike with previous agreements, the US in Syria is now in a worse situation than it was 12 months ago, having failed to achieve many of its strategic objectives. Cooperation with Turkey in northern Syria was wrecked following the liberation of Aleppo and the clear US support for the Kurds (SDF). Similarly, areas of deconfliction in Syria agreed to in Astana (between Iran, Russia and Turkey) have stopped the gains of terrorists in many active areas of the conflict, leading to zero chances of occupying more towns. Such efforts have been important bargaining chips during the various peace negotiations.

    The crux of this strategy seems to be a focus on the only possible solution that meets the interests of the deep state’s military wing, related to the original plan to dismantle Syria once the removal of Assad failed. From a certain point of view, it may make sense to focus on the situation in the north of the country in Raqqa, the only area where the US still has some influence. This may be the contorted vision drawn up by contending factions of American deep state. Certainly from the point of view of Moscow, the strategy in Syria is a mix of diplomatic solutions, seeking to reach multiple ceasefire agreements with major players like Turkey and the United States, but never setting aside the war effort carried out by Russia, Iran and Syria.

    The agreement between Putin and Trump will firstly benefit Syrian civilians as well as widening the opportunity for the SAA to liberate more towns and villages from the grip of terrorism. It is a long-awaited agreement and solution that is now met by the predominant wing of the US deep state. In the event of a failure of the agreement, Trump will be obligated to point out to the world the subversion of the Washington establishment and its deep state, which works to frustrate his agenda and replace it with its own terrible policies.

    Moscow's confidence in deriving concrete benefits from this deal increases hour by hour, thanks to the truce continuing to hold. From the Russian point of view, any military sabotage would once again lay American intentions bare, regardless of Trump's subsequent moves. However, one thing that is certain is that in the case of sabotage, Trump will be faced with having to make a definitive choice.

    • Either he will surrender to the deep state, returning the situation back to a state of hyper-conflict with a nuclear superpower; or
    • he will confront and overcome the deep state, thereby enabling him to implement his electoral promises.

  • Elon Musk's Worst Nightmare – Russian AK-47 Maker Builds Fully-Automated "Killer Robot"

    Authored by Joseph Jankowski via PlanetFreeWill.com,

    The debate over the role robots will play in the future of warfare is one that is taking place right now as the development of automated lethal technology is truly beginning to take shape. Predator drone style combat machines are just the tip of the iceberg for what is to come down the line of lethal weaponry and some are worried that when robots are calling the shots, things could get a little out of hand.

    Recently there has been some debate at the U.N. about “killer robots,” with prominent scientists, researchers, and Human rights organizations all warning that this type of technology – lethal tech. that divorces the need for human control – could cause a slew of unintended consequence to the detriment of humanity.

    A study conducted the University of British Columbia shows that this type of terminator-like weaponry isn’t sitting well with the general public, as an overwhelming majority of people, regardless of country or culture, want a complete ban placed upon any further development of these autonomous systems of war.

    Despite the warnings of risk and concern, this is not stopping arms manufacturers from taking warfare into the twilight zone and bringing the futuristic battlefield scenario where A.I. robots and human are fighting with each other, side by side, closer to everyday reality.

    Kalashnikov, the maker of the iconic AK-47, is one of those manufacturers bringing lethal automation and robotics into the present-day as it is currently building a range of products based on neural networks,’ including a fully automated combat module’ that can identify and shoot at its targets.

    Defense One is reporting:

    The maker of the famous AK-47 rifle is building “a range of products based on neural networks,” including a “fully automated combat module” that can identify and shoot at its targets. That’s what Kalashnikov spokeswoman Sofiya Ivanova told TASS, a Russian government information agency last week. It’s the latest illustration of how the U.S. and Russia differ as they develop artificial intelligence and robotics for warfare.

     

    The Kalashnikov “combat module” will consist of a gun connected to a console that constantly crunches image data “to identify targets and make decisions,” Ivanova told TASS. A Kalashnikov photo that ran with the TASS piece showed a turret-mounted weapon that appeared to fire rounds of 25mm or so.

    Defense One points out that in 2012 then-Deputy Defense Secretary Ash Carter signed a directive forbidding the U.S. to allow any robot or machine to take lethal action without the supervision of a human operator.

    Then in 2015, then-Deputy Defense Secretary Bob Work said fully automated killing machines were un-American.

    “I will make a hypothesis: that authoritarian regimes who believe people are weaknesses,” Work said, “that they cannot be trusted, they will naturally gravitate toward totally automated solutions. Why do I know that? Because that is exactly the way the Soviets conceived of their reconnaissance strike complex. It was going to be completely automated. We believe that the advantage we have as we start this competition is our people.”

    According to Sergey Denisentsev, a visiting fellow at the Center For Strategic International Studies, Russian weapons makers see robotics and the artificial intelligence driving them as key to future sales to war makers.

    “There is a need to look for new market niches such as electronic warfare systems, small submarines, and robots, but that will require strong promotional effort because a new technology sometimes finds it hard to find a buyer and to convince the buyer that he really needs it, ” Denisentsev said earlier this year.

    With my previous reporting dealing with robotics and war, I always point out the incredible advances made by Softbank owned Boston Dynamics in the field of A.I., using it as an example of what future warfare could (or most likely will) look like it. And to be honest, it really is nightmarish.

    The bottom line is war is a racket. Killing for political reasons is always disastrous. So the fact that governments are on the verge of possessing this terminator technology should send chills down everyone’s spine.

    H/T Nicholas West of ActivistPost.com

  • Feds Say Condo Involved In NYC's Largest Foreclosure Tied To Nigerian Corruption Case

    New York City real estate, particularly the luxury market, is a popular refugee for world’s corrupt, self-dealing public servants and the crooked businessmen who bribe them. China cracked down on wealthy citizens seeking to stash their wealth in international real estate by adding several deterrents to its capital controls earlier this year (Among them, Chinese investors moving money out of the country must now sign a pledge saying it won’t be used to buy real estate, or investment securities). Shortly after, the New York real-estate – literally half a world away – was rattled by a crush of stalled deals.  

    So, it’s unsurprising that the mystery behind the largest residential foreclosure auction in NYC history would have this kind of sordid backstory. Last month, we met Kola Aluko, a Nigerian oil magnate and the purported owner of One57’s Apartment 79, a $50 million apartment that will be sold next week in what appears to be the largest foreclosure auction in New York City history.

    And now the US government has added a new twist: In a lawsuit filed Friday in Houston by the Justice Department’s Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative, the Feds are seeking to recover $144 million in assets, including proceeds from a luxury condominium on Manhattan’s Billionaires’ Row in New York, which prosecutors claim were spoils from bribes paid for Nigerian oil contracts, according to Bloomberg.

    The targets of the suit were none other than Aluko and another Nigerian businessman, Olajide Omokore. However, judging by the government’s price tag, Aluko’s assets – including the One57 condo and Aluko’s $80 million yacht, 213-feet (65 meters) luxury yacht the Galactica Star – appear to be the focus of the suit. In the past, Aluko would frequently rent out his yacht to his friends. In 2015, Jay-Z and Beyonce rented it for the bargain-basement price of $900,000 per week to sail around the Mediterrainean.

    The Justice Department alleges that two Nigerian businessmen made corrupt payments to a Nigerian official who oversaw the country’s state-owned oil company in exchange for contracts, according to Bloomberg. The official used her influence to direct contracts to two of their shell companies — Atlantic Energy Drilling Concepts Nigeria Ltd. and Atlantic Energy Brass Development Ltd. — through a subsidiary of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corp, according to the complaint. The companies failed to abide by the terms the contracts, yet were permitted to sell more than $1.5 billion worth of Nigerian crude oil, the U.S. alleges. They then laundered the money through the US.

    "Corrupt foreign officials and business executives should make no mistake: if illicit funds are within the reach of the United States, we will seek to forfeit them and to return them to the victims from whom they were stolen," Acting Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Blanco said in a statement.

    The Justice Department’s recovery lawsuit comes just days before Aluko’s penthouse at One57, one of Manhattan’s most expensive buildings, is scheduled to be sold at a foreclosure auction forced by his mortgage lender, the Luxembourg-based Banque Havilland SA, which said in court filings earlier this year that he failed to pay back the full loan amount in September.

    As we’ve previously noted, Aluko took out an 'unusually large' ($35.3 million) mortgage with an even more unusual term: one-year.

    Aluko’s condo is a full-floor, 6,240-square-foot (580-square-meter) penthouse that was the eighth-priciest sold in the building located at 157 W. 57th Street, just across the street from Carnegie Hall, according to real estate data firm PropertyShark.

    Now of course one lawsuit doesn’t necessarily prove that a market is infested with criminality, but the opaque nature of real-estate transactions, and the ease with which buyers and sellers can conceal their true identities behind LLCs, make buying real estate in a market like NYC an attractive option for any would-be money launderer.

    And while one foreclosure certainly doesn’t signal that the market is collapsing, there are other more worrying trends in NYC luxury real estate. As we’ve previously noted, buildings like One57 are struggling with unsustainable vacancy rates. To wit: Nearly 40% of apartments in one comparable building remained on the market years after it had opened.

    As Bloomberg points out, One57, along with a cluster of ultra-high end luxury buildings around Central Park collectively known as “Billionaire’s Row,” has become a symbol of New York’s luxury-development boom — and eventual slowdown. The tower, which broke ground in 2009, drew investors willing to pay large sums for lavish residences they rarely lived in, inspiring other developers to build similar offerings, creating an effective “Billionaires' Row” along West 57th Street. One57 still holds the record for the most-expensive residential sale in New York in December 2014 at $100.5 million.

    The bribes were paid between 2011 and 2015 to Diezani Alison-Madueke, then Nigeria’s minister for petroleum resources, according to the complaint. The defendants are accused of spending millions to fund a lavish lifestyle for Alison-Madueke. They acquired real estate in London that was used by the minister and her family, and bought her more than $1 million of furniture and artwork from several stores in Houston, Texas, the complaint said.

    We wonder: In what tony neigborhood is her apartment?
     

  • Is Russiagate Really Hillarygate?

    Authored by Paul Roderick Gregory via Forbes.com,

    According to an insider account, the Clinton team, put together the Russia Gate narrative within 24 hours of her defeat. The Clinton account explained that Russian hacking and election meddling caused her unexpected loss. Her opponent, Donald Trump, was a puppet of Putin. Trump, they said, “encourages espionage against our people.” The scurrilous Trump dossier, prepared by a London opposition research firm, Orbis, and paid for by unidentified Democrat donors, formed a key part of the Clinton narrative: Trump’s sexual and business escapades in Russia had made him a hostage of the Kremlin, ready to do its bidding. That was Hillary's way to say that Trump is really not President of the United States—a siren call adopted by the Democratic party and media.

    Hillary and the Orbis Dossier

    The most under-covered story of Russia Gate is the interconnection between the Clinton campaign, an unregistered foreign agent of Russia headquartered in DC (Fusion GPS), and the Christopher Steele Orbis dossier. This connection has raised the question of whether Kremlin prepared the dossier as part of a disinformation campaign to sow chaos in the US political system. If ordered and paid for by Hillary Clinton associates, Russia Gate is turned on its head as collusion between Clinton operatives (not Trump’s) and Russian intelligence. Russia Gate becomes Hillary Gate.

    Neither the New York Times, Washington Post, nor CNN has covered this explosive story. Two op-eds have appeared in the Wall Street Journal  (Holman Jenkins and David Satter). The possible Russian-intelligence origins of the Steele dossier have been raised only in conservative publications, such as in The Federalist and National Review.

    The Fusion story has been known since Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) sent a heavily-footnoted letter to the Justice Department on March 31, 2017 demanding for his Judiciary Committee all relevant documents on Fusion GPS, the company that managed the Steele dossier against then-candidate Donald Trump. Grassley writes to justify his demand for documents that: “The issue is of particular concern to the Committee given that when Fusion GPS reportedly was acting as an unregistered agent of Russian interests, it appears to have been simultaneously overseeing the creation of the unsubstantiated dossier of allegations of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians.” (Emphasis added.)

    Former FBI director, James Comey, refused to answer questions about Fusion and the Steele dossier in his May 3 testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee. Comey responded to Lindsey Graham’s questions about Fusion GPS’s involvement “in preparing a dossier against Donald Trump that would be interfering in our election by the Russians?” with “I don’t want to say.” Perhaps he will be called on to answer in a forum where he cannot refuse to answer.

    The role of Fusion GPS and one of its key associates, a former Soviet intelligence officer, must raise the question as to whether the Steele dossier, which was orchestrated by a suspected unregistered agent of Russia, was a plant by Russian intelligence to harm Donald Trump?

    David Satter, one of our top experts on Russia and himself expelled by the Kremlin, writes:

    Perhaps most important, Russian intelligence also acted to sabotage Mr. Trump. The ‘Trump dossier, full of unverified sexual and political allegations, was published in January by BuzzFeed, despite having all the hallmarks of Russian spy agency ‘creativity.’ The dossier was prepared by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer. It employed standard Russian techniques of disinformation and manipulation.

    Much of the credibility of the Orbis dossier hinges on Steele’s reputation as a former M15 intelligence agent. Satter writes, however, that “after the publication of the Trump dossier, Mr. Steele went into hiding, supposedly in fear for his life. On March 15, however, Michael Morell, the former acting CIA director, told NBC that Mr. Steele had paid the Russian intelligence sources who provided the information and never met with them directly. In other words, his sources were not only working for pay. Furthermore, Mr. Steele had no way to judge the veracity of their claims.”

    If Steele disappeared for fear of his life, we must suspect that he feared murder by Russian agents. The only secret he might have had to warrant such a drastic Russian action would be knowledge that Russian intelligence prepared the dossier.

    According to a Vanity Fair article, Fusion GPS was first funded by an anti-Trump Republican donor, but, after Trump’s nomination, Fusion and Steele were paid by Democratic donors whose identity remains secret. Writes Satter: “Perhaps the time has come to expand the investigation into Russia’s meddling to include Mrs. Clinton’s campaign as well.”

    As someone who has read every word of the Steele Trump dossier and has studied the Soviet Union/Russia for almost a half century, I can say that the Steele dossier consists of raw intelligence from informants identified by capital letters, who claim (improbably) to have access to the highest levels of the Kremlin. The dossier was not, as the press reports, written by Steele. No matter how experienced (or gullible) Steele might be, there is no way for him to know whether his sources are clandestine Russian intelligence agents.

    In Stalin's day, some of the most valued KGB (NKVD) agents were called "novelists," for their ability to conjure up fictional plots and improbable tales to use against their enemies. Some of Steele's sources claim detailed knowledge of the deepest Kremlin secrets, such as Putin's personal control of Clinton emails or negotiations with Putin's head of the national oil company. If they truly had such knowledge, why would they "sell" it to Steele? The most likely explanation is that the Steele dossier is the work of Russian intelligence "novelists" charged by the Kremlin with defaming Trump and adding chaos to the American political system.

    Mueller’s Difficult Task

    While leaks from within the investigation focus on possible obstruction of justice, Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s writ – to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election – requires him to consider “matters” that Dems would prefer be left alone.

    Special Counsel Mueller has been given a broad charge and no deadline — a formula for trouble. He is supposed to “investigate Russia’s intervention in the 2016 election.” Given the many accounts of Russian contacts of Trump campaign officials and hangers-on, Mueller must follow these leads, which apparently have lead nowhere over a nine month investigation as reported even by Trump unfriendly sources like CNN. Mueller, therefore, should not require much time to rule out coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia state actors. Mueller must be careful to avoid detours into loosely related issue by scalp-hunting investigators. Mueller also must shut down leaks from within his office, if he wishes his reports to be credible to the American people.

    Mueller must also conduct an investigation which is perceived as fair to both sides. On the Clinton/Democratic side, there are a number of unanswered questions related to Russian electoral intervention. Among them is the question of whether the “wiped clean” Clinton e-mails are in Russian hands (as asserted by the Steele dossier), whether  the tarmac meeting of Bill Clinton and the Attorney General quashed the investigation of Hillary’s e-mails, and whether the  Clintons and Russian uranium interests engaged in quid pro quo and “pay to play” operations. 

    The most important unanswered question is whether the Clinton campaign funded the Orbis Trump smear campaign and did they understand the campaign could be conducted by Russian intelligence?

    Mueller must question Steele himself on his sources and some of the sources themselves, investigate whether they could be Russian intelligence agents, and determine the role of Clinton donors and campaign officials in the funding of the anti-Trump dossier.

    The Fusion-Steele matter is explosive because it suggests that Russia’s most damaging intervention in the 2016 campaign may have been its creation of the Steele Dossier, remarkably paid for by the Clinton campaign! If so, the Clinton campaign (not Trump) was the prime sponsor of Russia’s intervention in the 2016 election.

  • China Delivers "Surprisingly" Great Economic Data Across The Board, Yuan Yawns

    Following more dismal data from the US, hope for global growth remains in China and they did not disappoint. Despite slumping macro data, a major slowdown in real estate, and the nation's deleveraging efforts in the last three months, GDP beat, Retail Sales beat, Industrial Production surged, and even fixed asset investment was above expectations. The Yuan hasn't moved.

    For the last three months, Chinese data has been disappointing, along with US, as the collapsing credit impulse leaks into reality…

    But exports and consumer spending have been pillars for the economy over the second quarter, offsetting the curb on leverage, and tonight's data shows that none of that matters.. because the deleveraging economy beat across the board

    • China GDP BEAT 6.9% (exp +6.8%, prior +6.9%)
    • China Retail Sales BEAT 11.0% (exp +10.6%, prior +10.7%)
    • China Fixed Asset Investment BEAT 8.6% (exp +8.5%, prior +8.6%)
    • China Industrial Production BEAT 7.6% (exp +6.5%, prior +6.5%)

    As the charts below show, more of the same well-managed data to show that all is well enough that hope remains…Strong growth again reflects an economy awash in credit, foretold in the latest new yuan loans (1.54 trillion yuan) and aggregate social financing (1.78 trillion yuan).

    Enda Curran, Bloomberg's Chief Asia Economics Correspondent, notes that at first glance there's not a lot for the bears in these numbers given they appear strong across the board. The backdrop though continues to be one of cheap credit and mounting risks. That's an issue policy makers say they are aware of but for now, it seems like growth above all else is key.

    Iris Pang, greater China economist at ING Bank in Hong Kong:

    "Higher than expected GDP growth comes from strong industrial production. That said, the gap between FAI growth and industrial production growth tells the story that it is consumption and export driven growth."

    Julian Evans-Pritchard, China economist at Capital Economics, said the strength seen in the data seems unlikely to last:

    "The recent crackdown on financial risks has driven a slowdown in credit growth, which will weigh on the economy during the second half of this year.

     

    "What’s more, the National Financial Work Conference that concluded over the weekend has signaled that further regulatory tightening remains on the horizon."

    We wonder how long before the lagged response to the credit impulse collapse hits GDP... (NOTE the weaker and weaker reactions in GDP to credit impulse surges)

     

    The reaction in Yuan is underwhelming for now… (after its biggest weekly gain since March)

     

    China's stock market ripped back higher (after an early plunge) ahead of China's data dump, and held those gains as the data hit (we wonder if someone got wind of the data a little early?).

    As a reminder, Japan is closed for a holiday so we are not getting the usual juice from BoJ shenanigans on any move.

  • The Future Of Artificial Intelligence: Why The Hype Has Outrun Reality

    Via Knowledge@Wharton,

    Robots that serve dinner, self-driving cars and drone-taxis could be fun and hugely profitable. But don’t hold your breath. They are likely much further off than the hype suggests.

    A panel of experts at the recent 2017 Wharton Global Forum in Hong Kong outlined their views on the future for artificial intelligence (AI), robots, drones, other tech advances and how it all might affect employment in the future. The upshot was to deflate some of the hype, while noting the threats ahead posed to certain jobs.

    Their comments came in a panel session titled, “Engineering the Future of Business,” with Wharton Dean Geoffrey Garrett moderating and speakers Pascale Fung, a professor of electronic and computer engineering at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology; Vijay Kumar, dean of engineering at the University of Pennsylvania, and Nicolas Aguzin, Asian-Pacific chairman and CEO for J.P.Morgan.

    Kicking things off, Garrett asked: How big and disruptive is the self-driving car movement?

    It turns out that so much of what appears in mainstream media about self-driving cars being just around the corner is very much overstated, said Kumar. Fully autonomous cars are many years away, in his view.

    One of Kumar’s key points: Often there are two sides to high-tech advancements. One side gets a lot of media attention — advances in computing power, software and the like. Here, progress is quick — new apps, new companies and new products sprout up daily. However, the other, often-overlooked side deeply affects many projects — those where the virtual world must connect with the physical or mechanical world in new ways, noted Kumar, who is also a professor of mechanical engineering at Penn. Progress in that realm comes more slowly.

    At some point, all of that software in autonomous cars meets a hard pavement. In that world, as with other robot applications, progress comes by moving from “data to information to knowledge.” A fundamental problem is that most observers do not realize just how vast an amount of data is needed to operate in the physical world — ever-increasing amounts, or, as Kumar calls it — “exponential” amounts. While it’s understood today that “big data” is important, the amounts required for many physical operations are far larger than “big data” implies. The limitations on acquiring such vast amounts of data severely throttle back the speed of advancement for many kinds of projects, he suggested.

    In other words, many optimistic articles about autonomous vehicles overlook the fact that it will take many years to get enough data to make fully self-driving cars work at a large scale — not just a couple of years.

    Getting enough data to be 90% accurate “is difficult enough,” noted Kumar. Some object-recognition software today “is 90% accurate, you go to Facebook, there are just so many faces — [but there is] 90% accuracy” in identification. Still, even at 90% “your computer-vision colleagues would tell you ‘that’s dumb’…. But to get from 90% accuracy to 99% accuracy requires a lot more data” — exponentially more data. “And then to get from 99% accuracy to 99.9% accuracy, guess what? That needs even more data.” He compares the exponentially rising data needs to a graph that resembles a hockey stick, with a sudden, sharply rising slope. The problem when it comes to autonomous vehicles, as other analysts have noted, is that 90% or even 99% accuracy is simply not good enough when human lives are at stake.

    Exponentially More Data

    “To have exponentially more data to get all of the … cases right, is extremely hard,” Kumar said. “And that’s why I think self-driving cars, which involve taking actions based on data, are extremely hard [to perfect]…. “Yes, it’s a great concept, and yes, we’re making major strides, but … to solve it to the point that we feel absolutely comfortable — it will take a long time.”

    So why is one left with the impression from reading mainstream media that self-driving cars are just around the corner?

    To explain his view of what is happening in the media, Kumar cited remarks by former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan, who famously said there was “irrational exuberance” in the stock market not long before the crash of the huge tech stock bubble in the early 2000s. Kumar suggested a similar kind of exaggeration is true for today for self-driving cars. “That’s where the irrational exuberance comes in. It’s a technology that is almost there, but it’s going to take a long time to finally assimilate.”

    “To have electric power and motors and batteries to power drones that can lift people in the air — I think this is a pipe dream.”–Vijay Kumar

    Garrett pointed out that Tesla head Elon Musk claims all of the technology to allow new cars to drive themselves already exists (though not necessarily without a human aboard to take over in an emergency) and that the main problem is “human acceptance of the technology.”

    Kumar said he could not disagree more. “Elon Musk will also tell you that batteries are improving and getting better and better. Actually, it’s the same battery that existed five or 10 years ago.” What is different is that batteries have become smaller and less expensive, “because more of us are buying batteries. But fundamentally it’s the same thing.”

    Progress has been slow elsewhere, too. In the “physical domain,” Kumar explained, not much has changed when it comes to energy and power, either. “You look at electric motors, it’s World War II technology. So, on the physical side we are not making the same progress we are on the information side. And guess what? In the U.S., 2% of all of electricity consumption is through data centers. If you really want that much more data, if you want to confront the hockey stick, you are going to burn a lot of power just getting the data centers to work. I think at some point it gets harder and harder and harder….”

    Similar constraints apply to drone technology he said. “Here’s a simple fact. To fly a drone requires about 200 watts per kilo. So, if you want to lift a 75-kilo individual into the air, that’s a lot of power. Where are you going to get the batteries to do that?” The only power source with enough “power density” to lift such heavy payloads is fossil fuels. “You could get small jet turbines to power drones. But to have electric power and motors and batteries to power drones that can lift people in the air — I think this is a pipe dream.”

    That is not to say one “can’t do interesting things with drones, but whatever you do — you have to think of payloads that are commensurate what you want to do.”

    In other areas, like electric cars, progress is moving along smartly and Kumar says there is lots of potential. “The Chinese have shown that, they are leading the world. The number of electric cars in China on an annual basis that are being produced is three times that of the U.S…. I do think electric cars are here to stay, but I’m not so sure about drones using electric power.”

    Picking up on Kumar’s theme, Fung, who also helps run the Human Language Technology Center at her university, outlined some of the limits of artificial intelligence (AI) in the foreseeable future, where again the hype often outruns reality. While AI may perform many impressive and valuable tasks, once again physical limitations remain almost fixed.

    “… A deep-learning algorithm that than can do just speech recognition, which is translating what you are saying, has to be trained on millions of hours of data “and uses huge data farms,” Fung noted. And while a deep-learning network might have hundreds of thousands of neurons, the human brain has trillions. Humans, for the time being, are much more energy-efficient. They can work “all day on a tiny slice of pizza,” she joked.

    “The jobs safest from robot replacement will be those at the top and the bottom, not those in the middle.”–Vijay Kumar

    The Human Brain Conundrum

    This led to the panelists to note a second underappreciated divide: the scope of projects that AI can currently master. Kumar pointed out that tasks like translation are relatively narrow. We have “figured out how to go from data to information to some extent, though … with deep learning it’s very hard even to do that. To go from information to knowledge? We have no clue. We don’t know how the human brain works…. It’s going to be a long time before we build machines with the kind of intelligence we associate with humans.”

    Not long ago, Kumar noted, IBM’s supercomputer Watson could not even play tic tac toe with a five-year-old. Now it beats humans at Jeopardy!. But that speedy progress can blind us to the fact that computers today can best handle only narrow tasks or “point solutions. When you look at generalizing across the many things that humans do — that’s very hard to do.”

    Still, the stage is being set for bigger things down the road. To date, getting those narrow tasks that have been automated have required humans to “learn how to communicate with machines,” and not always successfully, as frustration with call centers and often Apple’s Siri suggests, noted Fung.

    Today, the effort is to reverse the teacher and pupil relationship so that, instead, machines begin to learn to communicate with humans. The “research and development, and application of AI algorithms and machines that will work for us,” cater to us, is underway, Fung said. “They will understand our meaning, our emotion, our personality, our affect and all that.” The goal is for AI to account for the “different layers” of human-to-human communication.

    “We look at each other, we engage each other’s emotion and intent,” said Fung, who is among the leaders worldwide in efforts to make machines communicate better with humans. “We use body language. It’s not just words. “That’s why we prefer face-to-face meetings, and we prefer even Skype to just talking on the phone.”

    Fung referenced an article she wrote for Scientific American, about the need to teach robots to understand and mimic human emotion. “Basically, it is making machines that understand our feelings and intent, more than just what we say, and respond to us in a more human way.”

    Such “affective computing” means machines will ultimately show “affect recognition” picked up from our voices, texts, facial expressions and body language. Future “human-robot communication must have that layer of communication.” But capturing intent as well as emotion is an extremely difficult challenge, Fung added. “Natural language is very hard to understand by machines — and by humans. We often misunderstand each other.”

    So where might all this lead when it comes to the future of jobs?

    Machines Are Still ‘Dumb’

    “In the near future, no one needs to worry because machines are pretty dumb….” Kumar said. As an example, Fung explained that she could make a robot today capable of doing some simple household chores, but, “it’s still cheaper for me to do it, or to teach my kids or my husband to do it. So, for the near future there are tons of jobs where it would be too expensive to replace them with machines. Fifty to 100 years from now, that’s likely to change, just as today’s world is different from 50 years ago.”

    But even as new tech arrives it is not always clear what the effect will be ultimately. For example, after the banking industry first introduced automatic teller machines [ATMs], instead of having fewer tellers “we had more tellers,” noted Aguzin. ATMs made it “cheaper to have a branch, and then we had more branches, and therefore we had more tellers in the end.”

    “With blockchain technology, eventually the cost of doing a transaction will be ‘like sending an email, like zero.’ Imagine applying that to trade finance.”–Nicolas Aguzin

    On the other hand, introducing blockchain technology as a ledger system into banking will likely eliminate the need for a third-party to double-check the accounting. Anything requiring reconciliation can be done instantly, with no need for confirmation, Aguzin added. Eventually the cost of doing a transaction will be “like sending an email, it will be like zero … without any possibility of confusion, there’s no cost. Imagine if you apply that to trade finance, etc.”

    Already, Aguzin’s bank is about to automate 1.7 million processes this year currently being done manually. “And those are not the lowest-level, manual types of jobs — it’s somewhere in the middle.” In an early foray in affective computing, his bank is working on software that will be able to sense what a client is feeling and their purpose when they call in for service. “It’s not perfect yet, but you can get a pretty good sense of how they are feeling, whether they want to complain or are they just going to check a balance? Are they going to do x, y — so you save a lot of time.”

    Still, said he remains confident that new jobs will be created in the wake of new technologies, as was the case following ATMs. His view about the future of jobs and automation is not as “catastrophic” as some analysts’. “I am a bit concerned about the speed of change, which may cause us to be careful, but … there will be new things coming out. I tend to have a bit more positive view of the future.”

    Fung reminded the audience that that even in fintech, progress will be throttled by the available data. “In certain areas, you have a lot of data, in others you don’t.” Financial executives have told Fung that they have huge databases, but in her experience, it often is not nearly large enough to accomplish many of their goals.

    Kumar concedes that today we are creating more jobs for robots than humans, a cause for concern for the future of jobs for humans. But he also calls himself a “pathological optimist” on the jobs issue. AI and robotics will work best in “applications where they work with humans.” Echoing Fung, he added that “it’s going to take a long time before we build machines with the kind of intelligence associated with humans. When it comes to going from “information to knowledge, we have no clue. We don’t know how the human brain works.”

    Security at the Top — and Bottom

    Picking up on Fung’s point that many lower-skill level jobs likely will be preserved, Kumar added that the jobs most likely to be eliminated could surprise people. “What is the one thing that computers are really good at? They are good at taking exams. So, this expectation of, oh, I got a 4.0 from this very well-known university, I will have a job in the future — this is not true.” At the same time, for robots “cleaning up a room after your three-year old is just very, very hard. Serving dinner is very, very hard. Cleaning up after dinner is even harder. I think those jobs are secure.”

    The panel’s consensus: The jobs safest from robot replacement will be those at the top and the bottom, not those in the middle.

    What about many years down the road, when robots become advanced enough and cheap enough to take over more and more human activities. What’s to become of human work?

    “You will still want to read a novel written by a human even though it’s no different from a novel written by a machine someday. You still appreciate that human touch.”–Pascale Fung

    For one thing, Fung said, there will be a lot more AI engineers “and people who have to regulate machines, maintain machines, and somehow design them until the machines can reproduce themselves.”

    But also, many jobs will begin to adapt to the new world. Suppose, for example, at some point in the distant future many restaurants have robot servers and waiters. People will “pay a lot more money to go to a restaurant where the chef is a human and the waiter is a human,” Fung said “So human labor would then become very valuable.”

    She added that many people might “become artists and chefs, and performing artists, because you still want to listen to a concert performed by humans, don’t you, rather than just robots playing a concerto for you. And you will still want to read a novel written by a human even though it’s no different from a novel written by a machine someday. You still appreciate that human touch.”

    What’s more, creativity already is becoming increasingly important, Fung notes. So, it’s not whether AI engineers or business people will be calling the shots in the future. “It’s really creative people versus non-creative people. There is more and more demand for creative people.” Already, it appears more difficult for engineering students “to compete with the best compared to the old days.”

    In the past, for engineers, a good academic record guaranteed a good job. Today, tech companies interview applicants in “so many different areas,” Fung added. They look beyond technical skills. They look for creativity. “I think the engineers have to learn more non-engineering skills, and then the non-engineers will be learning more of the engineering skills, including scientific thinking, including some coding….”

    Kumar agrees. Today, all Penn engineering students take business courses. “The idea of a well-rounded graduate, the idea of liberal education today, I think includes engineering and includes business, right? The thing I worry about is what happens to the anthropologist, the English majors, the history majors … I think those disciplines will come under a lot of pressure.”

  • CNN Caught Faking News Again: Now It's The UAE, Not Russia, Who "Hacked" Qatar

    Just over a month ago, we expressed amazement at just how sophisticated, efficient and pervasive the ‘Russian hacking’ community had become after CNN reported – citing unnamed government officials of course – that they had managed to hack into a Qatari News Agency and post a ‘fake’ news story all in an attempt to drive a wedge between the U.S., Qatar and some of it’s Gulf Arab neighbors, one which culminated – at least according to the CNN narrative – with the Qatari crisis in which an alliance of Arab states led by Saudi Arabia isolated and blockaded the nat gas rich nation.

    The CNN headline made it quite clear: ignore the Arab conflict and please focus on the only thing that matters these days: Russia. Just in case it is somehow lost, we will have it here for posterity.

    Think about that for a minute: set aside the logistics of the actual hacking event itself and consider just how good the Russians had to be to know exactly what news story needed to be planted inside the Qatari news agency to provoke an immediate severing of diplomatic ties by numerous Arab neighboring states: it truly was amazing how it all played out exactly the way the Russians planned. The conclusion: those wily ‘Russian hackers’ are certainly not a bunch of amateurs, would come in useful as the Russian hacking narrative just refused to go away.

    And while that may sound like a joke, at least to CNN it wasn’t.  Here are the details, as they were previously reported by CNN:

    The FBI recently sent a team of investigators to Doha to help the Qatari government investigate the alleged hacking incident, Qatari and US government officials say.

     

    Intelligence gathered by the US security agencies indicates that Russian hackers were behind the intrusion first reported by the Qatari government two weeks ago, US officials say. Qatar hosts one of the largest US military bases in the region.

     

    The alleged involvement of Russian hackers intensifies concerns by US intelligence and law enforcement agencies that Russia continues to try some of the same cyber-hacking measures on US allies that intelligence agencies believe it used to meddle in the 2016 elections.

     

    The Russian goal appears to be to cause rifts among the US and its allies. In recent months, suspected Russian cyber activities, including the use of fake news stories, have turned up amid elections in France, Germany and other countries.

    As it turns out, it’s somewhat ironic that CNN accused Russia of spreading “fake news stories” that “have turned up amid elections in France, Germany and other countries” because, as CNN’s ideological twins over at the WaPo blasted moments ago, it wasn’t Russia at all (now that the hacking narrative has found a renewed vigor in the US, courtesy of the leaked Trump Jr. emails) but – wait for it – the UAE, i.e. not Russia.  Compare the CNN headline above from June 6 with what the WaPo has just published:

    Here is the “latest” official narrative, at least according to the “U.S. intelligence and other officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter” quoted by WaPo, who may or may not be the same ones who planted the original fake news at CNN:

    The United Arab Emirates orchestrated the hacking of Qatari government news and social media sites in order to post incendiary false quotes attributed to Qatar’s emir, Sheikh Tamim Bin Hamad al-Thani, in late May that sparked the ongoing upheaval between Qatar and its neighbors, according to U.S. intelligence officials.

     

    Officials became aware last week that newly analyzed information gathered by U.S. intelligence agencies confirmed that on May 23, senior members of the UAE government discussed the plan and its implementation. The officials said it remains unclear whether the UAE carried out the hacks itself or contracted to have them done. The false reports said that the emir, among other things, had called Iran an “Islamic power” and praised Hamas.

    But… wait: didn’t US intelligence agencies just one month ago say it was all Russia’s fault? Looks like it took just one month for the CIA to change its mind. We wonder if and when it will the same to its “conclusion” confirmed by 17 4 intelligence agencies that Russia also hacked the DNC and John Podesta (although we won’t be holding our breath for that particular narrative shift). Back to the WaPo:

    The hacks and posting took place on May 24, shortly after President Trump completed a lengthy counterterrorism meeting with Persian Gulf leaders in neighboring Saudi Arabia and declared them unified.  Citing the emir’s reported comments, the Saudis, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt immediately banned all Qatari media. They then broke relations with Qatar and declared a trade and diplomatic boycott, sending the region into a political and diplomatic tailspin that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has warned could undermine U.S. counterterrorism efforts against the Islamic State.

    Then again, this may be just another fishing expedition (or better yet, clickbait) by the WaPo. Naturally, the Emirates denied everything:

    In a statement released in Washington by its ambassador, Yousef al-Otaiba, the UAE said the Post story was “false.” “The UAE had no role whatsoever in the alleged hacking described in the article,” the statement said. “What is true is Qatar’s behavior. Funding, supporting, and enabling extremists from the Taliban to Hamas and Qadafi. Inciting violence, encouraging radicalization, and undermining the stability of its neighbors.”

    Maybe he meant to say Saudi Arabia, but there’s just too many fake news in one place at this point to even keep track. Meanwhile, according to the WaPo even more subsequent hacks provided the detail needed to get to the bottom of the original hack:

    The revelations come as emails purportedly hacked from Otaiba’s private account have circulated to journalists over the past several months. That hack has been claimed by an apparently pro-Qatari organization calling itself GlobalLeaks. Many of the emails highlight the UAE’s determination over the years to rally Washington thinkers and policymakers to its side on the issues at the center of its dispute with Qatar.

    This confirms what we reported last month, when we said that Qatar – which has repeatedly charged that its sites were hacked, but has yet to release the results of its own investigation – accused the Arab states behind the embargo for also being behind the hack. Today’s WaPo report appears to confirm this:

    Intelligence officials said their working theory since the Qatar hacks has been that Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Egypt, or some combination of those countries were involved. It remains unclear whether the others also participated in the plan.

    Meanwhile, nobody is willing to say anything on the record, of course: “The Office of the Director of National Intelligence declined to comment, as did the CIA. The FBI, which Qatar has said was helping in its investigation, also declined to comment.” Which is understandable: they are all busy going through any and all Trump emails intercepted by the NSA, looking for a smoking gun.

    CNN’s fake news aside, what the WaPo report confirms, assuming it is accurate of course, is that the Arab states engaged in a “false flag” operation against Qatar, to provide them the justification for escalating the confrontation between Saudi Arabia and Qatar to its current crisis level, and potentially beyond: to war, considering Rex Tillerson’s attempts to mediate a resolution in his “shuttle diplomacy” tour in the Gulf over the past week proved to be a disaster.

    That said, authenticity of the latest WaPo “report” is itself suspect. We look forward to another denial in several months which confirms what most likely actually happened: the NSA and CIA were those responsible for the Qatar “hacking”, an event which has launched a destabilizing sequence of events in the middle east, and which according to many may culminate with war in the region, the ideal outcome for both the “Deep State” and the Military-Industrial/Neocon complex.

    As for CNN, we are “confident” they will be issuing a retraction to their original “fake news” report any… minute… now…

  • China's Ghost Recovery

    Authored by Jeffrey Snider via Alhambra Investment Partners,

    To the naked eye, it represents progress. China has still an enormous rural population doing subsistence level farming. As the nation grows economically, such a way of life is an inherent drag, an anchor on aggregate efficiency Chinese officials would rather not put up with. Moving a quarter of a billion people into cities in an historically condensed time period calls for radical thinking, and radical doing. In one official party plan, it was or has to happen before 2026.

    The idea has been to build 20 new cities for this urbanization, and then maybe 20 more. It led to places like Yujiapu in Tianjin. China’s answer to Manhattan was to include a replica Lincoln Center, a Rockefeller Center and even twin towers. Built to fit half a million, barely 100,000 live there.

    There are numerous other examples of these ghost cities, including Kangbashi dug out of the grassy plains of Inner Mongolia. It is in every sense a modern marvel, 137 sq. miles of tower blocks and skyscrapers that sit almost entirely empty. There are now plans to build yet another one, south of the capital Beijing this time, to supposedly relieve pressure and pollution of that city’s urban sprawl. In the Xiongan New Area, this newest city will be three times the size of NYC, enough, if plans were ever to actually work out, to draw almost 7 million Chinese.

    These are mind-boggling numbers and end up making truly eerie places for the few times when their existence is allowed to be acknowledged in the mainstream. The reasons for them are really not hard to comprehend, however.

    The older ghost cities started out as pure demographics, a place for China’s new middle class to urbanize and economize. The more the rest of the world demanded for China to produce and ship, the more Chinese (cheap) labor it would all require. And there had to be something other than slums for this to happen, else any such intrusive transformation risked what was and remains a delicate power balance.

    Then in 2008 suddenly the world paused in its love affair of Chinese-made goods. No problem, though, as Chinese officials assuming it was temporary merely sped up the process of building for the future, getting ahead of the curve, as it were. Surely China would need to after the full global recovery get right back on the same trajectory as before.

    That never happened, and though some economists in particular still believe it will, there isn’t the slightest sign of global demand getting nearly that far back. What do you do, then, if you are China? There is logic to keeping up the illusion, that the future will eventually look a lot like the “miracle” past, because what else would China Inc. otherwise do? If it won’t be building stuff for export to the West, then it will have to be building something.

    No matter how many times in the Western media they say demand is robust, catching up, or resilient, the Chinese know better.

    China’s overseas shipments rose from a year earlier as global demand held up and trade tensions with the U.S. were kept in check amid ongoing talks. At home, resilient demand led to a rise in imports.

     

    Demand for Chinese products has proven resilient this year as global demand holds up.

    Chinese exports in June 2017 are estimated (currently) to have risen 11.3% year-over-year. It sounds like what was written above about the global condition. But in truth, 11% growth, as 15% or even 20% growth at this stage, keeps China in the ghost city state. It isn’t anything close to “resilient”, let alone enough to make up for lost time and absorb the empty cities already built.

    There are instead already indications that China’s trade statistics are topping out – at levels not yet even as much as the insufficient growth rates produced in 2014. For the three months of Q2 combined, exports rose by just 8.1%. While that was the best quarterly rate in more than two years, it was less than what decelerating global demand required of China in Q4 2014 in the early stages of this “rising dollar.”

    On the import side, the increase in June was for the fourth straight month less than 20%. Given the dramatic contraction especially in 2015 of Chinese imports, 20% only seems good outside of relevant context. After China’s experience with the dot-com recession, by contrast, by early 2003 imports grew by sustained 40% for several years.

    The media can talk in glowing terms all it wants about China’s economy, but the truth is very different. It is instead consistent with the rest of the global economy in 2017, striking only for the distinct lack of momentum as “resiliency.” Enough time has passed since the end of the downturn in 2016 that if this was going to change it would have.

    Whether in trade or local economy terms, going back to 2011 there is a ceiling on even the rebounds. There is something still very wrong with the economy, as even though it might be better this year than last it is still far short of normal. That is a reflection here through China on the rest of it.

    Unless and until Americans and Europeans start buying Chinese goods again, any goods for that matter, there will have to be more ghost cities coming. Neither rebalancing nor global recovery are in China’s future. A 2014 Chinese government study concluded that as much as $6.8 trillion in so-called investments had been wasted from 2009 to that point. In the strictest sense it certainly seems to have been, but, again, what else were they going to do? Economists called it “stimulus” and still do, but in truth it was actually the last option in maintaining the (recovery) lie.

    They are not ghost cities.  It is still a ghost recovery.

     

  • Abe's Days Numbered? DB Warns Japan PM "May Be Forced Out" Leading To Spike In Yields

    Almost exactly ten years ago, on September 12, 2007 Japan’s current prime minister Shinzo Abe resigned less than a year into a tenure dogged by scandals, the suicide of a minister, a raft of resignations and corruption allegations, and a humiliating election drubbing for his Liberal Democratic Party. Never one to shrink away from resposibility, Abe blamed it on crippling diarrhea:

    Shinzo Abe resigned as Prime Minister, claiming that diarrhea was preventing him from carrying out his duties. The diarrhea was due to ulcerative colitis, a bowel illness caused by ulcers. Abe had suffered from this illness for decades, but after becoming Prime Minister, the stress of his job apparently made the symptoms worse.

    Apparently it did not prevent him from taking on the job again some five years later, when he was reinserted in the prime ministerial position again, largely as a smokescreen meant to keep the government together as BOJ’s then-new governor Haruhiko Kuroda unleashed the greatest “wealth creation” and bond monetization experiment in the history of Japan, which has culminated with the Japanese central bank owning nearly 100% of Japan’s GDP in Japanese Government Bonds.

    Unfortunately for Abe, it may be time to buy Imodium again.

    As Deutsche Bank reports, following a fresh series of political scandals, the Abe cabinet’s approval ratings have kept falling and are now in the sub-40% “danger zone” and as DB’s Makoto Yamashita writes, it is now starting to look as though Prime Minister Shinzo Abe might be forced out of office until the Liberal  Democratic Party leadership race scheduled for September 2018, “in which case JGB yields might be at risk of climbing quite significantly.”

    Ironically, in many ways this mirrors Abe’s first fall from grace. This is what the Economist wrote some ten years ago:

    “Mr Abe’s government was initially very popular. Yet the tide in Mr Abe’s affairs only ebbed. True, early on he made a notable opening towards China, with whom relations had been strained under Mr Koizumi. Other than that, Mr Abe proved unable to impose discipline upon a cabinet of the corrupt and incompetent. Worse, he had a tin ear for the political mood. Voters, it had turned out, had been beguiled more by Mr Koizumi the messenger than by his message of structural reform, which entailed pain and uncertainty, notably in Japan’s rural regions and among the old. Mr Abe failed to address these concerns.”

    This time around, the reason for the German bank’s dour outlook is because sub-40% approval ratings have almost invariably triggered changes of leadership around one year later over the past two decades and have always resulted in significant national election defeats.

    “We will thus be watching quite closely to see whether Abe’s upcoming cabinet reshuffle proves successful in regaining the 40% level. Given that this political risk is a yen-specific factor, it should be sufficient to buy foreign bonds as a hedge against the possibility of a “risk off” decline in interest rates.”

    And since the financial world is far more interested in the implications of Abe’s departure on JGBs than his actual political fate, here is the background: while the BOJ has once again proved successful in curbing upward pressure on the 10y JGB yield by conducting a fixed-rate operation, it continues to buy more 5y–10y JGBs than are being issued each month and is thus likely to reduce its purchases when yields are declining. Moreover, the BOJ has this month left its offer amounts in the super-long sector unchanged (at least to this point) despite yields having climbed quite considerably. The central bank thus appears willing to tolerate steepening of the >10y curve, which may suggest that a “shock” political event like an Abe resignation may lead to an accelerated selloff off the longest-dated Japanese bonds.

    As for Abe’s fate, here are the details:

    Abe cabinet’s approval ratings already in dangerous territory:  the Yomiuri Shimbun reported on July 10 that the Abe cabinet’s approval rating had fallen 13%pt from its previous survey to 36%, while other polls have shown a 5%pt decline to 33% (Asahi) and a 13%pt decline to 35% (NHK). An approval rating of 40% or higher is generally considered necessary for a prime minister to remain in office. The Yomiuri Shimbun also reported a 10% decline in the Liberal Democratic Party’s approval rating to 31%, a 1%pt decline for the Democratic Party to just 6%, and a 7%pt increase for independents to 47%. Some have suggested that  Prime Minister Shinzo Abe might still be “safe” for want of opposition, but past experience indicates that might not necessarily be the case.

    And, as Deutsche Bank warns, it is now beginning to look as though Abe might be forced out of office prior to the LDP leadership race scheduled for September 2018. Here’s why:

    For starters, no administration since 1997 has survived for more than a year after recording sub-40% cabinet approval ratings in consecutive months, although Keizo Obuchi should probably be considered an exception given that his cabinet’s approval rating had improved from 25% initially to 40% by the time he was forced to stand down due to the abovementioned diarrhea. Only Junichiro Koizumi served out his full term, having consistently maintained approval ratings above 40%. It is possible that Abe will redeem himself with his upcoming cabinet reshuffle, but failure to regain the 40% level would almost certainly point to a change of prime minister before the end of 2018 if past experience is any guide.

    Second, the next lower house election needs to be called by December 2018, and it is important to note that each upper or lower house election since 2003 contested with a sub-40% cabinet approval rating has resulted in defeat for the incumbent party (chart below), with changes of government occurring after Abe’s July 2007 upper house election defeat, Taro Aso’s August 2009 lower house defeat, and Yoshihiko Noda’s December 2012 lower house defeat. The next LDP leadership race is scheduled for September 2018, and it seems highly unlikely that party members would throw their support behind someone with a sub-40% cabinet approval ratings. The lack of unified opposition is indeed a significant difference from the past, but it is quite conceivable that independents will have combined forces to establish a new party by the end of this year or soon thereafter.

    Third, Abe will struggle to proceed with his attempt to revise the Constitution if his approval rating remains so low. Even if the necessary two-thirds majority can be secured in the Diet, it is difficult to envisage 50% support in a national referendum. There does not currently appear to be any headroom to use fiscal or monetary policy to boost the government’s popularity, with the Abe administration having already compiled a roughly JPY28.1 trillion “Economic Stimulus Package for Realizing Investment for the Future” under the second FY2016 supplementary budget. Some market participants appear to believe that further pump-priming could be on the cards, but recent experience has in any case demonstrated that even that might not be enough to win back the support of voters.

    Fourth, while markets may be finding it difficult to envisage a post-Abe government, Kyodo recently claimed that Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida intends to stand down around the time of the cabinet reshuffle (although we are as yet unsure as to the accuracy or veracity of this report). Kishida heads a faction thought to consist of around 46 LDP lawmakers (chart below)). This faction has its origins in the Kochi Kai launched by then Prime Minister Hayato Ikeda back in 1957, and is thought to be more dovish than Abe with regard to matters of diplomacy or the possibility of constitutional reform. Kishida is believed to have reiterated on June 28 that he remains reluctant to revise war-renouncing Article 9 of the Constitution, and Finance Minister Taro Aso might also emerge as a contender now that he is effectively heading the LDP’s  second largest faction. As a result, expect talk of a successor to Abe to heat up unless the upcoming cabinet reshuffle does prove successful in reversing recent declines in popularity.

    Finally, here’s why the above matters for Japanese risk assets, from Deutsche Bank:

    We have been stressing the potential for political risk to drive JPY rates higher for several weeks now, but have yet to see this possibility priced into the market. This is somewhat puzzling given that the demise of Abe would almost certain have ramifications for the BOJ (with Abe having been such a strong support of Governor Haruhiko Kuroda). The current climate of low bond market volatility thus looks likely to come to an end sooner rather than later. Weak inflation has of course helped to keep JPY rates anchored, but that might not be enough if political instability does develop into a major market theme. We will therefore be  keeping a close eye on poll results following Abe’s upcoming cabinet reshuffle. 

    And for those who are seeking a pair-trade variant to a long position in govvies elsewhere, DB recommends shorting Japan dur to said rising Abe risk:

    Given that this political risk is a yen-specific factor, it should be sufficient to buy foreign bonds as a hedge against the possibility of a (global) “risk off” decline in interest rates (including super-long JGB yields).

    As for Abe’s life after resigning – for the second time, – we are confident he will be fine following a few unpleasant run-ins, pardon the pun, with the bathroom which will once again be scapegoated for his failures, and several Imodium prescriptions. Who knows, after Japan’s economy crashes for a few more years, we may just see the third coming of prime minister Abe to serve as the smokescreen to the BOJ one last time, which at that point will be forced to buy, well, everything to keep the market from imploding.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Jul 16

Today’s News 16th July 2017

  • Times Change Out From Under Us – Paul Craig Roberts Opens "The Floodgates Of 'His' Memory"

    Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,

    He had lugged the 50 lb. bag of Milorganite into the garden in order to discover, as on many prior occasions, that he had nothing with which to open it. He blamed this on the war on terror and the TSA. As a youth he, as did every boy, had a pocket knife. Always. It was expected. There was no school rule against pocket knives. Once for a period they even all had switchblades. You could get them for 99 cents, a large amount in those days, enough to buy a case of 24 Coca-Colas. The switchblades met with school and parental disapproval as they smacked of New York gangs. But before teachers and parents came up with a policy, the boys had abandoned the switchblades. The knives had weak springs. Fascinated with the speed with which the knives opened with a satisfying click and locked the blade into place, the boys quickly wore out the springs on their switchblades. Unlike their trusty pocket knives, the switchblades quickly became useless.

    He no longer carried a pocket knife. He had learned long ago that things that go into pockets become habitual. He would forget to take the knife out when he rushed to catch his flight, just as he always forgot to put the knife in his pocket when he went to work in the garden. There would be a scene at the airport, confiscation of the knife, which had been his grandfather’s, and TSA questioning. They might want him to be strip searched. He could miss his flight. Such a large expensive organization as TSA needs justification, and so whereas the TSA officers might be reasonable, he could not count on it. Under the law he could be accused and prosecuted. One never knew.

    He could remember the air shuttle between Washington and New York. The planes flew on the hour. You could show up 10 minutes before takeoff and be seated. If one airplane wasn’t enough, they would provide a second. There was no security, no delays.

    He didn’t like being drawn back into memories of the past. It made him acutely aware how difficult just simple things had become over the course of his life, like carrying a pocket knife.

    A couple of weeks ago he had been on vacation at a gated mountain resort. He enjoyed hiking along the streams and visiting the waterfalls. He had managed to rent at the airport a sports sedan and was looking forward to a morning workout at the exercise center and then a semi-spirited drive along mountain roads outside the resort. As he was changing into his workout clothes, the telephone rang. As he rushed to stay on schedule his billfold with driving license did not make the clothes change.

    He discovered this at the exercise center. It was 10 minutes back to his cabin and then 10 minutes back in the direction of the exit gate. Why had he agreed to a telephone interview? If he went back for his license, his drive would be rushed and not enjoyable. He could go without his license, but suppose something happened, such as a collision with a deer. Would the police accept a reasonable story and the car rental papers for ID, or would he be hauled to jail, a long flight away from his lawyer? The days of reasonable police, he thought, were bygone days. The morning was shot. The only thing to do was to vent his frustration in exercise and return to his cabin for the telephone interview.

    Even the innocence of words had been lost. There were many words that could no longer be used. They had been banished down the memory hole. A professor friend had told him that he was subjected to a dressing down by a dean because he had used the word “girl” in class. “Girl” is now considered offensive to womyn.

    In restaurants in the South, waitresses called the men “honey.” “What will it be, honey?” The men called the waitresses “darling.” He wondered about that today. Perhaps in small towns. Since the advent of interstate highways, small towns had passed out of his experience. He wondered if they still had restaurants or just fast food franchises.

    It got worse. The floodgates of memory had opened. He was given his first firearm at age 10. It was a single barrel .410 shotgun. When he was 12 he was given a .22 pistol. Many of his friends had guns. The countryside was nearby and many urban families had farm relatives. He remembered, too, that all the kids were subjected to corporal punishment. Today a parent who spanked a kid or provided one with a firearm would be arrested, likely prosecuted, and the kid put into foster care where there was risk of being leased out to a pedophile group.

    He could remember riding his horse into the town three miles from his grandparents’ farm with a real pistol strapped to his side and a rifle in the scabbard when he was 12 or 13. No one said a thing. Today a SWAT team would be on the scene. He would be lucky not to be shot dead and never know the fate of his grandparents, who would be guilty of all sorts of offenses, including failure to supervise a minor.

    That reminded him of what he had recently read in a newspaper. On a cul-de-sac devoid of car traffic a mother sat in a chair outside the house while her child played in the front lawn. A busybody neighbor, trained to report parental malfeasance, whose view of the mother was blocked by shrubbery, saw an unsupervised child at play and called the police. When the police arrived, they arrested the mother on the basis of the unverified report from the neighbor. The mother was taken to jail. The newspaper did not say what had happened to the child, whether the kid was taken to foster care and whether the husband had to rush home from his job and ply lawyers with money to help put his family back together. These kinds of horrors inflicted on families by public authorities often have worse consequences than the predations of criminals. He wondered if parents and children would be safer if the police were disbanded and outlawed.

    Yet, society had accepted these abuses as justified. What, he thought, would have been the public reaction when he was a kid? The policemen would have been fired, the chief disciplined, and the mayor would have lost the next election. It would not have been possible for them to become heroes by destroying a family. The busybody neighbor would have become a pariah in the community.

    Just the other day he had seen a grandmother at the supermarket with tattoos and face piercings. A grandmother? How had this come about? At the mountain resort pool and exercise center it wasn’t just the men. He had seen young women who were covered in tattoos. A friend told him that some women not only had face and tongue piercings, but also navel, labia, and clitoris piercings. Piercings were what he remembered from boyhood days of looking through stacks of National Geographic magazines from the 1940s and 1950s. Articles explained with words and photographs facial piercing practices by tribes in “darkest Africa.” Now they were the practices of upper class womyn who played in resorts.

    He recalled his father’s first rule of business: “Never hire anyone with a tattoo.” Tattoos were what sailors did who got drunk in Asian ports. They demonstrated poor judgment and a lack of self-restraint. If anyone sober got a tattoo, it indicated a lack of self-respect. If an employee did not respect himself, he would not respect the job. His father would have a hard time assembling a work force today.

    A couple of years ago a college classmate told him that their noble old fraternity had been suspended by the college president. A black female student claimed that racial slurs had been shouted at her from an open window. The fraternity was able to show that all the windows had been painted shut for years, probably dating back to when the house was air conditioned. But the college president wasn’t going to dispute a black female’s word on the basis of evidence. It could mean protests, charges of racism, broken windows, newspaper and trustee inquiries. Bad PR for the college. It was safer to hand the fraternity a bit of injustice.

    Recently, he had arrived at the supermarket in a cloudburst. There were a dozen parking spaces by the entrance, but they were marked “Handicapped Parking $500 Fine.” He remembered when the handicapped said that they wanted to be treated like everyone else. Now they had privileges. He wondered about those signs. Did they give offense? “Handicapped” was one of those discarded words. They hadn’t got around to replacing the signs.

    He remembered, too, when males did not use four-letter words in front of parents or females. Now the young womyn could out-cuss his male generation.

    More memories. If you scraped a car while street parking, you were expected to leave a note with name and telephone number and expect to pay for the repair. He had once told some young people this and they laughed at the joke.

    Something had happened. He had been brought up to be a citizen in a world that no longer existed.

    At least there still were gardens. He put away his thoughts and went to get his knife.

  • Is It Racist? Most Americans Would Not Hire Hairy Women

    A slight majority of U.S. adults, 53 percent, would say ‘no’ when asked if they were likely or unlikely to hire a woman for a public role who had hair on her face.

    Infographic: Most Americans Would Not Hire Hairy Women | Statista

    You will find more statistics at Statista

    As Statista's Isabel von Kessel notes, this is the result of a YouGov survey of 2,159 adults at the end of June 2017. Also, many participants were unlikely to hire a woman for a job which included public appearances if she had hairy armpits (36 percent unlikely to hire, 33 percent likely), legs (36 percent unlikely, percent likely) or face (53 percent unlikely to hire, 20 percent likely).

    Broken down by gender, the survey indicates that men were generally more critical of female facial appearances: 57 percent stated that they would not hire a woman with facial hair, while 48 percent of women subscribed to this statement. Broken down by age groups, it's baby boomers (55+) who are least open to women sporting facial hair (64 percent), while 39 percent of millennials suggest that they are more likely to hire hairy women if they were the hiring manager for a company.

    Of course, the big question from all of this is… How long before the Leftists begin to side with the 'hirsute'?

    Isn't it time someone stood up for the rights of women with more hair than average? Make America Hairy Again?

  • Photos Of Aleppo Rising: Swimsuits, Concerts And Rebuilding In First Jihadi-Free Summer

    When taxi and bus drivers take journalists into Syria via the Beirut-Damascus Highway these days, there’s a common greeting that has become a kind of local tradition as the drivers pull into their Damascus area destinations. They confidently tell their passengers: “welcome to the real Syria.” Local Syrians living in government areas are all too aware of how the outside world perceives the government and the cities under its control. After years of often deceptive imagery and footage produced by opposition fighters coordinating with an eager Western press bent on vilifying Assad as “worse than Hitler”, many average Syrian citizens increasingly take to social media to post images and scenes of Syria that present a different vision: they see their war-torn land as fundamentally secular, religiously plural, socially tolerant, and slowly returning to normalcy under stabilizing government institutions.

    As the most intense phase of fighting in Aleppo was unfolding in 2016, veteran journalist Stephen Kinzer took to the editorial pages of the Boston Globe to remind Americans that the media has created a fantasy land concerning Syria. Kinzer painted a picture quite opposite the common perception:

    Coverage of the Syrian war will be remembered as one of the most shameful episodes in the history of the American press… For three years, violent militants have run Aleppo. Their rule began with a wave of repression. They posted notices warning residents: “Don’t send your children to school. If you do, we will get the backpack and you will get the coffin.” Then they destroyed factories, hoping that unemployed workers would have no recourse other than to become fighters. They trucked looted machinery to Turkey and sold it…

     

    The United States has the power to decree the death of nations. It can do so with popular support because many Americans — and many journalists — are content with the official story.

    Now, during the first summer of relative calm Aleppo residents have seen in over four years of grinding conflict, the city commonly referred as “the jewel of Syria” is once again rising from the ashes. Foreign journalists are also accessing places like East Aleppo and the heart of the walled ‘old city’ for the first time. Some few honest correspondents, unable to deny the local population’s spirit of hopefulness and zeal with which they undertake rebuilding projects, acknowledge that stability and normalcy have returned only after the last jihadists were expelled by the Syrian government and its allies.


    Aleppo orchestra concert, Summer 2017/via Sarah Abdallah

    A Western press and political class which generally mourned the liberation of the city from al-Qaeda groups like Nusra (AQ in Syria), calling government actions a ‘massacre’ and ‘genocide’, now finds a reality that can’t be ignored or denied: Aleppines are returning to ravaged parts of the city to rebuild, they are enjoying nightlife, going to music concerts, staying out late at cafes; families are swimming at local pools, women are strolling around in t-shirts and jeans free of the oppressive Wahhabi fighters that once ruled parts of the city.

    Kinzer’s Boston Globe piece further concluded that the entire web of assumptions on Syria woven by the media and fed to the public over the years were “appallingly distant from reality” and warned that these lies are “likely to prolong the war and condemn more Syrians to suffering and death.” As new photos continue to emerge of the real Aleppo and the real Syria it is essential to revisit the most destructive among the lies that have helped serve to prolong this tragic and brutal war.

    Aleppines didn’t want to live under Wahhabi Islamist rule


    Andalusia Swimming Pool in Aleppo, Summer 2017/via Syria Daily

    According to multiple eyewitness reports and studies, the story of how war entered Aleppo’s environs was not primarily one of mass public protests and government crackdown, but of an aggressive jihadist insurgency that erupted suddenly and fueled from outside the city. According to then Indian ambassador to Syria, V.P. Haran (Amb. to Syria from 2009 to 2012), Aleppo on the whole was unwillingly dragged into the war after remaining silent and stable while other cities raged. In an interview which detailed his own on-the-ground experience of the opening years of war in Syria, the ambassador said:

    Soon parts of Latakia, Homs and Hama were chaotic but Aleppo remained calm and this troubled the opposition greatly. The opposition couldn’t get the people in Aleppo to rise up against the regime so they sent bus loads of people to Aleppo. These people would burn something on the streets and leave. Journalists would then broadcast this saying Aleppo had risen.

    Why did it take until July 2012 – well over a year since conflict in Syria began – for Aleppo to see any fighting? Why did residents not “rise up” against the government?

    The answer is simple. The majority of Syrians, whether Sunni, Shia, Alawi, Christian, Kurd, or Ismaili, are sane individuals – they’ve seen what life is like under the “alternative” rebel rule marked by sharia courts, smoke and alcohol bans, public floggings, street executions, desecration of churches, and religious and ethnic cleansing of minorities. They recognize that there is a real Syrian national identity, and it goes beyond mere loyalty to the current ruling clique that happens to be in power, but in Syria as a pluralistic Levantine society that rejects Saudi style theocracy.


    Rebuilding Aleppo, Summer 2017. Latin Parish of St. Francis/via Sarah Abdallah

    The kind of religious and cultural pluralism represented in the liberal democracies of the West are present in Syria, ironically, through a kind of government-mandated “go along, get along” policy backed by an authoritarian police state. One can even find Syrian Jews living in the historic Jewish quarter of Damascus’ walled old city to this day.

    Syrian urban centers have for decades been marked by a quasi-secular culture and public life of pluralist co-existence. Aleppo itself was always a thriving merchant center where a typical street scene would involve women without head-coverings walking side by side with women wearing veils (hijab), cinemas and liquor stores, late night hookah smoke filled cafés, and large churches and mosques neighboring each other with various communities living in peaceful co-existence. By many accounts, the once vibrant secular and pluralist Aleppo is now coming back to life (and largely never left government-held West Aleppo).

    “Moderates” did not “liberate” Aleppo, but gave cover to an ISIS and al-Qaeda invasion


    Image: “moderate” rebels mock a Christian government soldier    —This photo was originally posted online by a Swedish based terror group in Syria after the Summer 2013 rebel offensive against the Menagh airbase near Aleppo. A rebel fighter mocks a captured Christian government soldier’s cross. Another photo posted in the original set reveals that the soldier was later tortured by being crushed with a large rock on his chest as he lay on his back.

    One of the most under reported and least understood events surrounding the history of how all of Aleppo province and the Northern Syria region became a hotbed of foreign jihadists is the fall of the strategically located Menagh airbase near Aleppo. As a Reuters timeline of events indicates:

    In early 2012 rebels take control of the rural areas northwest of Aleppo city, besieging the Menagh military air base and the largely Shiite towns of Nubl and Zahra.

    After a lengthy siege of Menagh, the base finally fell to jihadist factions under the command of the US-backed Free Syrian Army (FSA) in August of 2013. This event was key to rebel fighters gaining enough territory to cut off the Aleppo-Damascus Highway, which allowed them to encircle all of Aleppo for much of that year. But a little known yet hugely important detail of the Menagh episode is that rebels only got the upper hand after being joined by ISIS suicide bombers commanded by Omar the Chechen (ISIS’ now deceased most senior military commander). The fall of this government base is what opened a permanent jihadi corridor in the North, allowing terrorists to flood the area. The commander for the operation was US Ambassador Robert Ford’s personal friend, Col. Abdel Jabbar al-Okaidi, who was head of the US and UK funded Revolutionary Military Council of Aleppo (FSA). Okaidi worked in tandem with ISIS military commander Omar the Chechen and his crew for the operation – all while being supported by the United States and Great Britain.

    Concerning US-backed Okaidi’s close relationship to the ISIS faction in the summer of 2013, there is actually video evidence and eyewitness testimony (US Ambassador Ford himself later admitted the relationship to McClatchy News). Amazingly, the video, titled “US Key Man in Syria Worked Closely with ISIL and Jabhat al Nusra” never had very widespread public distribution, even though it has been authenticated by the top Syria expert in the U.S., Joshua Landis, of the University of Oklahoma, and author of the hugely influential Syria Comment. Using his Twitter account, Dr. Landis commented: “in 2013 WINEP advocated sending all US military aid thru him [Col. Okaidi]. Underscores US problem w moderates.”

    The video, documenting (now former) U.S. Ambassador Robert Ford’s visit to FSA Col. Okaidi in Northern Syria, also shows the same Col. Okaidi celebrating with and praising a well-known ISIS commander, Emir Abu Jandal, after conducting the joint Menagh operation. In an interview, this U.S. “key man” at that time, through which U.S. assistance flowed, also praised ISIS and al-Qaeda as the FSA’s “brothers.” Abu Jandal was part of Omar the Chechen’s ISIS crew assisting the FSA. Further video evidence also confirms Omar the Chechen’s role at Menagh. The videos also show Okaidi proudly declaring that al-Nusra (Al-Qaeda in Syria) makes up ten percent of the FSA. The FSA was always more of a branding campaign to sell the rebels as “moderates” to a gullible Western media than a reality on the ground; it was a loose coalition of various groups espousing militant jihad with the end goal of establishing an Islamist polity in Syria.


    Foreign fighters flooded Aleppo Province. The U.S. State Department’s own numbers: read the full report at STATE.GOV

    In the end, terror groups like ISIS enjoyed a meteoric rise in Syria due to US government and media support for these so-called “moderate rebels” – all entities which collectively sought regime change at all costs – even the high cost of mass civilian death and suffering that inevitably results from unleashing an insurgency in urban areas.

    The Syrian Army and government were never “Shia” or sectarian-based


    Al Aziziyah neighborhood in Aleppo/via     Syria Daily

    The Arab Spring narrative was the ideological lens through which experts initially pit the oppressive supposedly “Alawite/Shia regime” against a popular uprising of Syria’s majority Sunnis. As Sunnis make up about 70% of Syria’s population, it was simply a matter of numbers, and of time. But this view proved overly simplistic, and according to one little known West Point study, utterly false. It was commonly assumed that the Syrian Army was a hollowed out Alawite institution with its Sunni conscripts apprehensively waiting for the right moment to defect to the rebel side. This was the fundamental supposition behind years of repetitious predictions of the Assad regime’s impending collapse, and predicated upon a view of the Syrian military as a fundamentally weak and sectarian institution. But West Point’s 2015 study entitled Syria’s Sunnis and the Regime’s Resilience concluded the following:

    Sunnis and, more specifically, Sunni Arabs, continue to make up the majority of the regular army’s rank-and- file membership.

    The study’s unpopular findings confirmed that the Syrian Army, which has been the glue holding the state together throughout this war, remains primarily a Sunni enterprise while its guiding ideology is firmly nationalistic and not sectarian.

    The highest ranking Syrian officer to fall victim to rebel attack was General Dawoud Rajiha, Defense Minister and former chief of staff of the army, in a major 2012 bombing of a Damascus national security office. General Rajiha was an Orthodox Christian. Numerous Christians and officers of other religious backgrounds have served top positions in the Syrian Army going back decades – a reflection of Syria’s generally nationalist and religiously tolerant atmosphere.

    Mainstream press did not report from Aleppo, but was hundreds of miles away.


    Outside the Citadel of Aleppo: life returning to normal, Summer 2017/via Syria Daily

    The heavily populated urban areas of Syria continue to be held by the government. But most reporting has tended to dehumanize any voice coming out of government held areas, which includes the majority of Syrians. The war has resulted in over 6.5 million internally displaced people – the vast majority of which have sought refuge in government territory. 

    The fact remains that there are some popular figures in the establishment media and analyst community who speak and write frequently about Syria, and yet have never spent a significant amount of time in the country. Throughout much of the war they’ve primarily reported from Western capitals – thousands of miles away – or, if they are in a Middle East bureau, without ever leaving the safety of places like Beirut or Istanbul. Fewer still have the necessary Arabic language skills to keep pace with local and regional events. Some have never been to Syria at all. They become willing conduits of rebel propaganda beamed through WhatsApp messages and Skype interviews, which was especially the case when it came to the battle for Aleppo. That much of the world actually considers these people as authorities on what’s happening in Syria is a joke – it’s beyond absurd.


    Outdoor concert venue and Aleppo springs back to life, Summer 2017/    via Maram Kasem

    We are hopeful that the jihadist menace will be fully expelled and that the international proxy war which has taken so many lives and reduced much of a beautiful nation to rubble will finally come to an end. Aleppines and other Syrians are rebuilding – they are optimistically preparing for the future. Welcome to the real Aleppo.


    Final national exams just before summer 2017    /via Syria Daily

  • Research Team Slams Global Warming Data In New Report: "Not Reality… Totally Inconsistent With Credible Temperature Data"

    Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

    As world leaders, namely in the European Union, attack President Trump for pulling out of the Paris Climate Agreement which would have saddled Americans with billions upon billions of dollars in debt and economic losses, a new bombshell report that analyzed Global Average Surface Temperature (GAST) data produced by NASA, the NOAA and HADLEY proves the President was right on target with his refusal to be a part of the new initiative.

    According to the report, which has been peer reviewed by administrators, scientists and researchers from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (M.I.T.), and several of America’s leading universities, the data is completely bunk:

    In this research report, the most important surface data adjustment issues are identified and past changes in the previously reported historical data are quantified. It was found that each new version of GAST has nearly always exhibited a steeper warming linear trend over its entire history. And, it was nearly always accomplished by systematically removing the previously existing cyclical temperature pattern. This was true for all three entities providing GAST data measurement, NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU.

     

    As a result, this research sought to validate the current estimates of GAST using the best available relevant data. This included the best documented and understood data sets from the U.S. and elsewhere as well as global data from satellites that provide far more extensive global coverage and are not contaminated by bad siting and urbanization impacts. Satellite data integrity also benefits from having cross checks with Balloon data.

     

    The conclusive findings of this research are that the three GAST data sets are not a valid representation of reality. In fact, the magnitude of their historical data adjustments, that removed their cyclical temperature patterns, are totally inconsistent with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data. Thus, it is impossible to conclude from the three published GAST data sets that recent years have been the warmest ever –despite current claims of record setting warming.

     

    Finally, since GAST data set validity is a necessary condition for EPA’s GHG/CO2 Endangerment Finding, it too is invalidated by these research findings. (Full Abstract Report)

    Of course, this won’t stop global climate normalcy deniers from saying it’s all one big conspiracy to destroy the earth. They’ll naturally argue that data adjustments to the temperatures need to be made for a variety of reasons, which is something the report doesn’t dispute. What it does show, however, is that these “adjustments” always prove to be to the upside. Always warmer, never cooler:

    While the notion that some “adjustments” to historical data might need to be made is not challenged, logically it would be expected that such historical temperature data adjustments would sometimes raise these temperatures, and sometimes lower them. This situation would mean that the impact of such adjustments on the temperature trend line slope is uncertain. However, each new version of GAST has nearly always exhibited a steeper warming linear trend over its entire history.

    In short: The evidence has been falsified.

    Karl Denninger sums it up succinctly:

    It is therefore quite-clear that the data has been intentionally tampered with.

     

    Since this has formed the basis for plans to steal literal trillions of dollars and has already resulted in the forced extraction of hundreds of billions in aggregate for motorists and industry this quite-clearly constitutes the largest economic fraud ever perpetrated in the world.

     

    I call for the indictment and prosecution of every person and organization involved, asset-stripping all of them to their literal underwear.

    The real data looks something like this:

    global-warming-data1

    (Via ZeroHedge.com)

    And the establishment, along with their fanatical global warming myrmidons, continue to push the need for massive, costly initiatives to reduce green house gases and global temperatures to “normal” levels.

    The problem, of course, is that there is no global warming according to the above referenced report.

    Moreover, none of those supporting the Paris Climate Agreement and other initiatives have any idea what these behemoth regulations will actually do to curb climate change, as evidenced by the following video of Miami Beach Mayor Philip Levine, who despite his best efforts, can’t seem to figure out exactly how these agreements actually lower temperatures and help Americans:

  • Italy Threatens EU With "Nuclear Option": Give 200,000 Migrants EU Visas, Sending Them North

    Two weeks after Italy reacted with anger to Austria’s deployment of troops and armored vehicles to the border between the two nations, while reactivating border controls at the Brenner Pass over concerns that Italy will be unable to handle the roughly 85,000 migrants and refugees who have entered the country so far in 2017, the Italian government has threatened to retaliate in way that assures an imminent migrant crisis as well as an escalation of tensions between the two EU nations.

    According to The Times, an Italian minister and a senator have threatened to issue temporary EU visas to thousands of migrants in an effort to “resolve” Italy’s escalating migrant and refugee crisis, which would then allow the refugees to travel north. The move, which has been described as a ‘nuclear option,’ would allow the nearly 200,000 migrants currently stranded in Italy, to travel across Europe using a Brussels directive loophole.

    Paolo Gentiloni, the prime minister, is livid that the rest of Europe has refused to take its fair share of migrants and that they have closed ports to rescue ships as the number of refugees attempting the treacherous crossing from Libya to the Continent has surged.

    Italy previously called on its EU neighbors to help with the escalating humanitarian crisis but it has been disappointed by their complete lack of action. The face off prompted former Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi to shock the European liberal establishment, when last Friday he released excerpts from a new book in which he said that “we need to free ourselves from a sense of guilt. We do not have the moral duty to welcome into Italy people who are worse off than ourselves” adding that “we need to escape from our ‘do gooder’ mentality.“

    Migrants disembark from the Medecins Sans Frontiers ship Vos Prudence after
    being     rescued at sea, at Salerno’s harbor, Italy, on Friday

    Renzi also warned last Friday that Rome would look to curb funding to EU nations that had refused to offer help. “They are shutting their doors. We will block their funds,” he said, sounding suspiciously like Turkey’s Erdogan who has so far prevented a new refugee crisis in Europe by gating some 2 million migrants inside Turkey’s borders.

    One week later, not even Renzi’s dramatic reversal has prompted a reaction from the EU, leaving Italy in the same place as before, which as a reminder is that due to its geographic location, Italy has been one of the first entry points  for people fleeing from the south to reach Europe. More than 86,000 migrants have crossed the Mediterranean to Italy already this year, leaving the nation scrambling – and struggling – to cope with the huge increase of people fleeing north Africa.

    Meanwhile, hundreds of asylum seekers are packed into overcrowded centers – dubbed ‘human warehouses’ by locals  – scattered across small villages throughout the country.  Mattia Toaldo, a senior analyst at the European Council on Foreign Relations, told The Times: “If migrants continue to arrive and Italy decides to give them papers to cross borders and leave Italy it would be a nuclear option.“

    And since “Italians have lost any hope of getting help from the EU” they may say, “If you won’t make it a common challenge, we will” Toaldo added.

    This is precisely what some in Gentiloni’s government are already doing: Mario Giro, Italy’s deputy foreign minister, and Luigi Manconi, a senator with the ruling Democratic Party, told The Times that issuing migrants with temporary visas was under discussion. Giro believes that Italy can exploit European Council Directive 2001/55, developed after the Balkans conflict to give temporary European entry permits to a large number of displaced people.

    Needless to say, if Italy pursues this course of action, and ultimately activates the “nuclear option”, support for the Schengen scheme, which allows all EU citizens to travel freely across the Continent, may be in jeopardy. Worse, since for most of the migrants the final destination will be Germany, it may rekindle the same migrant crisis which at the end of 2015 saw Angela Merkel’s approval rating plummet as her countrymen slammed her “Open Door” (since shut) policy.


    The Italian rescue ship Vos Prudence arrives in the port of Salerno carrying 935
    migrants, including 16 children and 7 pregnant women on Friday

    The move will also drastically escalate tensions with not only Austria, but neighboring Frace, which have used dogs and the threat of armoured vehicles to push back migrants who try to enter through Italy’s northern border. France 24 reports that perhaps in anticipation of such a move, vast white tents erected in a former military zone on the outskirts of the tiny village of Conetta, house some 1,400 men from across Africa, packed onto endless rows of bunks.

    “I used to call this place a modern lager,” Cona mayor Albero Panfilio told AFP, referring to concentration camps. The commune of Cona includes the little village of Conetta. “After two years this is (still) a place where human beings are squashed in together, with no hope for the future.”

    “Now I call it a human warehouse. The migrants arrive, they don’t know where to put them, they have a warehouse, they dump them here.” He added that the asylum seekers were treated “like garbage.”

    Meanwhile, 10 kilometers away, in Bagnoli di Sopra, 700 migrants are crowded into another former military base surrounded by barbed wire fences with no access to journalists. 

    Finally, a question emerges: with Europe helpless to prevent Italy from pursuing this path should Rome choose to do so, will Brussels activate its own “nuclear response” in retaliation. Recall that in 2011, a “united Europe” and the ECB removed then-PM Sylvio Berlusconi almost overnight when the former premier threatened to exit the Eurozone, by sending yields on Italian bonds soaring above 10%. While this time Italy’s economy is (relatively) sound, should Rome proceed to dump 200,000 unwanted migrants in Europe’s lap, the one certain response would be a financial one, with Mario Draghi sending a very clear message if not to his native country, then certainly the current government, which will immediately be blacklisted by Europe, with any and all measures taken to remove it.

  • Global Stocks Soared $1.5 Trillion This Week – Now 102% Of World GDP

    Thanks, it seems, to a few short words from Janet Yellen, the world's stock markets added over $1.5 trillion to wealthy people's net worth this week, sending global market cap to record highs.

    The value of global equity markets reached a record high $76.28 trillion yesterday, up a shocking 18.6% since President Trump was elected. This is the same surge in global stocks that was seen as the market front-ran QE2 and QE3.

    This was the biggest spike in global equity markets since 2016.

     

     For the first time since Dec 2007, the market value of global equity markets is greater than the world's GDP…

    h/t @Schuldensuehner

    Of course – the big question is – how long can 'they' keep this dream alive?

     

    President Trump hopes a little longer…

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  • Canada's Multi-Million-Dollar Pay-Out To A 'Foreign Terrorist Fighter'

    Authored by Ruthie Blum via The Gatestone Institute,

    • "Has any soldier who fought FOR Canada ever received as generous a reward as this soldier who fought against us?" — Canadian Senator Linda Frum.
    • In 2003, Khadr confessed to throwing the grenade that killed U.S. Special Forces Sgt. 1st Class Christopher Speer and caused Sgt. 1st Class Layne Morris to lose an eye. Years later, he retracted his confession, claiming it had been extracted under duress. In fact, it was part of a plea deal that enabled him to be extradited to Canada to serve the rest of his sentence there.
    • "There was a Canadian flag flying along with the American flag at our base there, so it's quite a thing that now Canada is giving millions to a guy who would attack a compound where Canadians were serving. I don't see this as anything but treason. As far as I am concerned, Prime Minister Trudeau should be charged." — Sgt. 1st Class Layne Morris, who lost an eye from the grenade thrown by Omar Khadr.

    The government of Canada recently issued an official apology — and acknowledged awarding an "undisclosed" sum of money — to Toronto-born Islamist terrorist Omar Khadr for his "ordeal" at the U.S. military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and "any resulting harm" he was caused by the "torture" (specifically, sleep deprivation, solitary confinement and threats) that led to his confession.

    On July 7, Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Ralph Goodale released a statement announcing the "hope that this expression, and the negotiated settlement reached with the Government, will assist him in his efforts to begin a new and hopeful chapter in his life with his fellow Canadians."

    The civil settlement was reached with Khadr, 30, who was 10 when his family returned to the Middle East, and 15 when he was arrested fighting in Afghanistan with al Qaeda and the Taliban, the terrorist organizations to which his father was affiliated — on the basis of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

    In 2003, Khadr confessed to throwing the grenade that killed U.S. Special Forces Sgt. 1st Class Christopher Speer and caused Sgt. 1st Class Layne Morris to lose an eye. Years later, he retracted his confession, claiming it had been extracted under duress. In fact, it was part of a plea deal that enabled him to be extradited to Canada to serve the rest of his sentence there.

    With news of the large settlement he received — 10,500,000 Canadian dollars (approximately USD $8,000,000) — he gave an extensive interview to CBC's Power & Politics host Rosemary Barton, in which he said he thinks that the apology from the Canadian government "restores a little bit my reputation here in Canada, and I think that's the biggest thing for me." He declined to comment on having just received multi-millions in tax-free dollars.

    He also had the effrontery to say that he just wants "to be a normal person" and finish his nursing degree to help under-served communities. "I have a lot of experience with… and appreciation of pain," he explained, expressing only sorrow that the Speer and Morris families consider him responsible for their own pain.

    Amid harsh criticism against the Liberal government by opposition Conservatives and members of the public outraged that their tax dollars are going to a convicted terrorist, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau responded to reporters' questions on the matter during a press conference marking the July 8 close of G20 summit in Hamburg.

    Trudeau said that the settlement had nothing to do with Khadr's 2002 actions on the battlefield in Afghanistan, but rather with the fact that his rights had been violated. This is precisely what the Canadian Supreme Court ruled in 2008 and 2010, after Khadr's lawyers sued for damages.

    Trudeau added that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects all Canadians, "even when it is uncomfortable. When the government violates any Canadian's Charter rights, we all end up paying for it."

    Meanwhile, Goodale tried to evade responsibility, by casting aspersions on the previous government, headed by Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper, in power when Khadr was returned to Canada in 2012 to serve the remainder of his prison sentence for five counts of war crimes. Goodale accused Harper of having "refused to repatriate Mr. Khadr or otherwise resolve the matter."

    In spite of the fact that Khadr was arrested and detained when Liberal governments were in power in Canada, Goodale was referring to appeals during Harper's tenure — which began in 2006 — by Canadian Liberal and human rights lawyers to "bring Omar Khadr home."

    In 2008, former Canadian Justice Minister Irwin Cotler wrote:

    "I join other scholars and associations of jurists in calling for Omar Khadr to be transferred into the custody of Canadian law enforcement officials, to be afforded due process under Canadian law, with prospects for appropriate rehabilitation and integration."

    Cotler also stated,

    "Admittedly, the Khadr family has emerged, as some have put it, as synonymous with terrorism. But, the test of the rule of law is not its application in the easy cases, but its retention in the unpopular ones… Omar Khadr, a child victim, should now be afforded the justice denied him all these years, however unpopular and unpalatable his case may appear to be."

    In response to Goodale's implication that had it not been for the previous government, the current one would not have been forced to apologize to and pay Khadr, Harper immediately took to social media, writing:

    The government today attempted to lay blame elsewhere for their decision to conclude a secret deal with Omar Khadr. The decision to enter into this deal is theirs, and theirs alone, and it is simply wrong. Canadians deserve better than this. Today my thoughts are with Tabitha Speer and the families of all Canadian and allied soldiers who paid the ultimate price fighting to protect us.

    Canadian Senator Linda Frum railed against the settlement, tweeting: "Has any soldier who fought FOR Canada ever received as generous a reward as this soldier who fought against us?"

    Given Khadr's family history, Frum's fury is justified.

    As the New York Post reported, Khadr is the son of a Palestinian mother and an Egyptian father (Ahmed Khadr), who had strong ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, and became one of Osama bin Laden's loyal lieutenants. After 9/11, Ahmed Khadr was placed on the FBI's most-wanted list in relations to the attacks. He was arrested in Pakistan in 1995 on suspicion of financing the suicide bombing at the Egyptian Embassy in Islamabad, in which 16 people were killed. Protesting his innocence, he went on a hunger strike, and the Canadian government, then headed by Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, rallied behind him.

    While on a trade mission to Pakistan, Chrétien appealed to Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, and a few months later, Ahmed was released from prison and sent back with his family to Toronto. However, according to the New York Post, the Khadr clan soon returned to Pakistan, where Ahmed Khadr resumed his connections with al Qaeda and the Taliban. Young Omar Khadr not only met with the leaders of these terrorist groups, but lived with his parents and siblings in the bin Laden family compound, attending al Qaeda training camps, which his father — who was killed in 2003 — partly funded.

    The report continued:

    "A month before he joined an al Qaeda cell in 2002, Omar was sent by his father for private instruction in explosives and combat… [where he] learned to launch rocket-propelled grenades and became skilled at planting improvised explosive devices that were used to blow up US armored vehicles in Afghanistan."

    In his interrogation about the incident that led to his arrest and subsequent incarceration at Guantanamo, Omar Khadr said he had been on a suicide mission "to kill as many Americans as possible."

    In this still image taken from a video found in the rubble of the compound where Omar Khadr was captured on July 27, 2002, a 15-year-old Khadr constructs an improvised explosive device. (Courtesy U.S. Defense Operations/Wikimedia Commons)

    This did not prevent the U.S. military from flying an ophthalmologist to the Bagram Air Base — where was being treated for wounds he sustained while fighting American and Canadian soldiers — to save his eyes and keep him from going blind.

    Nor did it cause Omar to experience gratitude on the one hand, or remorse on the other. On the contrary, as military court documents revealed, when he was informed that Speer had died, he said he "felt happy" for having murdered an American. He also said that whenever he remembered killing Speer, it would make him "feel good."

    According to a report in the Globe and Mail, the Toronto lawyer representing Morris and Tabitha Speer — who won a default judgment in 2015 in the U.S. against Omar for $134 million – began proceedings to contest the Canadian government's settlement and prevent it from going forward.

    It is clearly too late for that; the money has already been transferred to Omar. Furthermore, the transaction was done swiftly and "quietly," to make legal action by taxpayers in Canada or the Morris and Speer families in America virtually impossible.

    Morris is understandably angry and hurt. "The fact is Chris Speer and myself were fighting with Canadians in Afghanistan," he said.

    "We were alongside the PPCLI (Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry). There was a Canadian flag flying along with the American flag at our base there, so it's quite a thing that now Canada is giving millions to a guy who would attack a compound where Canadians were serving. I don't see this as anything but treason… As far as I am concerned, Prime Minister Trudeau should be charged."

    Thus far, the administration in Washington has remained silent on Khadr pay-out, which came to light during the weekend of the G20 summit in Germany, where U.S. President Donald Trump heaped praise on his Canadian counterpart.

    Trump even opened his speech at a World Bank event to promote and finance women entrepreneurs in developing countries by declaring: "We have a great neighbor in Canada and Justin [Trudeau] is doing a spectacular job… Everybody loves him, and they love him for a reason…"

    This assertion, given the information that has since emerged about Khadr case, was unfortunate. Far more ironic under the circumstances, however, was the "Statement on Countering Terrorism," signed by the leaders of the G20.

    Its 21 clauses include a commitment to "address the evolving threat of returning foreign terrorist fighters … from conflict zones such as Iraq and Syria and remain committed to preventing [them] from establishing a foothold in other countries and regions around the world," and to "facilitate swift and targeted exchanges of information between intelligence and law enforcement and judicial authorities… [to] ensure that terrorists are brought to justice."

    Such words are empty without actions to back them up. Omar Khadr is a classic example of a "foreign terrorist fighter." Yet the Canadian legal system categorized him — in Cotler's words — as a "child victim, [who] should… be afforded the justice denied him all these years."

    It is bad enough to describe a teenager who set out to "kill as many Americans as possible" in this way. It is far worse that he is a free — and still very young — man, paid not only respect by the government whose values he was raised to abhor, but millions of dollars, to boot. If anything serves to encourage other terrorists to leave North America and Europe to fight in the Middle East, it is stories such as this one.

    The Trump administration must call Trudeau to task for this perversion, and offer an immediate and very public apology to Khadr's American victims, who did not receive a penny for their patriotic sacrifice.

  • Friend Insists Death Of Republican Operative Behind WSJ Collusion "Bombshell" Wasn't A Suicide

    Yesterday we reported how the death of Peter Smith, a longtime Republican operative and financier, had been ruled a suicide. Smith was the primary source for a bizarre WSJ story that tried to link National Security Adviser Mike Flynn with a group of individuals organized by Smith who bargained with a Russian hacker group for copies of what were purportedly Hillary Clinton’s missing 30,000 emails.

    Smith died on May 14 – 10 days after he was interviewed by WSJ for the piece. Though a reporter initially described his death as stemming from natural causes, the Chicago Tribune reported Friday that it had been, in fact, a suicide, citing local police records that describe the manner of death – asphyxiation due to helium poisoning – and an alleged suicide note that cited his recent ill health and the coming expiry of a life insurance policy as Smith’s reasons for taking his own life.

    But before that narrative could catch hold, a longtime associate of Smith who may have been the last person to speak with him has come forward, telling the Daily Caller that he doesn’t believe the police’s suicide ruling…and neither should you.

    Charles Ortel, a Wall Street investment banker and market analyst, told the DC that there were no indications the Chicago businessman and anti-Clinton political investigator was about to take his life when the two spoke on the phone the day before his death.

    “He may have been a fantastic actor but I certainly didn’t leave that phone call saying, ‘oh shit, the guy’s at the end of his rope,’” Charles Ortel, a Wall Street investment banker and market analyst, told The Daily Caller News Foundation’s (TheDCNF) Investigative Group.

     

    “This does not seem like a settled story. It made perfect sense to me he might have died of natural causes, but little chance he would have killed himself,” Smith said.

    Ortel and Smith had a common interest in the Clintons. Ortel has dug deeply into the financial operations of the Clinton Foundation. He first came to public attention in 2007 by exposing questionable accounting practices at General Electric, according to the DC.

    And Smith reportedly had a hand in exposing then Gov. Bill Clinton’s “Troopergate” scandal, where the future president used state troopers to guard him while he was having sex with various women who were not his wife.

    Ortel said in his last phone call to him, Smith seemed to be upbeat and very interested in future projects.

    Initially, Ortel assumed Smith died of natural causes, but after reading the police report, which included a description of a jerry-rigged suffocation device that’s widely used by terminally ill patients who opt to take their own lives, he’s not so sure.

     “There are lots of older guys like him who still ‘have it ‘and they’re still smart.  They like projects. They like the intellectual stimulation. He was very interested and pleased with his work,”  Ortel said.

    Ortel also said the description of the suicide note – with its all-caps type – was out of character for Smith, and that, out of all the emails they’d sent to each other, he couldn’t remember a single example of Smith typing in all caps.

    Ortel also was suspicious about the note Smith allegedly left behind, written in all caps, stating “NO FOUL PLAY WHATSOEVER.”

    He also noted that many life insurance policies typically exclude payments to beneficiaries in the case of suicide.

    He wrote that he was taking his own life because of a “RECENT BAD TURN IN HEALTH SINCE JANUARY, 2017” and that his timing was related “TO LIFE INSURANCE OF $5 MILLION EXPIRING.”

    Assuming, for a moment, Smith’s death was the result of foul play: what’s the explanation? Could it have been a politically motivated attack? In the original WSJ story, Smith said he’d received a cache of documents purporting to be the missing 30,000 emails that Clinton withheld from the FBI and State Department, but withheld them because he had doubts about their veracity. Maybe Smith was in possession of the legitimate emails, but lied about turning them over to Wikileaks. What if the Democrats were somehow warned about what Smith had in his possession, or at least what he believed he might have had. Is another "Seth Rich" scenario emerging?
     

  • 3 Examples That Show How Common Core Is Destroying Math Education In America

    Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

    Whenever you let federal bureaucrats get their hands on anything they are probably going to ruin it.  During the Obama administration, the Department of Education spearheaded a transformation of American education that was absolutely breathtaking.  Over a period of about five years, Common Core standards were implemented in almost every state in the entire nation.  Unfortunately, this has resulted in a huge step backward for public education in this country.  Common Core has been called “state-sponsored child abuse”, and it is a big reason why U.S. students are scoring so poorly on standardized tests compared to much of the rest of the world.

    According to Wikipedia, at one point 46 states had adopted Common Core, but now some states are having second thoughts…

    46 states initially adopted the Common Core State Standards, although implementation has not been uniform. At least 12 states have introduced legislation to repeal the standards outright,[1] and Indiana has since withdrawn from the standards.

    Sadly, many parents don’t even understand how dramatically our system of education has been tampered with.  In her book entitled The Education Invasion: How Common Core Fights Parents for Control of American Kids, Joy Pullmann exposes how the Gates Foundation has been one of the key players in the effort to get Common Core introduced into classrooms all over America…

    Organized in seven chapters, her book describes how the Gates Foundation promoted and continues to promote one extremely wealthy couple’s uninformed, unsupported, and unsupportable ideas on education for other people’s children while their own children are enrolled in a non-Common Cored private school. It explains how (but not exactly why) the Gates Foundation helped to centralize control of public education in the U.S. Department of Education. It also explains why parents, teachers, local school boards, and state legislators were the last to learn how the public schools their local and state taxes supported had been nationalized without Congressional knowledge or permission; and why they were expected to believe that their local public schools were now accountable for what and how they teach … not to the local and state taxpayers who fund them or to locally-elected school boards that by law are still supposed to set education policies not already determined by their state legislature … but to a distant bureaucracy in exchange for money to their state department of education to close “achievement gaps” between unspecified groups.

    But this isn’t just an issue about control.  The truth is that the approach to teaching basic fundamentals such as how to add and how to subtract is fundamentally different under Common Core.

    Let me share just three examples that show how much Common Core is changing the way that U.S. students learn math.  All of these examples have been floating around Facebook, and if you have never seen these before they are likely to make you quite angry.

    If I asked you to subtract 12 from 32, how would you do it?  Well, the “new way” is much, much more complicated than how we were all taught to do it…

    If that first one seemed bizarre to you, than you really aren’t going to like this one…

    And this last one was so confusing that a parent with a degree in engineering decided to include his own commentary on his child’s homework…

    How are kids supposed to function in the real world if this is how they are learning to do basic math?

    Personally, I am going to teach my daughter that 9 + 6 equals 15.  But that isn’t how it is supposed to be done under Common Core.  You can watch a video of a teacher explaining the very convoluted Common Core way to solve that math equation right here.

    And of course it isn’t just math that is the problem.  Common Core is systematically “dumbing down” our young people, and that may help to explain why the average U.S. college freshman now reads at a seventh grade level.

    So what is the answer?

    The first step in fixing our education system is to repeal Common Core.  But even in red states such as Idaho there is a lot of resistance…

    Since their inception, the Idaho Core Standards have been enmeshed in controversy.

     

    Some legislators and citizens have pushed for a repeal of the Idaho Core Standards, the state’s version of Common Core standards in math and English language arts. Those repeal efforts have gone nowhere in the Legislature.

    I don’t know what is wrong with our legislators.  The Republicans have full control in this state, and so there is absolutely no excuse for not getting something done.

    As I end this article, I want to give you an idea of just how far the quality of education in America has fallen over the past 100 years.  In Kentucky, an eighth grade exam from 1912 made a lot of headlines when it was donated to the Bullitt County History Museum.  As you can see, it is doubtful whether many of our college students would be able to pass such an exam today…

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Jul 15

Today’s News 15th July 2017

  • Retired Green Beret Warns: "There Could Be A Nuclear Strike Against The US Coming Soon"

    Authored by Jeremiah Johnson (nom de plume of a retired Green Beret of the United States Army Special Forces) via SHTFplan.com,

    For approximately the past five years, the Mainstream Media (MSM) and the Obama-administration supported research “think-tanks” for monitoring the North Korean situation have had a field day.  They consistently (along with the brain-dead public’s crowds of naysayers) and intentionally understated the capabilities of North Korea.  The experts in the field (such as Dr. Peter V. Pry, Admiral Bill Gortney, General Curtis Scapparotti) have not been able to be denied; however, they have been marginalized and made to seem to be “in conflict” with the prevailing, majority “view.”  The “tyranny of the majority,” in this case, was needed to accomplish the objectives of the Obama administration: appear to be “strong” on sanctions, and “aloof” with diplomacy, i.e., Barack Hussein Obama II’s not “lowering” himself to deal with North Korea diplomatically.

    The true objective of Obama regarding North Korea was to pursue a laissez-faire policy and allow North Korea to progress, becoming a viable threat, as it is today.

    All of this was deliberately planned by Obama and his handlers.  As far back as April 7, 2015, Admiral Bill Gortney (the former commander of North American Aerospace Defense, a.k.a. NORAD) gave a press conference in which he warned of North Korea’s capabilities with an ICBM, an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile…warned that North Korea could strike the United States with a nuclear warhead on an ICBM…he stated this in 2015.  Six months prior, in October of 2014 Admiral Gortney stated that North Korea had nuclear weapons, had miniaturization capabilities, and could place them on missiles that could reach the continental United States.

    Fast-forward to this year.  There was a joint article that was penned by Dr. Peter V. Pry, America’s foremost expert on EMP (Electromagnetic Pulse) threats posed to the United States by foreign nations and the head of every committee to brief Congress on those issues.  A former analyst with the Central Intelligence Agency, Dr. Pry is currently the Executive Director of the EMP Task Force on National and Homeland Security.  The article was co-authored by R. James Woolsey, former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.  Here are excerpts from that article, released on March 29, 2017 by The Hill:

    “The mainstream media, and some officials who should know better, continue to allege North Korea does not yet have capability to deliver on its repeated threats to strike the U.S. with nuclear weapons.  False reassurance is given to the American people that North Korea has not “demonstrated” that it can miniaturize a nuclear warhead small enough for missile delivery, or build a reentry vehicle for an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of penetrating the atmosphere to blast a U.S. city.

     

    Yet any nation that has built nuclear weapons and long-range missiles, as North Korea has done, can easily overcome the relatively much simpler technological challenge of warhead miniaturization and reentry vehicle design.

     

    The notion that North Korea is testing A-Bombs and H-Bomb components, but does not yet have the sophistication to miniaturize warheads and make reentry vehicles for missile delivery is absurd.

     

    …North Korea should be regarded as capable of delivering by satellite a small nuclear warhead, specially designed to make a high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack against the United States.

     

    According to the Congressional EMP Commission, a single warhead delivered by North Korean satellite could blackout the national electric grid and other life-sustaining critical infrastructures for over a year – killing 9 of 10 Americans by starvation and societal collapse.  Two North Korean satellites, the KMS-3 and KMS-4, presently orbit over the U.S. on trajectories consistent with surprise EMP attack.

     

    Why do the press and public officials ignore or under-report these facts?  Perhaps no administration wants to acknowledge that North Korea is an existential threat on their watch.  Whatever the motives for obfuscating the North Korean nuclear threat, the need to protect the American people is immediate and urgent…”

    There you have the main points to substantiate what was written earlier: a deliberate obfuscation of the facts by the Obama administration coupled with the complicit MSM to allow North Korea the time to develop the capabilities to strike the continental United States.  Let’s also try not to forget that a “standard” ICBM is not the only focus of North Korea: the SLBM (Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missile) is a threat.  Recall that CNN put this report out on April 24, 2016:

    “After previous launch attempts by Pyongyang failed, this one seems to have gone much better, one U.S. official noted.  “North Korea’s sub launch capability has gone from a joke to something very serious,” this official said. “The U.S. is watching this very closely.”  Asked whether the test was successful, another U.S. official told CNN, “essentially yes.”

    (CNN, from Don Melvin, Jim Sciutto, and Wil Ripley)

    For years, now, the paid think-tank naysayers have decried the capabilities of North Korea and downplayed their programs of missile and nuclear warhead developments.  on September 7, 2016, two days prior to the North Korean nuclear test of September 9th, a DoS (Denial of Service) attack crashed the website of the Project on Crowdsourced Satellite Imagery based in California.  Working on this “project” are two analysts, Melissa Hanrahan, and Jeffrey Lewis.  Both have consistently and repeatedly denied North Korea’s nuclear capabilities and as late as this year, both have stated that North Korea “was years away from perfecting an ICBM.”  Not only have they been proven wrong, but Lewis “backpedaled” and declared that this latest launch from last week was indeed a North Korean-launched ICBM.              

    Fast-forward to today: The United States just flew a live-fire “exercise” on the border of North Korea, and the United States is now screwing with North Korea’s money.

    Two American B-1 B bombers dropped live bombs on simulated missile battery targets while accompanied by South Korean fighter aircraft targeting simulated underground bunkers.  North Korea responded in their state-run media with such:

    “The US, with its dangerous military provocation, is pushing the risk of a nuclear war on the peninsula to a tipping point.”

    They labeled the maneuver as “…a dangerous military gambit of warmongers who are trying to ignite the fuse of a nuclear war on the peninsula,” and went on to add this, of great importance for you to focus upon, so much so that I’ve underlined the important part:

    “A small misjudgment or error can immediately lead to the beginning of a nuclear war, which will inevitably lead to another world war.”

    Do you realize the silent significance of the underlined portion?  The MSM has tried to paint a picture of North Korea as a “rogue” state with an insane leader.  In truth, there are other nations, such as China and Russia that conduct commerce with North Korea as well as having pledged military alliances.

    Does anyone really think that China and Russia will sit this one out, and that it will all be just an EMP by North Korea followed by a couple of nukes dropped by the U.S.?

    In the meantime, it has just been revealed by Jonathan Stempel of Reuters that the U.S. is going after North Korea’s money.  Here is an excerpt of that article:

    “U.S. authorities have tried to seize millions of dollars associated with several companies that deal with North Korea, including the country’s military, from eight large international banks, according to court filings made public on Thursday.  The effort was revealed two days after North Korea tested a long-range missile capable of reaching Alaska, ratcheting up tensions with the United States and adding to worries about North Korea leader Kim Jong Un’s nuclear weapons plans.  Thursday’s filings show that Chief Judge Beryl Howell of the federal court in Washington, D.C. on May 22 granted U.S. prosecutors’ applications for “damming” seizure warrants against Bank of America Corp, Bank of New York Mellon Corp, Citigroup Inc, Deutsche Bank AG, HSBC Holdings Plc, JPMorgan Chase & Co, Standard Chartered Plc and Wells Fargo & Co.  Prosecutors believe the banks have processed more than $700 million of “prohibited” transactions on behalf of entities tied to North Korea since 2009, including the period after Donald Trump was elected U.S. president, the filings show.”

    With measures such as military exercises and money seizures, it can be clearly seen that Un and North Korea are being maneuvered into a situation where the only recourses are capitulation to the U.S./IMF hegemony (which we know will not occur) or to conduct a strike against the United States.  North Korea has that capability right now…to launch a nuclear strike against the continental United States.

    The next world war will be initiated by an EMP, and North Korea will either launch it or take the blame for it by a country that did launch it…to include the United States.

    Do not be in denial of the threat: be the “10th Man,” as in the movie “World War Z.”  Think outside of the confines that society places upon your intellect.  It is not “fear porn” to continuously “sound off” about what is going on around us, especially when people are either unaware of it or denying that it can happen.  The MSM is either silent on the subject, or it skews the information.  There are still those who are unaware of the current threats to the U.S. outlined in this article.  There are still many people who will be reading this information for the first time: those who may have heard bits and pieces of it and are not aware of what is going on or the depth and significance of it.

    It is primarily for them that I write this piece, and secondly to those who may wish to review some of the previously-released information and reflect upon it…for them to make the right decisions regarding preparations for themselves and their families.

    Bottom line: everyone is pretty much on their own…everyone and their families.  The “sink or swim” tenet does apply.  It is stupid to discount information that may help you when the time comes (or before it does) just because of “going along with the crowd,” or skepticism.  Many people would willingly burn to a crisp and stay in a target area just to emphasize their denial and disagreement with someone else’s view.  Throughout history, these people follow a stubborn refusal to admit there is always more than what appears on the surface. To act upon such information and decisively (at the critical point) is paramount.

    I implore everyone to study carefully the buildup by the parties involved and weigh the reasons (who, what, when, where, how, and…most importantly, why) there could be a strike against the U.S. coming soon.  Many people believe that it is, and I am one of them.  I’d rather be wrong a thousand times than be “right” once on it, but the situation changes day to day.  It is better to be prepared for it.  If it comes, I’m not going to take any satisfaction at those who constantly deride or detract.  Instead I’m going to thank God that I’m safe and pray that others took steps to keep themselves and their families safe, too, and make it through the times to come.  Perhaps the whole country will come crashing down, but maybe…just maybe, we can survive and make it better than it was before.

    I close with the words of Dr. Pry:

    “…North Korea is a mortal nuclear threat to the United States – right now.  North Korea has already successfully tested and developed nuclear weapons.  It has also already miniaturized nuclear weapons for ballistic missile delivery and has armed missiles with nuclear warheads.

     

    Any nuclear weapon detonated above an altitude of 30 kilometers will generate an electromagnetic pulse that will destroy electronics and could collapse the electric power grid and other critical infrastructures – communications, transportation, banking and finance, food and water – that sustain modern civilization and the lives of 300 million Americans.  All could be destroyed by a single nuclear weapon making an EMP attack.

     

    A Super-EMP attack on the United States would cause much more and much deeper damage than a primitive nuclear weapon…North Korean nuclear tests look suspiciously like a Super-EMP weapon. A Super-EMP warhead would have a low yield, like the North Korean device, because it is not designed to create a big explosion, but to convert its energy into gamma rays, that generate the EMP effect.

     

    Reportedly South Korean military intelligence concluded, independent of the EMP Commission, that Russian scientists are in North Korea helping develop a Super-EMP warhead. In 2012, a military commentator for the People’s Republic of China stated that North Korea has Super-EMP nuclear warheads.  A Super-EMP warhead would not weigh much, and could probably be delivered by North Korea’s ICBM.  The missile does not have to be accurate, as the EMP field is so large that detonating anywhere over the United States would have catastrophic consequences.

     

    So, as of Dec. 12, North Korea’s successful orbit of a satellite demonstrates its ability to make an EMP attack against the United States – right now.”

     

    Dr. Peter Vincent Pry, December 19, 2012, Washington Times, “PRY: North Korea EMP     attack could destroy U.S. – now.”

  • Most Republicans Say Universities Negatively Impact America

    A majority of Republicans think higher education is having a negative effect on the U.S. according to new polling from the Pew Research Center.

    As Statista's Niall McCarthy notes, both Democrats and Republicans are deeply divided about the impact of a whole host of institutions and in many instances, that partisan divide has widened significantly over the past 12 months. The level of division is most evident when it comes to America's colleges and universities…

    Infographic: Most Republicans Say Universities Negatively Impact U.S. | Statista

    You will find more statistics at Statista

    While 55 percent of the public think U.S. colleges and universities are having a positive effect on the country, Republicans are particularly downcast about higher education. Pew found that an overwhelming 72 percent majority of Democrats think colleges and universities are exherting a positive influence while 58 percent of Republicans say they are having a negative effect.

    Republican skepticism of the national news media is no secret so it comes as little surprise that 85 percent say it is having a negative effect on the country. Democrats are more divided on the media with 46 percent saying it is negative and 44 percent feeling it is positive. When it comes to banks and financial institutions, Democrats are more skeptical than Republicans while majorities in both parties are positive about churches and religious organizations.

  • The New Silk Road Will Go Through Syria

    Authored by Pepe Escobar via Asia Times,

    China and Syria have already begun discussing post-war infrastructure investment; with a 'Matchmaking Fair for Syria Reconstruction' held in Beijing

    Amid the proverbial doom and gloom pervading all things Syria, the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune sometimes yield, well, good fortune.

    Take what happened this past Sunday in Beijing. The China-Arab Exchange Association and the Syrian Embassy organized a Syria Day Expo crammed with hundreds of Chinese specialists in infrastructure investment. It was a sort of mini-gathering of the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), billed as “The First Project Matchmaking Fair for Syria Reconstruction”.

    And there will be serious follow-ups: a Syria Reconstruction Expo; the 59th Damascus International Fair next month, where around 30 Arab and foreign nations will be represented; and the China-Arab States Expo in Yinchuan, Ningxia Hui province, in September.

    Qin Yong, deputy chairman of the China-Arab Exchange Association, announced that Beijing plans to invest $2 billion in an industrial park in Syria for 150 Chinese companies.

    Nothing would make more sense. Before the tragic Syrian proxy war, Syrian merchants were already incredibly active in the small-goods Silk Road between Yiwu and the Levant. The Chinese don’t forget that Syria controlled overland access to both Europe and Africa in ancient Silk Road times when, after the desert crossing via Palmyra, goods reached the Mediterranean on their way to Rome. After the demise of Palmyra, a secondary road followed the Euphrates upstream and then through Aleppo and Antioch.

    Beijing always plans years ahead. And the government in Damascus is implicated at the highest levels. So, it’s not an accident that Syrian Ambassador to China Imad Moustapha had to come up with the clincher: China, Russia and Iran will have priority over anyone else for all infrastructure investment and reconstruction projects when the war is over.

    The New Silk Roads, or One Belt, One Road Initiative (Obor), will inevitably feature a Syrian hub – complete with the requisite legal support for Chinese companies involved in investment, construction and banking via a special commission created by the Syrian embassy, the China-Arab Exchange Association and the Beijing-based Shijing law firm.

    Get me on that Shanghai-Latakia cargo

    Few remember that before the war China had already invested tens of billions of US dollars in Syria’s oil and gas industry. Naturally the priority for Damascus, once the war is over, will be massive reconstruction of widely destroyed infrastructure. China could be part of that via the AIIB. Then comes investment in agriculture, industry and connectivity – transportation corridors in the Levant and connecting Syria to Iraq and Iran (other two Obor hubs).

    What matters most of all is that Beijing has already taken the crucial step of being directly involved in the final settlement of the Syrian war – geopolitically and geo-economically. Beijing has had a special representative for Syria since last year – and has already been providing humanitarian aid.

    Needless to add, all those elaborate plans depend on no more war. And there’s the rub.

    With the demise of Daesh (ISIS), or at least its imminent loss of any significant urban center, no one knows in what manner a fragmented, phony Caliphate “Sunnistan” might be manipulated into cutting Syria from its New Silk Road future.

    Qatar has already provided a game-changer; Doha has gotten closer to Tehran (common interests in South Pars/North Dome gas-field oblige), as well as Damascus – much to the despair of the House of Saud. So, unlike the recent past, Qatar is not engaged in regime change anymore. But still there are the diverging interests of Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Israel and, of course, Washington, to accommodate.

    A possible scenario out of what Putin and Trump negotiated in Hamburg – that was not relayed by either Lavrov or Tillerson – is that the ceasefire in southwestern Syria, assuming it holds, could mean US peacekeeping forces in effect sanctioning the creation of a demilitarized zone (DMZ) between the Syrian Golan and the rest of the country.

    Translation: the Golan de facto annexed by Israel. And the “carrot” for Moscow would be Washington accepting Crimea de facto re-incorporated into the Russian Federation.

    That may sound less far-fetched than it seems. The next few months will tell if this is indeed a plausible scenario.

    The other big sticking point is Ankara against the YPG Kurds. Contrary to the ominous and quite possible Balkanization scenario, Washington and Moscow might well decide, in tandem, to let them sort things out by themselves. Then we will inevitably have the Turkish army occupying al-Bab for the foreseeable future.

    The bottom line: that Saudi Arabia gets nothing. And Israel and Turkey get political/military “wins”. It’s hard to imagine how Moscow could possibly sell this arrangement to Iran as a victory. Still, Tehran may not have a free flow Iran-Iraq-Syria-Hezbollah route totally back in action, but it will maintain close relations with Damascus and be engaged in the expansion of the New Silk Roads.

    The key question from now on seems to be whether Washington will follow the deep state “Syraq” policy – as in “Assad must go” mixed with support or weaponizing of non-existent “moderate rebels”; or whether Trump’s priority – to eliminate Daesh/ISIS for good – will prevail.

    Beijing, anyway, has made up its mind. It will work non-stop for the Iran-Iraq-Syria triumvirate to become a key hub in Obor. Any bets against a future, booming Shanghai-Latakia container route?

  • China Warns Japan: "Get Used To Our Warplanes", Sends Spy Ship Near Alaska

    In an unexpectedly brazen rattling of sabers, just days after China deployed troops to its first foreign base in Djibouti, a move which the Global Times clarified is “about protecting its own security, not about seeking to control the world, Beijing made a less than subtle reversal, when it told Japan on Friday to “get used to it” after it flew six warplanes over the Miyako Strait between two southern Japanese islands in a military exercise.

    It all started late on Thursday night, when Japan’s defense ministry issued a token statement describing the flyover by the formation of Xian H-6 bombers, also known as China’s B-52, earlier that day as “unusual”, while noting that there had been no violation of Japanese airspace.

    The flyover was hardly surprising: the Chinese navy and air force have been carrying out a series of exercises in the Western Pacific in recent month, both as they hone their ability to operate far from their home shores, as well as a trial balloon to gauge the reactions of their increasingly more nervous neighbors.

    What made this flyover different, is that usually following a formal protest by the “offended” country, Beijing would take note and issue a token statement of its own, “neither admitting nor denying” guilt, but certainly without assurances of further transgressions. But not this time. On Friday the Chinese defense ministry said it was “legal and proper” for its military aircraft to operate in the airspace and that it would continue to organize regular training exercises according to “mission requirements.”

    In other words, Beijing pushed back against Japan’s complaint suggesting that China had not only done nothing wrong, but that this behaviour would escalate:

    “The relevant side should not make a fuss about nothing or over-interpret, it will be fine once they get used to it,” the ministry said in a statement.

    Furthermore, the Miyako Strait is between Japan’s islands of Miyako and Okinawa, to the northeast of self-ruled Taiwan, which China claims as its own.

    It wasn’t just Japan: also on Thursday, Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense said the Chinese bombers flew just outside its air defense identification zone and that it had “closely followed” the movements.

    It is probably safe to assume that several more such close encounters, coupled an escalation in the harsh language – don’t expect Japan to back off diplomatically, especially not under Abe who militant ambitions are hardly secret – and a repeat of the tensions that erupted in 2013/2014 over territorial claims in the East China Sea, and which ended with diplomatic relations between China and Japan collapsing as well as nationalist sentiment in both China and Japan erupting, appears likely.

    In a separate close encounter, at the same time that the US was conducting a succeeful THAAD-based intercept of a ballistic missile on Tuesday, a Chinese spy ship was lurking just 100 miles from Alaska’s coast to witness the said test for itself, Fox News reported. Furthermore, it was the first time the North American Aerospace Defense Command had seen this class of Chinese spy ship before near Alaska, an official told Fox News. The ship was spotted off the coast of Kodiak, on Alaska’s southern tip.

    The THAAD test came after North Korea successfully test launched an alleged ICBM missile (this has subsequently been challenged with many claiming the missile was only intermediate range) that flew longer than any test conducted by Kim’s regime to date. Officials have said that Kim may now have the capability to strike Alaska. Prior to the test, both China and Russia have repeatedly demanded that the US remove its THAAD installations from South Korea over concerns that the balance of power in the Pacific Rim could shift, and destabilize the region.

    China has sent warships to Alaska before, most famously in 2015 when former Barack Obama visited Alaska, China “greeted” him by sending five ships, while more recently a Chinese warship trailed a U.S. warship when it sailed earlier this month near a contested island in the South China Sea.

    China also recently launched a new class of destroyer in Shanghai, which military experts say is on par with modern U.S. Burke class guided-missile destroyers. Furthermore, China now has roughly the same number of destroyers, cruisers and submarines as the U.S. Navy, according to new study from CNAS a Washington think tank.

    In a separate naval adventure, China’s first fully functional aircraft carrier recently sailed near Taiwan after making a port call in Hong Kong that marked 20 years since the British handed the city over. The carrier was declared combat ready following initial tests in November. It does not, however, have advanced steam catapults to launch jets like a modern U.S. Navy aircraft carrier.

    It was not clear where the Chinese spy ship had moved to after its brief trip to the Alaska coast.

  • Is It Time To Think And Act Differently On North Korea?

    Authored by George Koo via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    North Korea’s latest test of a missile with a range capable of threatening American cities has left the Trump Administration somewhere between wishful thinking and a hard place. Too bad neither represents a realistic resolution of the conundrum.

    The easy way out, for the US at least, is to “let China do it.” President Donald Trump, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Defense Secretary James Mattis and UN Ambassador Nikki Haley have in unison chanted the same basic mantra: The problem would be solved if China would apply more pressure on North Korea.

    First there is no evidence China can tell North Korea what to do with any real hope of success. The two countries are not buddies and there is no love lost between China’s President Xi Jinping and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. They have not met since both leaders came to power in 2012 and they communicate via messengers.

    China has supported a UN resolution strongly condemning North Korea. The Kim regime no more pays heed to China than it has to protests from South Korea, Japan or the United States.

    Just as China cannot stop North Korea from developing nuclear weapon and intercontinental missile technology, North Korea is not developing these technologies for China’s sake. North Korea believes it needs nuclear strike capability in order to be taken seriously by the US.

    To date, sanctions on North Korea have not worked. The American response has been to ask the UN Security Council to impose more sanctions. In particular, Trump does not feel China is tightening the screws hard enough.

    Shutting down North Korea’s economy might bring Kim to heel from the American perspective but clearly such a move is unacceptable from China’s view. Economic collapse would trigger a massive humanitarian crisis and China would be left to deal with the refugees as they take the only viable option and migrate north into China.

    There is a flip side to this approach. Even if the sanctions bring North Korea to its knees, it does not mean the Kim regime will become more conciliatory. Kim may decide he has nothing to lose and simply launch an attack on the south.

    The other tough approach is to launch a Rumsfeldian shock and awe military bombardment on North Korea before the North can attack.

    There is virtually no chance, however, that carpet-bombing could vaporize the array of artillery and missiles facing South Korea. The consequent damage to Seoul and other parts of South Korea from the retaliation would be significant, not to mention the danger to the 30,000 American troops stationed in the south.

    There is also no assurance any precision strikes could successfully take out Kim and his inner circle nor knock out all the country’s nuclear weapons and development centers. The risks of failure are simply too great to contemplate.

    There is a more sensible approach that an increasing number of commentators and foreign policy observers are suggesting the Trump Administration consider: offer talks without preconditions.

    North Korea fears the US and knows Beijing cannot commit on behalf of Washington. Pyongyang wants to deal directly with Washington and does not see China as a credible intermediary. Why not begin a direct conversation?

    The Clinton Administration almost reached an agreement with Pyongyang when the clock ran out on Clinton’s term. George W. Bush elected to ignore North Korea and then imposed preconditions before being willing to resume negotiations.

    Pyongyang saw the Bush White House as dealing in bad faith and that the only way to gain American respect was to complete the development of a nuclear bomb. North Korea detonated its first nuclear bomb in October 2006, during Bush’s second term.

    The Obama administration, unfortunately, followed the Bush line: no negotiations without preconditions. To push for North Korea’s agreement, Washington bandied the threats of sanctions and solicited Beijing for help.

    In the 16 years since the end of the Clinton administration, Washington and Pyongyang have made no progress in reaching a common understanding. Each has accused the other of acting in bad faith. The US threatened more sanctions; North Korea kept testing weapons with bigger bang and missiles with longer range.

    This endless cycle is not going anywhere and the threat of an American shock-and-awe style attack clearly worries Pyongyang. Why can’t Washington soften a bit and show a willingness to talk without pre-conditions? What does it have to lose?

    Will the world respect us less as a fearsome hegemon because we are willing to swallow our pride, or will it applaud us for taking the first step towards peace? Donald Trump has an opportunity to accomplish an important foreign policy triumph that has eluded his two predecessors.

  • Mexico's Gasoline Thieves Go Full Mad Max As Competing Cartels Declare War On Each Other And The Army

    Fuel theft in Mexico used to consist of a few villagers drilling holes in Pemex pipelines and carrying away just enough gasoline to fill their vehicles and maybe a couple extra gallons to sell on the side of the freeway.  But as The Columbian notes, illegally tapping into pipelines and stealing gas from Mexico’s state-owned oil company has morphed into a very well organized criminal enterprise, run by well-armed regional cartels and supported by distribution on a commercial scale to factories and petrol stations.

    Heavy arms and violence seen in Tuesday’s confrontation in Puebla state reflect its growth into a billion-dollar business that supplies not just the people selling gas on the sides of highways — called “huachicoleros” — but factories and gasoline station chains.

     

    It has become an industrial-scale operation, involving a string of villages and hamlets along pipeline routes, not just in Puebla, but in Guanajuato, Veracruz, Tamaulipas and other Mexican states. The government says more than 6,000 illegal pipeline taps were found in 2016 and officials have been detecting an average of about 20 taps a day this year.

     

    “Of all the fuel that is stolen, only 10 percent is sold to the public” by roadside vendors, said Jesus Morales, the top police official in Puebla state. “The other 90 percent goes to big business groups, to gas stations, factories.”

    Meanwhile, the collection and distribution of stolen fuel has become every bit as barbaric as the drug trade with local villagers being given quotas by organized cartels and then suffering brutal consequences when those quotas aren’t met.

    As the stakes have risen, fuel theft has become a blood industry.

     

    In early July, nine people were killed, including five men whose bodies were burned, in a dispute between fuel thieves in the town of Huehuetlan in Puebla state. Morales said the killings involved a gang of distributors trying to collect from local vendors who were unable to meet their sales quotas because of police raids.

     

    “They committed this barbarous act as a gesture of anger,” said Morales, who claimed that vendors have recently raised the price of stolen fuel to near that of legitimate gasoline — it used to be half as much — because their supplies are being cut off.

     

    As the police officers waited near the cornfield in Puebla, they saw a huge column of smoke rise into the sky after a clandestine warehouse of stolen fuel went up in flames about two miles down the road.

     

    Authorities couldn’t go into the area to fight the blaze because they risked a confrontation with villagers.

     

    “They don’t even let the fire department enter,” Assistant Public Safety Secretary Jose Tlachi said. “They usually try to put the fires out themselves.”

     

    Pemex workers and local villagers paint a surreal scene of the carnage left in the wake of this relatively nascent criminal enterprise which includes 1,000’s of abandoned “Max Max-style” vehicles and gasoline literally flooding entire fields after pipeline taps are drilled and then simply abandoned once tanks have been filled.

    A former soldier carrying an AR-15 and extra clips who was patrolling the pipeline for Pemex said the police officers had earlier been attacked by three armored trucks, explaining their reluctance to confront the thieves a second time.

     

    “You can tell they are armored by the weight of the vehicles. They are better-armed than we are,” he said.

     

    The battle against the fuel thieves has left a strange “huachicolero” landscape east of Mexico City. Fields are littered with leaking illegal taps, abandoned fuel tanks and Mad Max-style vehicles whose interiors have been ripped out to hold thousand-liter tanks. Fires from stolen fuel are common.

     

    The vehicles the gangs use are usually stolen and abandoned after a few trips. Over 1,700 of such vehicles have been seized in the last two months.

    Meanwhile, just like with the drug cartels, local police forces are finding themselves outgunned by the thieves who have the benefit of better weapons and armored vehicles.

    The police officers gripped their assault rifles tightly as they stared at the men filling plastic tanks and loading them onto a dozen pickup trucks in a cornfield in central Mexico. Even though a crime was being committed in front of them, the officers said it was too dangerous to move in.

     

    They had to wait until the army arrived to advance because the suspects were better-armed than they were and an earlier attempt to arrest them had been repelled by gunfire, officials said.

     

    “In the morning there were 40 trucks loading,” said Francisco, a security employee with the state oil company Petroleos Mexicanos, or Pemex, who asked that his last name not be used for safety reasons. “We saw them loading, we went in, and they started shooting at us. The criminals had an armored car.”

    Of course, gas thieving skyrocketed in Mexico earlier this year after President Pena Nieto decided to remove federal subsidies and hike prices a little over 20%, a move intended to offset budget deficits.  In hindsight, the price hike has cost the state-owned oil company, Pemex, at least $1 billion worth of stolen fuel and launched a brand new cartel war…probably not the expected outcome.

  • Human Guinea Pigs: Congress Slams Door On Pentagon Biochemical Weapons Testing Declassification

    In the 1960’s and 1970’s the US government tested chemical and biological weapons on US troops in still little known secret programs called Projects 112 and SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). The Vietnam era tests involved some 6,000 military personnel being subject to experiments involving deadly nerve agents like sarin and VX, as well as biological agents like E. Coli, all of which can result in quick death or potential lifelong debilitating health issues such as long-term central nervous system failure. A fatal dose of VX nerve agent, for example, can kill in minutes, but it is unknown if the program resulted in deaths because documents remain classified as “Top Secret” even 50 years later. Veterans advocacy groups have long tried to get specifics of the program declassified in the hopes that disclosure might allow victims of the tests access to health benefits and better medical treatment, but on Thursday Congress slammed the door on these attempts, leaving veterans and some congressional sponsors outraged.


    USS George Eastman personnel were among those identified by the National
    Academies of     Sciences as subject to US government experiments in biochem warfare.

    Some limited details of the highly classified program came to light in 2000, when the Department of Veterans Affairs obtained documents related to the program from the Pentagon in order to study medical treatments for claimants. But veteran victims of testing have long been left in the lurch as the Pentagon decides how much information should be shared with the public. Veterans Affairs has an official statement on its website – the result of in-house studies in coordination with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, claiming there’s no evidence that exposure has led to ill-health:

    Project 112/Project SHAD, or Shipboard Hazard and Defense, was a series of tests conducted by the Department of Defense from 1962 to 1974. Servicemembers participated in conducting the tests. The purpose was to determine the potential risks to U.S. warships and American forces from chemical and biological warfare agents.

     

    To date, there is no clear evidence of specific, long-term health problems associated with participation in Project SHAD.

    Disturbingly, the National Academies admits in a 2016 study that among the 6000 personnel involved in the tests…

    Only some of the involved military personnel were aware of the nature of the tests at the time they were conducted.

    Table: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine study of
    Project SHAD agents used on troop personnel and hypothesized health effects.

    Reps. Mike Thompson, D-Calif., Don Young, R-Alaska, and Walter Jones, R-N.C. have worked on behalf of veterans groups to put the issue before Congress. The congressmen sponsored language in a defense policy bill this week that would force the secretary of defense to either declassify documents related to the chemical program or explain to Congress why he can’t. The Pentagon has kept silent on the issue.

    On Thursday the House Rules Committee, which decides what goes before the House floor, struck down the proposal, so the declassification won’t even be up for discussion before Congress. An enraged Rep. Thompson called the fact that it didn’t even make it out of committee “shameful” and took to the house floor saying:

    These tests were an ugly part of our history. They put veteran lives at risk. And our veterans have every right to know what it was they were exposed to, how much they were exposed to, we need to think about their safety and their security.

    A number of veteran spokespersons questioned how greater public knowledge of the experiments would compromise national security, which appears to be the Pentagon’s position. Government classification often has more to do with covering up embarrassing secrets and preventing lawsuits than national security. A number of outrageously immoral programs going back to the middle of the last century are already well-known and documented, including Mk-Ultra, Operation Paperclip, and nuclear testing on soldiers. Thompson told McClatchy News just prior to the proposal going to committee:

    It’s been over 50 years since these tests were conducted and the DOD has yet to provide a complete accounting of what truly happened to our service members. Veterans can’t wait any longer.

    It is entirely possible that buried amidst the stacks of Top Secret DoD documentation on project SHAD is the United States’ own horrific Ronald Maddison story. Maddison was victim of what is widely considered to be the most sickeningly scandalous case of human experimentation in UK history. In 1953 Maddison, a 20-year-old Royal Air Force engineer, thought he had volunteered for mild experiments related to curing the common cold. Instead he was given a large dose of liquid sarin drops applied directly to his skin by military scientists at England’s Porton Down labs in order to study the effects. Maddison died an agonizing death, which the UK government spent decades covering up.
     

    Ronald Maddison, subject of
    UK chemical testing at Porton Down

    Details of the Ronald Maddison story only came to light over 50 years after his death, when an unwitting eyewitness named Alfred Thornhill went public. Thornhill told The Guardian:

    “I saw his leg rise up from the bed and I saw his skin begin turning blue. It started from the ankle and started spreading up his leg. It was like watching somebody pouring a blue liquid into a glass, it just began filling up. I was standing by the bed gawping. It was like watching something from outer space and then one of the doctors produced the biggest needle I had ever seen. It was the size of a bicycle pump and went down onto the lad’s body. The sister saw me gawping and told me to get out.”

    Maddison’s ordeal was not an isolated case of chemical weapons testing using human guinea pigs in either Britain or America, but it was certainly one of the ugliest in terms of the circumstances of his death. As 6000 possibly sick US veterans got the door slammed in their faces yesterday regarding project SHAD, we must ask: what is the Pentagon hiding?

  • Locals Furious At Plan To Dump Radioactive Water From Fukushima Into Pacific Ocean

    In the latest sign that the area surrounding the destroyed Fukushima power plant is far from ready for the return of human inhabitants, locals and fishing groups are criticizing a plan to release water containing radioactive tritium from the ruined Fukushima power plant into the ocean, according to the Telegraph. Officials of Tokyo Electric Power Co., the operator of the plant, say tritium poses little risk to human health and is quickly diluted by the ocean. But for some, the plan undoubtedly dredges up uncomfortable memories from 2013, when it was revealed that 300 tonnes of radioactive material had been leaking into the Pacific Ocean from the devastated plant every day. It was also revealed that TEPCO had known about the leaks, but had tried to cover them up.

    TEPCO has been tasked with decommissioning the plant, and has been using robots to find and clean the melted nuclear fuel debris that is believed to be creating exorbitant levels of radiation in the area surrounding the plant. Though the company had to pull some of its robots out in February after radiation reached such high levels that not even machinery could function correctly, according to the International Business Times.

    In March 2011, a magnitude 9 undersea megaquake triggered a massive tsunami that battered coastal North Eastern Japan, and triggered the level seven meltdowns of three nuclear reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant, and the evacuation of 160,000 residents and the implementation of a 310 square mile uninhabitable zone. The quake was the worst to ever hit Japan, and it caused the worst nuclear disaster the world had seen since Ukraine’s Chernobyl meltdown in 1986. The three reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant melted down when the tsunami caused a blackout at the plant that shut off its cooling systems.

    Six years after the disaster, some residents are beginning to return as the Japanese government prepares to lift restrictions on four towns in the affected area. But a completed cleanup effort could take decades, and the government must still find a way to exterminate the radioactive boars that have overrun the area.

    Takashi Kawamura, chairman of TEPCO, told local media "The decision has already been made” regarding the tritium infused water. He added, however, that the utility is waiting for approval from the Japanese government before going ahead with the plan and is seeking the understanding of local residents.

    The tritium is building up in water that has been used to cool three reactors that suffered fuel melt-downs after cooling equipment was destroyed during the earthquake and tsunami. Around 770,000 tons of highly radioactive water is being stored in 580 tanks at the site. Many of the contaminants can be filtered out, but the technology does not presently exist to remove tritium from water.

    Environmental activist say dumping the tritium-infused water is part of a pattern of negligence on the part of TEPCO stretching back to before the earthquake even happened, when the company failed to take proper precautions to reinforce the cooling systems at the plants’ reactors.

    "This accident happened more than six years ago and the authorities should have been able to devise a way to remove the tritium instead of simply announcing that they are going to dump it into the ocean", said Aileen Mioko-Smith, an anti-nuclear campaigner with Kyoto-based Green Action Japan.

    "They say that it will be safe because the ocean is large so it will be diluted, but that sets a precedent that can be copied, essentially permitting anyone to dump nuclear waste into our seas", she told The Telegraph.

    Fishermen who operate in waters off the plant say the release of any radioactive material will devastate their industry, which is still struggling to recover from the initial nuclear disaster, according to the Telegraph.

    "Releasing [tritium] into the sea will create a new wave of unfounded rumours, making all our efforts for naught", Kanji Tachiya, head of a local fishing cooperative, told Kyodo News.
     

  • BEHOLD: The Greatest Trump vs CNN Fake News Meme, Motion Picture Edition

     

    Content originally published at iBankCoin.com

    After a week of pure chaos, I thought you’d enjoy this.

    Watch.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Jul 14

Today’s News 14th July 2017

  • Oust Trump, War With Russia

    Authored by Finian Cunningham via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    Behind the sensational Western media coverage now linking the US president’s son to alleged Russian collusion in the American election, the real euphoria stems from relief that, at last, some «evidence» has been found.

    For more than seven months now, the US corporate media have been running unrelenting claims that somehow Donald J Trump colluded with Russian state-sponsored hackers to get elected over his Democrat rival Hillary Clinton.

    The media campaign has been dismissed as a witch hunt by Trump. Perhaps more sinisterly, US-Russia relations have also become deeply toxic due to the allegations. Not even a friendly meeting between Trump and Putin at last weekend’s G20 summit in Germany seems able to lift the poisonous cloud over bilateral relations.

    However, the never-ending «Russia-gate» story was, to be frank, at risk of boring people to death from the sheer lack of evidence to shore up the conjecture of Trump being a Russian stooge. Despite the fact that three separate government probes have been working on the issue, they have nothing to show for it.

    Then this week the «Russia-gate» story-tellers got a lifeline with reports that the president’s eldest son, Donald Jr, held a meeting with a Russian lawyer over a year ago at Trump Tower in New York City. The disclosure came from emails sent by Trump’s son to a mediator who promised «dirt on Clinton» that would damage her election campaign.

    Democrats, Republicans, supporters of Clinton and the anti-Trump media are now cock-a-hoop that they have a «smoking gun» to prove the narrative of Trump-Russia collusion. Trump Jr is being accused of betraying his country by consorting with a foreign enemy, Russia.

    A Washington Post comment noted: «Donald Trump Jr’s emails are the clearest indication yet that Trump campaign officials and family members were willing to deal with a foreign adversary in their mutual goal of taking down Hillary Clinton, and their revelation is dramatic proof that the Russia investigation is alive with no end in sight».

    Meanwhile, the New York Times reported: «Rancor at White House as Russia Story Refuses to Let the Page Turn». It goes on to comment with a tone of satisfaction: «Every time the president tries to put the furor behind him, more disclosures thrust it back to the fore, and people close to him are anonymously blaming one another».

    What the media outlets decline to say is that the Russia-gate story has not gone away precisely because the media have dutifully amplified leaks and anonymous intelligence claims – more accurately, innuendo – pillorying Trump as a Russian patsy.

    The Deep State rulers of the US, comprising the military-intelligence apparatus, never wanted businessman Trump to become president. Unlike Clinton, Trump was insufficiently hawkish towards Russia. Ever since his shock election last November, the Deep State and its media machine have been full throttle to oust the «wrong president». The «Russian collusion» claims are the spearhead of this attack, an attack could qualify as a «soft coup» against the elected president.

    With Trump’s son now admitting that he met with a Russian lawyer last summer as the head of his father’s election campaign, the anti-Trump campaign senses a mortal wound and are going full pelt to exploit it.

    But the drama has the hallmarks of yet more media-driven sensation that is out of all proportion to the facts. Trump Jr’s lawyer dismissed the latest claims as «much ado about nothing».

    The Russian government, which has consistently rejected any claims of interfering in the US election, said that the speculation about Trump and the «Kremlin-connected attorney» is «making a mountain out of a molehill».

    As Trump Jr told Fox News this week, he held the meeting simply because he was interested in hearing «opposition research» on Hillary Clinton. As it turned out, no such information was forthcoming and the meeting ended inconclusively after only 20 minutes. That was the end of it. Apparently, Trump Sr wasn’t even told about the brief interview, so insignificant was it at the time.

    It seems a fair and plausible observation that Trump Jr was simply doing what any political campaigner would do. Get dirt on opponents.

    The US media are thus guilty of «protesting too much» about what is a rather prosaic matter. Apart from the obvious axe they want to grind against President Trump, the other reason for the media hysteria over the latest twist in the Russia-gate affair is that the Deep State and their media machine have, at last, something resembling hard evidence. This is why they are grandstanding. It is from relief that they have found something approximating a story to justify all the months of shrill speculation.

    The hypocrisy of the pious media, pundits and politicians over Trump Jr’s betrayal is quickly revealed when one considers that Hillary Clinton’s campaign actively worked with the CIA-backed Kiev regime to dig up dirt on Trump during the election, as reported by Cristina Laila. «Where is the call for Hillary Clinton and her aides to be interviewed by the Senate intelligence panel», she asks.

    According to US media interviews given by Nataliya Veselnitskaya, the Russian lawyer at the center of the Trump brouhaha, she is adamant that she was not acting for the Kremlin. The Kremlin also denies knowing her. She maintains that she not did approach the Trump campaign to provide «dirt» on Clinton, but rather to lobby against US sanctions imposed on her Russian business clients.

    The claim that Veselnitskaya was «acting on Russian government information to help Donald Trump» apparently stems solely from the assertion made by the former British tabloid journalist Rob Goldstone, who wrote to Donald Jr to set up the meeting. It was Goldstone who described the meeting with Veselnitskaya as conveying «Russian government information to help your father’s campaign».

    In other words that is not «proof» of Russian government involvement. It is simply hearsay from a tabloid hack with self-serving reasons.

    Questions that the US media should be asking are: Was Goldstone hamming up his Russian government claims in order to sell Trump a mediation service and a scoop? Also, how did private emails between Goldstone and Trump end up in the possession of the New York Times? Did Goldstone flog them to the newspaper in order to cash in on the brewing Russia-gate scandal?

    The lawyer for the family of Emin Agalarov, the Russian singer who asked Goldstone to set up the meeting between Trump Jr and Veselnitskaya, has now come out to rubbish the claims made by Goldstone.

    «The vast majority of what Rob Goldstone said in email exchange with Donald Trump Jr is not accurate», Agalarov’s family attorney, Scott Balber, told RT. «The only thing that’s true is that Emin asked the meeting to be arranged. The rest of it is not true, it’s false».

    As with so much else in the Russia-gate affair, the latest twist seems to be another concoction to turn wild speculation into the semblance of fact. It is as if the US media conceived the headline «Trump colluded with Russia» a long time ago, and have ever since been chasing to find a «story» to fit the headline.

    There are too many holes in the whole Russia-gate affair for it to stand up. It is only the servile US media operating on the agenda of the powerful anti-Trump Deep State that make this non-story appear to stand up.

    So desperate is the Deep State to oust Trump from office, it is willing to damage US-Russia relations beyond repair, to the point of risking all-out war.

  • London Transport Employees Instructed to Not Use Phrase "Ladies and Gentlemen" Anymore

     

    Content originally published at iBankCoin.com

    The London Mayor, Sadiq Khan, in conjunction with the gay rights group, Stonewall, scored a major victory today by banning the phrase “ladies and gentlemen” from the vernacular used by London Transport employees. It’s simply not in touch with the times, as genders defined by the DNA helix are old hat, worn, and not the reality that is supported by the far left — which is filled with hermaphrodites who can literally copulate with themselves.

    More on this important, groundbreaking, civil rights victory for the gay class.

    The phrase “ladies and gentleman” is to be scrapped from announcements on the Tube in a bid to make them gender-neutral.
     
    London Underground staff have been told to instead use greetings such as “good morning everyone” to ensure that all passengers feel “welcome”.
     
    All new pre-recorded announcements will also be changed to use the new phrases, Transport for London (TfL) said.
     
    Campaigners had said the phrase “ladies and gentleman” – which is commonly used by drivers – was “outdated”, adding that it is“polite, but really belonging to yesterday”.
     
    Stonewall, the LGBT campaign group, welcomed the decision, which comes after months of campaigning and was supported by London mayor Sadiq Khan.
     
    The change of phrases follows similar moves in other companies, universities and schools across the country to use gender-neutral language.
     
    “We want everyone to feel welcome on our transport network,” said Mark Evers, director of customer strategy at TfL.
     
    “We have reviewed the language that we use in announcements and elsewhere and will make sure that it is fully inclusive, reflecting the great diversity of London.”
     
    Mr Khan said he was “keen” that TfL speak in a “more neutral way”.
     
    He added: “TfL serves a vibrant, diverse and multicultural city, and provision of an inclusive transport service is at the heart of TfL’s purpose.
     
    “I am aware however, that some customers may not relate to or feel comfortable with the way that certain station announcements are made.”
     
    TfL said it had told staff about the use of the new phrases, but that “from time-to-time, well-meaning staff may still use the term ‘ladies and gentlemen”.
     
    “If this happens frequently, we will issue reminders to staff,” it added.
     
    Stonewall said in a statement: “Language is extremely important to the lesbian, gay, bi and trans community, and the way we use it can help ensure all people feel included.

    “We welcome gender neutral announcements to be rolled out across TfL as it will ensure that everyone – no matter who they identify as – feels accounted for.”

    When I say ‘they’ are trying to control language, indoctrinate your children through the schools, and through pop culture, I mean it. The very best thing you can do, providing you have a little money, is to send your children to good private schools and explain to them that policies like this are wrong and there is nothing improper with being polite and addressing people as ‘ladies’ or ‘gentlemen.’ Take it from me, a parent who has sent his children to both public and private schools — it’s not even comparable. Two different worlds.

    This is a key pillar in the establishment’s plot to destroy the nuclear family, neuter the male gender, and corral the lower classes into group think slave camps of thought, and then have them become loyal serfs —  broken spiritually and physically.

    Society is more augmented than you know.

  • Tacos Vs Burritos Index: The Great Divide In Mexican-American Cuisine

    Via Priceonomics.com,

    Americans love the genre of cuisine generally known as "Mexican food". The cuisine of our southern neighbor has been ingrained in our culture since the early 20th century. In many respects, it has evolved beyond its origins to become something uniquely American (think Tex-Mex and giant breakfast burritos).

    You can find it anywhere, from just across the border to the farthest corners of our northern states. This presents a great opportunity to explore which parts of the country offer the most for Mexican food aficionados. Which city has the most Mexican restaurants? Do some regions of the United States exhibit any preferences for tacos versus burritos?

    We analyzed restaurant menu data from Priceonomics customer Datafiniti to see who serves Mexican food and what kind of food that actually is. With the ability to filter for cuisine as well as restaurants with available menu data, we easily found several thousand records to start our investigation. From this initial dataset, we extracted over 100,000 menu items and searched for specific instances of tacos or burritos. Finally, by grouping this data geographically, we were able to compare cities.

    Ultimately we found that most major cities (e.g. NYC), as well as cities in the Southwest and California, had the most Mexican restaurants to offer. Cities in Texas, Colorado, and California reign supreme for the most restaurants per capita. In the taco vs. burrito debate, the overall skew of menu items was 56% tacos and 44% burritos nationally. Most notably, cities in Texas offered mostly taco options, while cities in the middle of the country and Northwest offered more burrito options.

    ***

    To start our analysis, we need to determine which cities have the most Mexican restaurants. Below, we’ve charted the top 25 cities.

    Data source: Datafiniti

    As we can see, the largest cities in the country dominate this list. Chicago, New York, and Los Angeles hold the top three positions. Cities on the list are from all over the country, though there is an abundance of cities from the Southwest (especially Texas).

    This list is a bit disingenuous though, and I’ll explain why. As we said at the beginning, we are looking for the cities with the most Mexican food – when I hear that, I think of independently owned restaurants or smaller chains. This list above includes many fast food and fast casual chains that many taco/burrito enthusiasts would not consider authentic, for example, Taco Bell. 

    We’ve plotted which restaurants have the most locations in our dataset to illustrate that point.

    Data source: Datafiniti

    Taco Bell makes up nearly 20% of the listings, and in total, the top ten (which includes other popular chains like Chipotle) make up 28% of listings. As we continue our analysis of Mexican restaurants, we will want to remove these kinds of places. With the help of additional secondary research, we’ve identified 20+ restaurants that would be considered fast food chains and ultimately will exclude from the analysis. In total, these make up about 33% of our initial records. To clarify, we’ll still include smaller local chains in the dataset.

    Now that we’re only looking at authentic restaurants, we’ll determine the restaurant most listings by city.

    Data source: Datafiniti

    The rankings are very similar to our previous analysis, but we can see that some cities have jumped up in our rankings. Houston moved up to third while San Francisco, Tucson, and Washington D.C. also jumped up several positions. Cities such as Portland and Phoenix dropped.

    Now we want to investigate the ratio between tacos and burritos for each of these cities. We will show which cities you should visit if you’re a fan of either option. We’ve arranged our results from most taco percentage to least. Across the country, the average breakdown is 56% tacos to 44% burritos, and we’ve added highlighting to show when a city skews towards a particular entree. 

    Data source: Datafiniti

    San Antonio and Dallas, have the greatest percentage of tacos at 84%. Indianapolis has the greatest percentage of burritos at 62%. In general, more cities on our list lean towards tacos. Another interesting trend is that all cities in Southwest, from Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona, are taco cities. Burrito cities are mostly from the Midwest and West. California has cities in both categories. It appears that SoCal prefers tacos (LA and San Diego), while NorCal prefers burritos (San Francisco, Sacramento, San Jose).

    Our previous lists were made up of cities with large populations, which would naturally have a greater number restaurants of all kinds. By accounting for population and calculating the number of Mexican restaurants per person, we can highlight some smaller cities with a lot of Mexican cuisine to offer.

    Data source: Datafiniti

    Similar to our first analysis, we will list the 25 cities with the most Mexican restaurants, but this time we will look at restaurants per 10,000 residents. You should also note that we are still excluding the fast food and fast casual restaurants that we removed earlier.

    Humble, TX has a staggering 7.2 restaurants per 10,000 residents. That is almost about 1.5 times that of the second place city, Littleton, CO with 4.8. In this analysis, we see a lot more small cities from the Southwest and California. Larger cities including Tucson, Las Vegas, San Francisco, Denver still made the cut though.

    Now how will these cities compare when looking at their offerings for tacos and burritos? Again we will look at the ratio of taco and burrito options, ordering our list from most taco percentage to least.

    Data source: Datafiniti

    These cities seem to lean more towards a particular dish than the larger cities. McAllen, TX is clearly a taco town with 93% tacos. Berkeley, CA is king of the burritos with 68% burritos. Overall, we see that there are a lot more places that skew towards burritos than our previous list. Colorado, in particular, appears to have several smaller cities that have many burrito options. It also appears the trend for cities in Texas to prefer tacos holds true. 

    ***

    Ultimately, we found that if you love Mexican food, you can really find a lot of options anywhere in the country, especially in bigger cities that can provide you with plenty of options. If you’re looking for tacos, head to Texas, southern California, or other Southwestern states. Burrito enthusiasts can find what they are looking for in the rest of the country, especially northern California and Colorado.

  • The Striking Reason Why The US Just Spent A Record $429 Billion In One Month

    On Thursday morning the CBO released a surprisingly upbeat assessment of Donald Trump’s proposed budget, calculating that it would cut the cumulative US deficit by 30% over the next decade, preventing the US debt from spiraling out of control (even further).

    That however. may be an overly optimistic assessment, especially following the release of the latest monthly budget data, which showed that not only did the US deficit surge to $90 billion, far above the $38 billion consensus estimate, and a “NM” compared to the $6.3 billion budget surplus in June of last year, but the US also saw the biggest one month outlay on record, at $429 billion, 33% higher than the $323 billion in outlays one years ago.

    What prompted this massive surge in outlays?

    The biggest reason for the outlier print is that according to Stone McCarthy, outlays increased by roughly $60 billion in “other” items relative to baseline because the Treasury revised up its estimates of the subsidy cost of student loans, and to a lesser extent housing, it guarantees.

    Here is the CBO explanation:

    Outlays for the Department of Education rose by $31 billion (or 51 percent), because the department revised upward, by roughly $39 billion, the estimated net subsidy costs of loans and loan guarantees issued in prior years—a change much larger than last year’s $7 billion upward revision. If the effects of those revisions were excluded, outlays for the department for the first nine months of fiscal year 2017 would have fallen by $2 billion (or 3 percent).

     

    Outlays for the Department of Housing and Urban Development rose by $29 billion, primarily because the department made upward revisions in June 2017, but downward revisions in April 2016, to the estimated net subsidy costs of loans and loan guarantees issued in prior years.

    The cost of those loans is treated in the budget on a present value basis, not a cash basis and the Treasury periodically revises these costs. (It should be noted that the associated increase in outlays doesn’t impact Treasury borrowing or debt under the debt limit.) If not for these special factors, Treasury would have reported another small surplus for June… however it did not.

    On the revenue side, things were just as bad with the US Treasury collecting only $338.7BN, just 9% higher than the $330BN in June of 2016.

    What makes the surge in the deficit especially surprising is that June is often a surplus month, as the Treasury receives large corporate and non-withheld individual tax payments in that month.

    One theory explaining the shortfall in revenues reflects taxpayers delaying the recognition of income in 2016, anticipating tax cuts this year. That revenue should eventually be recovered. About a third of the revision was on the outlay size, with a large chunk due to changes in the estimated subsidy costs described above. Based on the CBO revisions, it appears that the deficit for the fiscal year, which has three months left, will be in the $650 billion to $700 billion range, if not even higher, mostly due to the surge in “subsidy costs of housing and student loans” guaranteed by the Treasury.

    Combining these two means that YTD, the deficit jumped to $523.1BN vs $399.2BN last year.
    While many analysts had a deficit base case for fiscal 2017 at roughly
    $575BN (the year ends on Sept 30), the CBO recently revised its
    projection for the fiscal 2017 up by $134 billion to $693 billion. Most of the CBO revision reflects weaker than expected revenues, which means it will be even more surprised when it finds out what is going on with outlays.

    To summarize: what the unexpected surge in government spending means is that quietly and mostly behind the scenes, the student debt bubble has begun to burst, and the Treasury is “provisioning” for it in real time, with all US taxpayers once again on the hook.

    Finally, since the $1.4 trillion and rising student debt bubble is expected to end up with discharges of 35% if not higher, it means that over the next several years, the budget deficit will be incrementally boosted by approximately $500 billion as America’s taxpayers are once again taken to the cleaners, this time to bail out millions of liberal arts majors who for one reason or another just can’t pay back their student loans.

    h/t @SMRA

  • China Says Trade With North Korea Grew Only 10.5% In First 6 Months Of 2017

    New data released by the Chinese government suggests trade with its restive neighbor, North Korea, has only increased by a modest degree since the beginning of the year, rebutting criticisms from President Donald Trump and UN ambassador Nikki Haley that the world's second-largest economy is undermining US efforts to curb trade with the North.

    A Chinese official said Thursday that China's trade with isolated North Korea rose more than 10 percent in the January-June period from a year earlier, according to Reuters. The data show a sharp decline in trade in April, May and June after data released by China Customs in April showed a 37.4 percent increase in trade with North Korea in the first quarter of 2017. However, data released a week ago by China's Ministry of Commerce show trade between the two countries grew by 13.7 percent from January to May, suggesting a significant dip since April, according to CNBC.

    Trump has leaned on China to curb trade that might help support North Korea’s nuclear program – even coaxing the Communist Party to verbally commit its support for "complete, verifiable and irreversible" denuclearize of the Korean Peninsula. But Chinese reluctance to act against their longtime ally forced the US’s hand last month, when it introduced sanctions against 10 Chinese entities suspected of helping support the North’s nuclear program.

    The data appear to support China’s claims that it is fully enforcing United Nations sanctions on nuclear-armed North Korea and there is nothing wrong with what it terms "normal" trade with Pyongyang, referring to areas not covered by sanctions.

    “Chinese customs spokesman Huang Songping told a briefing on China's overall trade figures that total trade with North Korea expanded by 10.5 percent to $2.55 billion in the first six months of the year. While China's imports from North Korea dropped 13.2 percent to $880 million in the period from January to June, exports to North Korea rose 29.1 percent to $1.67 billion, he said.

     

    The exports were largely driven by textile products and other traditional labor-intensive goods not included on the United Nations embargo list, Huang added.

     

    'As neighbors, China and North Korea maintain normal business and trade exchanges,' he said, adding that goods for ordinary people and those used for humanitarian reasons are not subject to sanctions."

    Reuters said that overall trade with North Korea declined in June, compared with previous second-quarter months, while trade in dollar terms with North Korea rose about 12% from the previous month to $499 million. In May, trade with North Korea gained 14.5 percent from April to $443.5 million, previously released customs data show.

    As a Chinese government spokesman noted, China has complied with UN Security Council sanctions on North Korea  – though, in its role as a permanent member of the security council, the North’s only major ally has worked persistently to soften international sanctions against the hermit kingdom and its officials. It is also responsible for 90% of trade with North Korea.

    “Numbers showing an increase are not evidence that China is failing to enforce UN resolutions, with imports from North Korea falling every month since March, Huang added. China suspended imports of North Korean coal in February, while imports of iron ore accord with relevant U.N. resolutions, he said.

     

    'China customs have all along fully, accurately, conscientiously and strictly enforced relevant Security Council resolutions.'"

    Relations between China and the US have cooled in recent weeks – a development highlighted by the North’s July 4 test of its first genuine ICBM. Late last month, the US antagonized the Chinese by finalizing a $1.4 billion arms sale to Taiwan in defiance of its longstanding "one China" policy.

    While China has been angered by North Korea's repeated nuclear and missile tests, it also blames the US and South Korea for worsening tensions with their military exercises, while not doing enough to open talks with the North Koreans, as Beijing has proposed. China's Foreign Ministry this week urged a halt to what it called the "China responsibility theory" on North Korea, saying all parties needed to pull their weight, according to Reuters.

    Trade between China and North Korea has declined in both 2015 and 2016, a senior government-backed academic said in a front-page comment in the overseas edition of the official People's Daily on Wednesday.

    In this particularly trying time for US-China relations, US officials would do well to remain well alert – particularly after Guo Wengui, a billionaire investor who fled China and moved to New York after becoming a major critic of the Chinese regime, revealed that Chinese intelligence might have more than 25,000 deep-cover operatives in the US. Their primary mission is to steal military technologies. But they’re also here to “buy” high level government officials, as well as political and corporate elites who can give China favorable business deals.

  • IMF Rings The Alarm On Canada's Economy

    Shortly after yesterday’s rate hike by the Bank of Canada, its first since 2010, we warned that as rates in Canada begin to rise, the local economy which has seen a striking decline in hourly earnings in the past year, which remains greatly reliant on a vibrant construction sector, and where households are the most levered on record, if there is anything that can burst the local housing bubble, it is tighter monetary conditions. And a bubble it is, as the chart below clearly demonstrates… one just waiting for the pin, which as we suggested yesterday in “”Canada Is In Serious Trouble” Again, And This Time It’s For Real“, may have finally been provided thanks to the Bank of Canada itself.

    Now, one day after our warning, the IMF has doubled down and on Thursday issued its latest consultation report, in which it said that while Canada’s economy has regained some momentum, it warned that business investment remains weak, non-energy exports have underperformed, housing imbalances have increased and uncertainty surrounding trade negotiations with the United States could hurt the recovery.

    The report – which concerningly was written even before the BOC hiked rates by 0.25% – also said the Bank of Canada’s current monetary policy stance is appropriate, and it cautioned against tightening.

    “While the output gap has started to close, monetary policy should stay accommodative until signs of durable growth and higher inflation emerge,” the IMF said, adding that rate hikes should be “approached cautiously”.

    Directors noted that Canada’s financial sector is well capitalized and
    has strong profitability, but that there are rising vulnerabilities in
    the housing sector    …  Directors agreed that monetary policy should stay
    accommodative and be gradually tightened as signs of durable growth and
    inflation pressures emerge. They recognized that monetary easing could
    complement fiscal stimulus, and may need to be considered along with
    unconventional measures if economic activity contracts significantly,
    although there is a risk that it could exacerbate housing imbalances    .

    While one can accuse the IMF of being traditionally dovish: recall Christine Lagarde – who famously said the IMF would be out of business if there were no world crises – has been screaming at central banks for hiking rates (in retrospect she will be proven right, just not yet), in this case she may be right: the recent sudden surge in Canadian interest rates especially on the long end will have a severe impact on loan demand, not to mention mortgage rates and, of course, housing demand.

    Furthermore, in a statement following its annual policy review with Canada, the IMF
    cautioned that “risks to Canada’s outlook are significant” particularly
    – drumroll – “the danger of a sharp correction in the housing market, a further
    decline in oil prices, or U.S. protectionism    .”

    Risks to the outlook are significant. On the upside, stronger-than-expected growth in the U.S. could boost export and investment in the near term. On the downside, risks stem from several potential factors—including the risk of a sharp correction in the housing market, high uncertainty surrounding U.S. policies, or a further decline in oil prices—that can be mutually reinforcing. Policy choices will therefore be crucial in shaping the outlook and reducing risks.

    The monetary fund also said that financial stability risks could emerge if the housing correction is accompanied by a recession, but there was good news: the IMF noted that recent stress tests have shown Canadian banks could withstand a “significant loss” on their uninsured residential mortgage portfolio, in part because of high capital position.

    Well, we are about to find out.

    Meanwhile, house prices in Toronto and Vancouver have more than doubled since 2009 and the boom has fueled record household debt, a vulnerability that has also been noted by the Bank of Canada. As Reuters adds, some economists believe the rate hike this week was at least partly aimed at reducing financial system imbalances, which is admirable… the only problem is that the first casualty of a correction in imbalances will be the blue line in the chart at the top.

    “The main risk on the domestic side is a sharp correction in the housing market that impairs bank balance sheets, triggers negative feedback loops in the economy, and increases contingent claims on the government,” the IMF warned, sounding the loudest alarm yet on Canada’s economy even if it was reiterating previous warnings about Canada’s long housing boom.

    There was another danger: Trump. The Fund also warned U.S. trade protectionism could hurt Canada’s economy, and laid out a scenario for an increase in tariffs that could come with the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement. The IMF was also kind enough to quantify just how little it would take to send the local economy into a tailspin: the IMF said if the United States raises the average tariff on imports from Canada by 2.1 percentage points and there is no retaliation from Canada, there would be a short-term negative impact on real GDP of about 0.4%. Naturally, if tariff increases were higher, an outright recession was virtually guaranteed.

  • Is This Why The UN Human Rights Council Is Silent As Venezuelans Die Oppressed Under Socialism?

    Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

    The United Nations Human Rights Council has been silent on the death of Venezuelans at the hands of their democratic socialist government. The UN has sided with death, but that isn’t surprising, considering the horrific plans they have laid out for most humans.

    The Miami Herald is calling the UN’s lack of response to blood in the streets in Venezuela a “travesty.” Despite Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro’s bloody repression of opposition protests that have resulted in more than 100 dead, thousands of wounded and hundreds of political prisoners over the past three months, the United Nations Human Rights Council, UNHRC, has not uttered a single word about Venezuela’s human rights crisis.

    But there’s a reason for the silence, and all one has to do to figure it out, is lightly scratch the surface. The UN doesn’t care about human rights.  It’s a front for their ability to massively depopulate the earth for the advancement of Agenda 21.

    In 1992, at a Venezuela conference, the United Nations passed something called “Agenda 21,” for which the elder US President, George Bush, publicly gave his support. It referred to something called “Sustainable Development,” but what this plan laid out very clearly was a one world government. This idea of One World Rule is not new to the Bush clan, or even to the modern day Illuminati. It has been around at least since the times of the Roman Empire, and before. –The Daily Sheeple

    Could this be the reason the UN doesn’t care about a few hundred Venezuelans and their oppressed deaths? Possibly, but don’t expect the mainstream media to report on the horrors of socialism.  Human beings who seek freedom are the biggest threat to the political structures which are planning to destroy most of mankind, which is why governments are using brainwashing techniques and propaganda on the weak masses.  Humans will always gravitate toward their freedom unless brainwashed to accept their own oppression. This is the reason we have so many people across the globe cannot see taxation as the theft that it is. But the explanation for the UN’s silence gets even more disturbing.

    Some have an even more sinister reason for the UN’s silence on the oppression of the Venezuelan people.

    There is a reason for that inaction, of course. About half of the council’s 47 member countries are dictatorships — including Cuba, China, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Venezuela — who defend one another against charges of human-rights violations. In fact, the UNHRC is a mutual protection society for the world’s worst dictatorships. –Miami Herald

    That isn’t exactly comforting.  Dictatorships, which the US is headed quickly towards becoming, are in control of “human rights,” so expect the eventual announcement that there is no such thing by those claiming ownership over others. Neither the United States nor any other socialist democracies represented at the council have presented any motions to the council condemning Venezuela’s human rights abuses. That’s because death is a necessary outcome to those who seek infinite power over the lives of others.

    As the United States stumbles toward tyranny and becomes more socialist, the changes of our streets looking like those of Venezuela increase.  The hypocrisy of instituting the very same socialist policies which caused Venezuela to collapse would appear too obvious for those attempting to brainwash the public in the United States.

    Hope seems all but lost against a world takeover, but those on the bottom forget that they are many while the elites are few.

  • Janet Yellen's Bitcoin Troll Gets $15,000 In Donations

    In what was perhaps the most amusing act of protest to occur during testimony by one of the world’s most powerful central bankers since ECB President Mario Draghi was glitter-bombed by far-left activist Josephine Witt two years ago, an anonymous bitcoiner trolled Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen by holding up a hand-made sign that read “Buy Bitcoin” during Yellen’s testimony before the House financial Services Committee on Wednesday.

    Though the attendee and a friend who accompanied him were ultimately asked to leave by a staffer, the moment quickly went viral on twitter, sparking a community-wide hunt to uncover the brazen bitcoiner’s identity and bitcoin wallet ID so they could send him donations as a sign of solidarity.

    The community’s response to the still unnamed man's act of defiance yielded dozens of tweets, memes and, to date, more than $15,000 in donations to a bitcoin wallet purportedly belonging to the young troublemaker.

    Bitcoiner @cryptoethan, an 18-year-old trader who claims to be a close friend of “bitcoin sign guy” satisfied the community’s demands by posting a photo of sign guy holding another sign that advertised a bitcoin wallet address where donations could be sent. As of press time, the wallet has received more than six-and-a-half coins – equal to more than $15,000 at the current bitcoin price of about $2,340 per coin. Readers can check out the wallet in real time on blockchain.info.

    Crypto Ethan, for his part, insists that he isn’t sign guy, and that, by posting the wallet address, he was merely helping out a friend.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The moment provided a moment of levity for the bitcoin community, which is facing a day of reckoning that could ultimately split the network in two. On July 21, the bitcoin core development team will release its SegWit2x proposal. The software update would increase the amount of transaction data that the network can process every ten minutes, while also allowing the network to shift some of the transaction data onto side networks. As Bloomberg explains, Segwit2.0 has been made viable by a defection of miners to the bitcoin core camp. Previously, miners, many of whom are based in China, had presented a nearly unified front in opposition to SegWit2x.

    Bloomberg goes into more detail about the conflict here:

    “Behind the conflict is an ideological split about bitcoin’s rightful identity. The community has bitterly argued whether the cryptocurrency should evolve to appeal to mainstream corporations and become more attractive to traditional capital, or fortify its position as a libertarian beacon; whether it should act more as an asset like gold, or as a payment system.

    The seeds of the debate were planted years ago: To protect from cyber attacks, bitcoin by design caps the amount of information on its network, called the blockchain. That puts a ceiling on how many transactions it can process — the so-called block size limit — just as the currency’s growing popularity is boosting activity. As a result, transaction times and processing fees have soared to record levels this year, curtailing bitcoin’s ability to process payments with the same efficiency as services like Visa Inc.

     

    To address this problem, two main schools of thought emerged. On one side are miners, who deploy costly computers to verify transactions and act as the backbone of the blockchain. They’re proposing a straightforward increase to the block size limit.

     

    On the other is Core, a group of developers instrumental in upholding bitcoin’s bug-proof software. They insist that to ease blockchain’s traffic jam, some of its data must be managed outside the main network. They claim that not only would it reduce congestion, but also allow other projects including smart contracts to be built on top of bitcoin.

     

    But moving data off the blockchain effectively diminishes the influence of miners, the majority of whom are based in China and who have invested millions on giant server farms. Not surprisingly, Core’s proposal, called SegWit, has garnered resistance from miners, the most vocal being Wu Jihan, co-founder of the world’s largest mining organization Antpool.

     

    ‘SegWit is itself a great technology, but the reason it hasn’t taken off is because its interest doesn’t align with miners,’ Wu said.

     

    Still, after previous counter-proposals championed by Wu fell through, miners last month agreed to compromise and support SegWit, in exchange for increasing the block size. Wu says the plan will alleviate short-to-medium term congestion and give Core enough time to flesh out a long-term solution. That proposal is what is known as SegWit2x, which implements SegWit and doubles the block size limit.”

    Chris Coney, host of the Cryptoverse podcast, featured the photobombing as the main topic in his daily podcast. Coney noted a key detail that went unnoticed by much of the media coverage surrounding the incident: The fact that the kid raised the sign just as Florida Rep. Bill Posey was asking Chair Yellen about what the Fed's biggest fears are.

    Coney sent the kid about 0.4 bitcoin, equal to about $96, live on air, praising bitcoin sign guy's "creative" ploy to try and entice more people to join the bitcoin community – an act Coney described as "pure gangster": “do yourself a favor, do me a favor, do the bitcoin network a favor, do the bitcoin community a favor and send this kid a tip."

    So, what’s Yellen’s biggest fear, anyway?

    She responded to the Florida Congressman’s question by saying the growing mismatch between workers’ skills and those needed to succeed in an increasingly tech-oriented workforce iss one of her biggest concerns.  

    “The kinds of jobs that will be available and the types of skills to use those jobs…to my mind education and training are absolutely central for the new kinds of workers who will fill these types of jobs…”

    That's right: It's Jobs, jobs, jobs…

    Perhaps the world's under-educated workers can take a page out of bitcoin sign guy’s yellow legal notepad and start committing absurdist acts of protest in the hopes of earning the patronage of hundreds of strangers on the internet… for what it’s worth, it looks to fun – and may end up being lucrative, just avoid getting arrested.
     

  • Tech Billionaires Are Funding A Plan To Break The Human Race Out Of The Matrix

    Authored by Jake Anderson via TheAntiMedia.org,

    On the southwestern edge of Lake Titicaca, Peru, there is an ancient 23-foot doorway known as the Aramu Muru. Local natives call it the “Puerta de hayu Marca,” the gateway to the lands of the gods and immortal life. Throughout their history, the natives have described people disappearing and appearing at this doorway.

    In 1998, purported extraterrestrial contactee Jerry Wills claimed a tall blonde humanoid named Zo taught him how to access Aramu Muru and enter “another universe.” Wills further claimed that Zo illustrated to him how our universe is an experimental simulation within his species’ universe. They built it to understand their own reality, which is itself nested inside a larger universe.

    The next year, in 1999, the blockbuster science fiction film The Matrix came out and forever emblazoned into our collective subconscious the idea that our existence is a simulation created by a more advanced race of beings. Incidentally, the film also made long black trench coats, black sunglasses, and my last name all the rage, but I digress…

    A few years after the release of The Matrix, philosopher Nick Bostrom published the Simulation Argument, a concise paper entitled “Are You Living in a Computer Simulation?” It presented a trilemma, a mathematical breakdown of why at least one of three provocative scenarios must be true.

    “(1) the human species is very likely to go extinct before reaching a ‘posthuman’ stage;

     

    (2) any posthuman civilization is extremely unlikely to run a significant number of simulations of their evolutionary history (or variations thereof);

     

    (3) we are almost certainly living in a computer simulation. It follows that the belief that there is a significant chance that we will one day become posthumans who run ancestor-simulations is false, unless we are currently living in a simulation.”

    The “posthuman civilization” to which Bostrom refers defines a period of time after which humans have merged with technology. This is sometimes referred to as post-Singularity, with the ‘Singularity’ describing futurist Ray Kurzweil’s designation of a society in which humans are post-biological, living synergistically with artificial intelligence.

    The Simulation Argument presupposes the development of this posthuman civilization, at which point, Bostrom states, advanced humans or AI might develop simulations of the past in the same way that current scientists create test environments; some of the simulations would likely be for entertainment reasons, as well, in the same way humans currently create video games and movies.

    In recent years, a number of high-profile figures have come out to state their belief that we are living in a simulation. Chief among them is tech magnate Elon Musk, who has stated that the video game No Man’s Sky confirmed his belief that someday simulations would approximate reality so comprehensively that they would be indistinguishable from reality. Apparently, he was sitting in a hot tub with friends when he finally converted.

    Musk is the CEO and brains behind Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink, and OpenAI. In recent years, he has expressed bold plans for his companies that he believes will advance the human race: with Tesla, he wants to spearhead a transportation infrastructure that doesn’t rely on burning hydrocarbons; with SpaceX, he wants to assist in humanity’s gradual extraplanetary migration to Mars; and with Neuralink and OpenAI, he wants to facilitate humanity’s merger with advanced computer technology.

    When he was asked about whether humans are living inside a computer simulation, Musk made headlines last year by saying he thinks the chances are one in billions that we aren’t.

    “The strongest argument for us probably being in a simulation I think is the following: 40 years ago we had Pong – two rectangles and a dot,” Musk stated. “That’s where we were. Now 40 years later we have photorealistic, 3D simulations with millions of people playing simultaneously and it’s getting better every year. And soon we’ll have virtual reality, we’ll have augmented reality. If you assume any rate of improvement at all, then the games will become indistinguishable from reality, just indistinguishable.”

    Here Musk is referring to the exponential growth of technology, the lynchpin of the Singularity theory. If in 40 years we’ve gone from the two-dimensional pong to the cusp of augmented and virtual reality, imagine where we’ll be in another forty, or a hundred, or 400. Provided the human race survives, one may assume we will achieve the ability to produce simulations with sentient beings. Already, the Department of Defense has created the Sentient World Simulation, a real-time “synthetic mirror of the real world with automated continuous calibration with respect to current real-world information, such as major events, opinion polls, demographic statistics, economic reports, and shifts in trends,” according to a working paper on the system.

    In recent years, other scientists have conducted research and even experimentation in attempts to show actual evidence of the Simulation. Heads turned last year when theoretical physicist S. James Gate announced he had found strange computer code in his String Theory research. Bound inside the equations we use to describe our universe, he says, is peculiar self-dual linear binary error-correcting block code.

    A team of German physicists has also set out to show that the numerical constraints we see in our universe are consistent with the kinds of limitations we would see in a simulated universe. These physicists have invoked a non-perturbative approach known as lattice quantum chromodynamics to try to discover whether there is an underlying grid to the space/time continuum.

    So far their efforts have recreated a minuscule region of the known universe, a sliver of a corner that is but a few femtometers across. But this corner simulates the hypothetical lattice of the universal grid, and their search for a corresponding physical restraint turned up a theoretical upper limit on high-energy particles known as the Greisen–Zatsepin–Kuzmin, or GZK cut off. In other words, there are aspects of our universe that look and behave as a simulation might.

    With news that there are two anonymous tech billionaires working on a secret project to break us out of the Matrix, it’s hard to know whether we should laugh or scream in horror. 

    Simulation talk is great epistemological fun and metaphysical amusement of the highest order, but it may speak to an underlying anxiety regarding the merging of our reality with machines, or an underlying existential loneliness. It’s even been posited as a solution to the Fermi Paradox. Why haven’t we met aliens? Well, because we live inside a world they built.

    Our earth is marooned in a cosmic void so vast it would take our current Deep Space I propulsion system an astonishing 81,000 years to reach the nearest star — in a galaxy of hundreds of billions, which is, itself, just one of hundreds of billions. The thought that it’s all 1s and 0s rendered by a futuristic microprocessor is philosophically sexy but, perhaps, sociologically lazy.

    That there is anxiety about reality being manufactured in a society obsessed with simulated pleasure and mediated experience isn’t altogether surprising. It’s the ultimate, though perhaps accidental, expression of resistance to a culture steeped in consumerism and artificial growth.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Jul 13

Today’s News 13th July 2017

  • Hackers Steal Swedish Security Company CEO's Identity, Declare Him "Bankrupt"

    The 59-year old CEO of Swedish Security Firm Securitas was declared bankrupt this week after hackers stole his identity, took out a loan in his name, then filed for bankruptcy.  As Bloomberg noted, “the sub-optimal branding implications were hard to miss.”

    Securitas AB hopes to have put the whole awkward incident behind it by the end of the day. According to Bloomberg, the appointed bankruptcy trustee has been informed and will support the appeal of the bankruptcy decision, which is expected to be removed, Securitas said. Securitas CEO Alf Goransson is appealing the July 10 bankruptcy decision by the Stockholm District Court, which acted on false information, the company said on Wednesday. The appointed bankruptcy trustee has been informed and will support the appeal of the bankruptcy decision, which is expected to be removed, Securitas said.

    “The perpetrator used the CEO’s identity to seek a loan of an undisclosed amount, after which a bankruptcy application was filed in his name. The identity theft took place in March. Goransson didn’t know he’d been hacked until this week, the company said.”

     

    The hack attack “has no effect on the company, other than that our CEO has been declared bankrupt,” spokeswoman Gisela Lindstrand said. “And that will hopefully only last until later today, depending on how soon they can remove the decision.”

    However, the theft, as Bloomberg notes, raises questions about security in a society that is leading the way in digitization. Sweden is well ahead of most of the rest of the world in replacing cash with digital payments – even homeless groups there accept credit cards.

    Even a museum dedicated to the pop group Abba – the group that popularized the song “Money, Money, Money” – doesn’t accept cash.

    At the country’s Abba museum, tourists aren’t allowed to pay for anything with cash.

    Has Sweden’s commitment to transparency created an environment where identity theft is commonplace? The statistics would say yes.

    “The country’s efforts to embrace transparency in all fields are also well documented. Sweden encourages widespread access to public information (employees can find out what their colleagues earn by checking with the tax authorities) and, like most other rich countries, online shopping and loan applications are on the rise. All of this has coincided with a sharp increase in identity fraud. Sweden responded last year by introducing specific legislation to target the development. Goransson’s case was one of 12,800 crimes involving hacked identities reported in Sweden in the first six months of 2017.”

    Goransson has been de-registered as chairman of Loomis, a cash-handling company that used to be part of Securitas, in accordance with formal procedures of the Swedish Companies Registration Office. Goransson is also expected to appeal this decision after he gets the bankruptcy ruling thrown out, according to Bloomberg.

  • Russia-US Relations: Dim Light Does Not Get Brighter

    Authored by Alex Gorka via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    The US administration backs the new sanctions on Russia. «The administration is fully supportive of those sanctions», said White House Director of Legislative Affairs Marc Short at a press briefing on July 10.

    The statement comes in the wake of US and Russian presidents’ meeting at the G20 summit in Hamburg, Germany. Following the event, President Trump said he wanted to move forward «working constructively with Russia». Does he mean that introducing tougher sanctions is a way to promote «constructive» relationship?

    «Could the White House be working against it? They well could be. Have they contacted us to work against it? No», said Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.). The only worry on the part of the administration is that the bill does not include «certain national waivers that have always been consistently part of sanctions bills in the past». For the administration, a softer bill with a provision for sanctions waivers would be just the thing it wants. It finds the strengthened sanctions and other things to spoil the relations with Russia acceptable.

    The legislation had sailed through the Senate to get stalled in the House. It is expected to be voted on till the Congressional recess in August. When in force, it would require a congressional review if President Donald Trump attempted to ease or end punitive actions on Russia. A foreign policy issue is supposed to be delegated to Congress to set an unusual precedent of constrained presidential authority. So, it’s the procedures, not the substance, that evokes the administration’s concern.

    In late December, 2016, the Obama administration expelled 35 Russian diplomats and shut down the embassy compounds in Maryland and New York. Back then, Moscow abstained from taking a reciprocal action. President Putin even invited US diplomats and their families to a party in the Kremlin.

    More than half a year has passed. The White House has not yet resolved the issue of the compounds. It keeps on hanging in the mid-air to become a serious irritant to affect the bilateral relations. This prompts Russia to consider retaliatory steps. On July 11, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said he was «considering specific measures» in response, but did not elaborate. According to him, it is «simply shameful for such a great country as the United States, a champion of international law, to leave the situation in such a state of suspended animation».

    Moscow may well expel a number of American diplomats and seize some US diplomatic buildings to complicate the relationship President Trump says he wants to improve. Obviously, Russia’s patience has run out. After all, the seizure of the embassy property is an egregious violation of the Vienna Convention, it cannot go unanswered forever.

    There is another irritant looming. House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce (R-Calif.) filed legislation – the «Russia Arms Trade Limitation Act» – on July 7 to impose fresh sanctions on Russia for violations of the landmark 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. The lawmaker submitted the proposal as an amendment to the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), a must-pass annual bill that sets policy for the Defense Department.

    The NDAA defense already has a provision saying that if Russia continued to violate the treaty within 15 months of the legislation’s enactment, the United States «would no longer be legally bound by the treaty as a matter of domestic law».

    Actually, the bill envisages a unilateral withdrawal without a serious attempt to solve the differences and address Russia’s concerns. The US would make a move to almost certainly launch an arms race without even consulting the European NATO allies. After all, this is a European problem; the intermediate range missiles cannot strike the United States from the Old Continent.

    Russia has denied violating the treaty while no explanations have been produced to explain Russia’s accusation that the US Mk-41 launcher installed in Europe as a part of ballistic missile defense is capable of firing long range cruise missiles in a clear breach of the agreement’s terms. Anyway, this is a separate issue to be discussed by experts; it should not negatively affect the whole range of issues on the Russia-US agenda. Disagreeing on the INF Treaty does not prevent the powers from cooperating on Syria and other problems.

    The domestic political strife has dealt a heavy blow to the Russia-US relations. The lawmakers have no time for crucial tax and health reforms but they do find time for anti-Russia bills. Congress and media have taken on a hostile attitude towards Russia while the current administration has not taken any real step to improve the ties so far. On the contrary, the Treasury Department even tightened the sanctions on June 20.

    Hopes are high for the upcoming meeting between Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and US Under Secretary of State Thomas Shannon. But if the abovementioned bills become laws and the problems continue to pile up, there will hardly be a light to see at the end of the tunnel. This is the wrong environment for achieving progress during the talks on arms control, the fight against terrorism or crisis management to end the ongoing war in Syria.

    One thing leads to another. It’s impossible to build mutually beneficial, business-like and pragmatic relations under the conditions of hostile attitude on the part of Congress and inability or unwillingness of the administration to do anything about it.

  • NEOCONS GET IN HERE: Tucker Carlson Just Humiliated Max Boot on National TV

     

    Content originally published at iBankCoin.com

    Over the past 30 years, the neocons have presided over the worst foreign policies in American history — pursuing their Trotskyite schemes of war that have accelerated to an ebb tide that peaked during Bush the Idiot’s reign.

    Men like Max Boot, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, Bill Kristol, Richard Perle, and many others, have attached themselves to the republican party like a cancerous tumor — transforming it from a checkered pants, cigar smoked room, boys club into a satanic cult out for the blood of the indigenous.

    At the root of the neocon “plan”, being disciples of Trotsky, is the destruction of “Mother Russia.” It’s in their blood — because they’re still mad at Stalin. This has been a constant since the 50’s. It was only after the Berlin Wall fell and there was a detente between the United States and Russia in the 90s did these revolutionaries affix themselves to the GOP with real energy.

    The net result of neocon led foreign policies have resulted in thousands of dead Americans, the entire middle east reduced to rubble, millions of civilians dead and/or displaced — and they have the stones to call Putin evil.

    Pray tell me, who has killed more people in the world over the past 30 years, America or Russia? Moreover, how has America benefited by these wars, which has bankrupted the treasury and led to an enormous spike in commodities, helped produce a housing bubble and subsequent financial meltdown and the ruin of countless people — worldwide — all because they had to export America democracy in order to “make America safe”?

    How has that worked out so far, Max Boot? Have you taken a look into Rome, Munich or Paris recently?

    This heated and contentious debate with the former defense policy adviser to Mitt Romney, Max Boot, and Tucker Carlson, should be archived and saved for the sake of posterity. I will not transcribe it for you — because you’ll miss out on the essence of this verbal and intellectual beat down. The world is a dangerous place. At the vanguard of that danger are respected ‘intellectuals’ like Max Boot — trying hard to promote a demonic brand of foreign policy that will kill your sons.

  • Shkreli Told Investors He Had Millions Under Management When His Fund Was Broke

    The prosecution has continued to call witnesses and show evidence in the trial of Martin Shkreli, providing the jury with documents to prove that Shkreli mislead investors by telling them he was managing $100 million when his fund had a balance of negative 33 cents in its prime brokerage account.

    Another witness and former Shkreli investor told the jury how couldn’t tell if Shkreli’s flirts were genuine, or if the “Pharma Bro” really did have feelings for him.

    According to the New York Daily News, Steven Richardson — a man who told Brooklyn federal jurors he’s had a domestic partner for 25 years — testified Tuesday he wondered if Shkreli’s quips about hookups and sex were just ploys to strike a rapport with the 63-year-old investor.

    It got to the point that Richardson had to have a March 2010 talk with Shkreli, 34. After cocktails at Richardson’s Chelsea apartment, he said he sat Shkreli down on his bed. “I said, ‘Do you have any physical feelings for me?’ He took a second he said, ‘No, I like you a lot but I don’t.’”

    Prosecutors also called Dr. Lindsay Rosenwald as a witness to discuss how his $100,000 investment with Shkreli turned out. Rosenwald ended up with Retrophin stock that he ended up selling for between $400,000 and $600,000. He also told a story about when Shkreli awkwardly hit him up about a dating lead. Shkreli allegedly asked Rosenwald if a certain woman was single. He then said he wanted it to be known “there is a handsome young hedge fund millionaire she should be dating.”

    Meanwhile, a government accountant called by the prosecution went through bank-account records to try and corroborate the government’s argument. A bank account maintained by one of Martin Shkreli's hedge funds in July 2011 had a balance of "negative 33 cents" in it, at the same time he was telling investors his funds had tens of millions of dollars under management, an accountant testified Tuesday, according to CNBC.

    That accountant also said that an analysis of one of Shkreli's funds, MSMB Capital Management, showed that it never at any one point had a total of more than $1.2 million in its bank account and brokerage account combined. And the combined balance of a brokerage account and several bank accounts maintained by his other fund, MSMB Healthcare, never topped $1.6 million, Wendy Spaulding, the accountant, testified in Brooklyn, New York, federal court.

    The accountant revealed Tuesday that Retrophin, a drug company founded by Shkreli, paid $10,000 for Jay-Z concert tickets at a time when the company had just tens of thousands of dollars in its own bank accounts.

    And the accountant testified that records showed more than $1.3 million from Retrophin being transferred to Shkreli's personal bank account, and another $26,000 being transferred into that account from MSMB Capital.

    Spaulding’s testimony could be damning for Shkreli, CNBC noted, because several witnesses have already testified that he told them he was managing between $30 million and $50 million.

    Prosecutors also accuse Shkreli of looting Retrophin of money and stock to pay off investors in his hedge funds once they began demanding their money back.

    Those investors also have said that Shkreli told them his hedge funds had a balance of long and short positions in publicly traded stocks, and that the funds as a rule did not have more than 10 percent of their investments in any single company.
     

  • CNN Cracks the Case, Publishes Video of Trump Dining with Goldstone and Agalarov's

     

    Content originally published at iBankCoin.com

    The plot just thickened, yet again. You have to play six degrees of separation in trying to understand how Trump Jr. got in touch with that Russian lawyer. There are varying theories out there — from Trump Jr. being set up by the deep state — to this meeting being the touchstone which introduced Wikileaks and John Podesta’s emails to the world.

    Judging by the evidence available, I’d say the Russian lawyer who met with Trump Jr., at a minimum, is suspect.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Nevertheless, here’s CNN, publishing ‘exclusive’ video of Trump dining with Goldstone and the Agalarov’s — proving the point that the President was familiar with them and that he had ‘Russian ties.’

    EXCLUSIVE: One of Trump’s Russian ties

  • The New World Order Takeover Is Very Real… And Will Begin With Germany And China

    Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,

    In numerous articles over the years I have outlined in acute detail the agenda for a future one-world economic and governmental system led primarily by banking elites and globalists; an agenda they sometimes refer to as the "New World Order." The term has gained such public exposure and notoriety recently that the globalists have fallen back to using different terminology. Some of them, like the International Monetary Fund's Christine Lagarde, refer to it as the "global economic reset." Others call it the "new multilateralism." Still others refer to it as the "end of the unipolar order," referring to the slow death of the U.S. economy as the central pillar of the global economy.

    Whatever label they decide to use, all of them signal a full spectrum destabilization of the "old world" financial and geopolitical system and the ascendance of a tightly controlled one world edifice dominated openly by globalist hubs like the IMF and the BIS.

    Too many people, even in the liberty movement, tend to examine only the veneer of this agenda. Some have deluded themselves into thinking the U.S. and the dollar are actually the core of the NWO and are therefore indispensable to the globalists. As I have shown time and time again, the Federal Reserve is now on a fast track to complete its sabotage of the U.S. economy; they would not be instigating instability and crisis to deflate the massive fiscal bubbles they have created unless America was at least partially expendable.

    Some believe the NWO is a purely "western" construct and that eastern nations are defending themselves against an encroaching globalist empire. I have also shown that this is nonsense, and that eastern nations work closely with the same exact globalists they are supposedly at war with. This includes Russia's Vladimir Putin, a figure often ignorantly praised by select liberty activists.

    What we see in the mainstream is conflict, yes; but it is theatrical conflict. At the end of the day, Eastern leaders pander to globalist high priests at the IMF and BIS and have lunch with NWO icons like Henry Kissinger, just as heads of the Republican Party and even Donald Trump's family go out to parties with Democrat strategists and George Soros.

    It's all a kabuki play. All the world is a stage…

    So, the question then remains, since the NWO and a one world economic system is in fact a real threat proven to exist through considerable evidence including the very words of prominent globalists, how does such a thing begin? If the U.S. is merely a limb that the globalists are willing to sacrifice in trade to gain even greater centralization, where will the NWO actually take root? As noted, both Eastern and Western nations are at the disposal of the international financiers, so it should come as no surprise that the NWO is seemingly taking shape around the relationship between two nations; one from either side.

    As Bloomberg announces with apparent glee in an article titled "China, Germany Step Up As U.S. Retires From World Leadership," Donald Trump risks "uniting cold war allies and foes alike against him." In other words, the future is extreme socialism, the populists are a dangerous and dying breed and globalization marches on without them. The narrative is clearly being established.

    The relationship between China and Germany might seem strange, but the two countries are far more alike than many people comprehend. Germany is the industrial and economic centerpiece of the European Union.  China is the economic and industrial pillar of Asia.  China sells itself as a communist society with capitalist hobbies. Germany sells itself as a capitalist society integrating socialist (communist) programs and social justice mantras. In reality, both nations are collectivist hell-holes, but this is exactly the kind of model the globalists want for the entire world.

    Germany has set the stage for the self-flagellating model of "multiculturalism." Angela Merkel is obsessive in her pursuit of the ideal, and this makes sense from a globalist perspective. Multiculturalism requires absolutely uninhibited movement of ideologies and populations across borders, making borders essentially obsolete. Idiot leftists duped by pie-in-the-sky fantasies like "it takes a village to raise a child" have been exploited by the globalists as a tool to push the end of national sovereignty. Merkel's Germany has been at the forefront of this movement in Europe and is now apparently being groomed as an antithesis to Trump.

    Germany has also for many years stood as a kind of socialist paradise, with over 25% of their GDP going into entitlement programs so pervasive it is possible for German citizens (women in particular) to live most of their lives without ever having to work. It was this constant flow of tax dollars into welfare programs that attracted a vast number of so-called "refugees" from Islamic countries into the EU, virtually overwhelming the entitlement system and forcing Germany to put restrictions on new citizens.

    China has served the NWO model as more of an oppressive economic testing ground. Welfare and universal health insurance is indeed at the forefront of the Chinese government's latest "five year" program. Of course, with hundreds of millions of Chinese living on less than one U.S. dollar per day, the population has no choice but to rely on the generosity of the state. This has molded an economy that is barely tolerable for many, but tolerable enough to keep them from revolting. It is a dynamic the elites would like to apply in every nation.

    The Chinese government oversees every aspect of the corporate networks that make up its economy. A Chinese business is in most cases a Chinese government business. There is no such thing as free enterprise in China. China's relationship with globalist institutions is well known. They are one of the first nations to openly call for a new global currency system headed by the IMF and based on the SDR basket. China has also recently been inducted into membership in the SDR basket by the IMF, showing that the back scratching is mutual.

    It is this strategy of elevating the SDR basket and replacing the dollar's world reserve status as a precursor to a global currency that has been brought up time and time again by globalists. Recently by Mohamad El-Rian, former CEO of PIMCO in an article titled "Could The IMF's World Currency Help Encourage Global Unity?" Take special note that El-Erian suggests the shift into a global currency system as a way to fight back against the recent "rise of populism."

    In order for such a plan to be launched, there has to be some stability somewhere on the world. While many nations face financial crisis on a scale not seen since the Great Depression, the globalists still need to have places to consolidate capital and establish a beachhead for the next assault on sovereignty. This beachhead may come in the form of an economic union between Germany and China, the two NWO favorites.

    China is Germany's largest trading partner and Germany has been the top place for Chinese investment in Europe. Last month Merkel and Chinese Premier Li Keqiang met with the intention of "deepening ties" in the face of "protectionism" promoted by Donald Trump. Merkel stated:

    "China has become a more important and strategic partner…"

     

    "We are living in times of global uncertainty and see our responsibility to expand our partnership in all the different areas and to push for a world order based on law…"

    Germany's ambassador to Beijing, in a recent briefing with reporters leading into G20 stated:

    "The economic and political dynamic from a German perspective is moving toward the east."

     

    "The U.S. has left somewhat of a vacuum in the region by abandoning the proposed 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership free-trade agreement…"

    As I have argued since before the 2016 election, Donald Trump's job is to be the catalyst for multiple globalist programs which have actually been in the works for decades. Trump is now the excuse for everything. Trump and populism are the excuse for renewed "multilateralism," the excuse for German and Chinese cooperation, the excuse for a new global currency system and, most likely, the scapegoat for the inevitable final stage of our ongoing economic collapse.

    Where Trump is supposed to represent the old world order and its "barbarism," Germany and China obviously are being staged as the symbol of something new; a New World Order in which cooperation and interdependency are the great virtues of our epoch. It is my suspicion that along with Russia and China, Germany will be one of the first nations to fully dump the U.S. dollar as the world reserve currency when the time comes to shift into the SDR basket system. And, that time is approaching quickly. It is also my suspicion that the globalists are seeking an economic power base from which to project their NWO, and Germany and China fit the bill nicely.

    I suggest alternative analysts watch the relationship between these two countries very closely. Their behaviors may signal many changes and dangers ahead.

  • WHo KiLLeD SeTH RiCH?
  • Got Milk? First 165 Cows Airlifted To Qatar

    It appears that the Gulf blockade against Qatar will remain in place for the foreseeable future after representatives from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain and the UAE dismissed Qatar's response to their 13 demands as “not serious” and pledged to continue to keep the Gulf state under political and economic sanctions until it changes its policies.

    And after a local businessman said he would import 4,000 cows to the gulf desert late last month, the first cows are already starting to arrive. As CNN Money reports, Qatar has taken delivery of 165 cows that were airlifted into the Gulf state to ease a milk shortage caused by sanctions imposed by Qatar’s neighbors. They are the first shipment for local dairy company, Baladna, which is ramping up production just weeks after Qatar's four Arab state antagonists cut off diplomatic ties.

    Qatar has repeatedly denied allegations that it supports terrorism, and has said it would not comply with the gulf state’s other demands, including shuttering its media properties, including Al Jazeera. The first cows, purchased from a German supplier, arrived Tuesday on a Qatar Airways flight from Budapest, Hungary. Other cows are expected to be sourced from the Netherlands, the U.S. and Australia.

    Most of Qatar's fresh milk and dairy products, meant for Doha’s more than 1 million residents, came from Saudi Arabia up until the sanctions were declared. That supply was cut off after the kingdom and its allies cut transport links with "a country that spends $500 million a week to prepare stadiums and a metro before the soccer World Cup in 2022.

    In an act of generosity toward its distressed Gulf neighbor, Iran dispatched four cargo planes of food to Qatar and plans to provide 100 tons of fruit and vegetable every day. Qatar has also been holding talks with Iran and Turkey to secure food and water supplies after Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Bahrain cut links, accusing Doha of supporting terrorism.

    Within days of the embargo, Turkish and Iranian products filled empty shelves in the supermarkets of Qatar and local factories ramped up production.

    According to Bloomberg's calculations, it will take as many as 60 flights for Qatar Airways to deliver the 590-kilogram beasts that Moutaz Al Khayyat, chairman of Power International Holding, bought in Australia and the U.S. “This is the time to work for Qatar,” he said. In addition to the abovementioned airlifted Turkish dairy goods and Iranian fruit and vegetables, there’s also a campaign to buy home-grown produce. Signs with colors of the Qatari flag have been placed next to dairy products in stores. One sign dangling from the ceiling said: “Together for the support of local products.”
     

  • Infowars, Breitbart, Drudge Could Soon Face An FEC 'Inquisition' Over Russian "Collusion"

    Authored by Alexander Paul via PlanetFreeWill.com,

    Conservative news outlets like Infowars, Breitbart and the Drudge Report could soon be facing an inquisition from the FEC for coordinating with the Russians to blitz the realm of social media with deceptive anti-Clinton stories that effectively could have influenced the 2016 presidential election.

    This could happen if top Federal Election Commission Democrat, Ellen Weintraub, is able to get her way during this Thursday’s FEC meeting.

    The Washington Examiner reports:

    The plan, set for discussion at Thursday’s FEC meeting, could open the door to political subpoenas targeting the websites, their editorial news decisions, and their owners, maybe even Matt Drudge and Alex Jones, according to an expert analysis.

     

    In her effort targeting foreign influence in federal and state elections, Commissioner Ellen Weintraub would probe spending by overseas sources and even partially-foreign-owned U.S. firms on campaigns, including their media buys. Foreign influence is illegal in elections.

     

    She said that tackling foreign influence in elections could be the FEC’s finest hour, adding, “I believe that this Commission can indeed rise to the challenge of understanding what happened in the 2016 election and plugging any legal or procedural holes that could allow foreign actors to interfere with our future elections.”

     

    Politico recently reported that “Weintraub’s interest was piqued by an article published last week by Time magazine that revealed intelligence officials had evidence that Russian agents bought Facebook ads to disseminate election-themed stories. It also indicated that congressional investigators were examining whether Russian efforts to spread such content were boosted by two U.S. companies with deep ties to Trump — Breitbart News and Cambridge Analytica.”

    The Time Magazine article which influenced Weintraub also pointed to Russian ties to conservative ownership and funding as a potential target of investigators. The report reads, citing McClatchy, “FBI counterintelligence investigators were probing whether far-right sites like Breitbart News and Infowars had coordinated with Russian botnets to blitz social media with anti-Clinton stories, mixing fact and fiction when Trump was doing poorly in the campaign.”

    The FEC will decide at this Thursday’s meeting whether or not to investigate websites like the Drudge Report, Infowars, Breitbart, and others on the right for violating election spending rules by allowing advertising on their Facebook pages by Russian entities.

    “It’s pretty easy to see how this quickly becomes an inquisition into conservative media outlets,” an elections laws expert and critic of the Weintraub bid told the Washington Examiner.

     

    “Commissioner Weintraub appears to be laying the groundwork to subpoena people at Breitbart, Drudge, and Infowars – maybe even Matt Drudge and Alex Jones themselves,” he added.

    Infowars founder Alex Jones responded on Tuesday to the news of Weintraub’s actions by saying that he is under a “criminal espionage investigation by the FBI,” and denied ever taken any money from Russia.

    “I have never gotten one scintilla of money from Russia. I’ve never got any directives from Russia,’ Jones said. “This is outrageous! I mean, they want us shut down.”

    On his Tuesday Broadcast, Jones was correct to point out that this Russian election tampering narrative that will not go away in Democratic circles has been, as CNN’s Van Jones put it so eloquently, a “nothing burger.”

    According to Jones, Infowars is almost exclusively funded by sales from their online store which sells books, water filters, and nutritional supplements. The rest of the funding is transparent, according to Jones, who said his organization receives funding from third party ad generators like Google and AdBlade.

    The Infowars founder said that he would be willing to testify publically before Congress.

    Ellen Weintraub has been a big opponent of the Citizens United decision expanding corporate political spending and foreign ownership in politically active U.S. firms and in the past has denied claims of targeting or regulating the media or internet sites. She was part of the FEC commission who targeted Fox News in 2015.

    In her proposal, she wrote, “the American public is justifiably alarmed by the reports of foreign attempts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election.” She added, “This is an all-hands-on-deck moment for our democracy.”

    “It is this Commission’s duty to do respond, and to respond forcefully. Whether a hostile foreign power provided anything of value in connection with a federal, state, or local election goes to the very heart of the Federal Election Commission’s mission and jurisdiction,” the proposal continued.

    The possible FEC Inquisition is coming at an interesting time, as it has been recently revealed that the U.S. actually has a big problem with foreign influence in its election; that is, in the form of noncitizen voters.

    The research organization Just Facts in New Jersey has taken a fresh look at post-election polling data and concluded that the number of noncitizens voting illegally in U.S. elections is likely far greater than previous estimates.

    The group found that many as 5.7 million noncitizens may have voted in the 2008 election, playing a large role in the election win of Barack Obama.

    The work of professors at Old Dominion University in Virginia also found that as many as 2.8 million noncitizens could have voted in 2008.

    For 2012, Just Facts said that 3.2 million to 5.6 million noncitizens were registered to vote and 1.2 million to 3.6 million of them voted.

    The suspicion over illegal votes being cast in U.S. elections sparked the Trump Administration to create a commission on election fraud to investigate voter fraud and voter suppression.

    Trump has alleged that some 3-5 million illegals voted in the 2016 election, robbing him of a better result in the popular vote.

    The commission had given states until July 14 to provide data including names, birth dates and partial Social Security numbers of voters but has since delayed the data turnover as the Administration awaits the ruling of a lawsuit filed by the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington.

    While the mainstream media railed against any claim that noncitizens voted in 2016, all it takes is a turn to the evidence in North Carolina where an independent and bipartisan agency that oversees elections in the state found hundreds of illegal votes, including votes cast by felons and non-citizens, double voting, voter impersonation, and irregularities that affected mail-in absentee ballots.

    With an estimated 11-12 million illegal aliens roaming the Unites States and the lax voting controls in many areas, it seems very foolish to deny that non-citizens voted in 2016. It is even more foolish to continue to case Russian influence in the election when it is clear that the vote count in the U.S. may have been bloated due to the lack of border security and voting legitimacy.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Jul 12

Today’s News 12th July 2017

  • Tear Gas, Guns, & Riot Squads: The Police State's Answer To Free Speech Is Brute Force

    Authored by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

    Forget everything you’ve ever been taught about free speech in America.

    It’s all a lie.

    There can be no free speech for the citizenry when the government speaks in a language of force.

    What is this language of force?

    Militarized police. Riot squads. Camouflage gear. Black uniforms. Armored vehicles. Mass arrests. Pepper spray. Tear gas. Batons. Strip searches. Surveillance cameras. Kevlar vests. Drones. Lethal weapons. Less-than-lethal weapons unleashed with deadly force. Rubber bullets. Water cannons. Stun grenades. Arrests of journalists. Crowd control tactics. Intimidation tactics. Brutality.

    This is not the language of freedom.

    This is not even the language of law and order.

    Unfortunately, this is how the government at all levels—federal, state and local—now responds to those who choose to exercise their First Amendment right to peacefully assemble in public and challenge the status quo.

    Recently, this militarized exercise in intimidation reared its ugly head in the college town of Charlottesville, Va., where protesters who took to the streets to peacefully express their disapproval of a planned KKK rally were held at bay by implacable lines of gun-wielding riot police. Only after a motley crew of Klansmen had been safely escorted to and from the rally by black-garbed police did the assembled army of city, county and state police declare the public gathering unlawful and proceed to unleash canisters of tear gas on the few remaining protesters to force them to disperse.

    To be clear, this is the treatment being meted out to protesters across the political spectrum.

    The police state does not discriminate.

    As a USA Today article notes, “People demanding justice, demanding accountability or demanding basic human rights without resorting to violence, should not be greeted with machine guns and tanks. Peaceful protest is democracy in action. It is a forum for those who feel disempowered or disenfranchised. Protesters should not have to face intimidation by weapons of war.”

    A militarized police response to protesters poses a danger to all those involved, protesters and police alike. In fact, militarization makes police more likely to turn to violence to solve problems.

    You want to turn a peaceful protest into a riot?

    Bring in the militarized police with their guns and black uniforms and warzone tactics and “comply or die” mindset. Ratchet up the tension across the board. Take what should be a healthy exercise in constitutional principles (free speech, assembly and protest) and turn it into a lesson in authoritarianism.

    Frankly, any police officer who tells you that he needs tanks, SWAT teams, and pepper spray to do his job shouldn’t be a police officer in a constitutional republic.

    All that stuff in the First Amendment sounds great in theory. However, it amounts to little more than a hill of beans if you have to exercise those freedoms while facing down an army of police equipped with deadly weapons.

    It doesn’t have to be this way.

    There are other, far better models to follow.

    For instance, back in 2011, the St. Louis police opted to employ a passive response to Occupy St. Louis activists. First, police gave the protesters nearly 36 hours’ notice to clear the area, as opposed to the 20 to 60 minutes’ notice other cities gave. Then, as journalist Brad Hicks reports, when the police finally showed up:

    They didn’t show up in riot gear and helmets, they showed up in shirt sleeves with their faces showing. They not only didn’t show up with SWAT gear, they showed up with no unusual weapons at all, and what weapons they had all securely holstered. They politely woke everybody up. They politely helped everybody who was willing to remove their property from the park to do so. They then asked, out of the 75 to 100 people down there, how many people were volunteering for being-arrested duty? Given 33 hours to think about it, and 10 hours to sweat it over, only 27 volunteered … and were escorted away by a handful of cops. The rest were advised to please continue to protest, over there on the sidewalk … and what happened next was the most absolutely brilliant piece of crowd control policing I have heard of in my entire lifetime. All of the cops who weren’t busy transporting and processing the voluntary arrestees lined up, blocking the stairs down into the plaza. They stood shoulder to shoulder. They kept calm and silent. They positioned the weapons on their belts out of sight. They crossed their hands low in front of them, in exactly the least provocative posture known to man. And they peacefully, silently, respectfully occupied the plaza, using exactly the same non-violent resistance techniques that the protesters themselves had been trained in.

    As Forbes concluded, “This is a more humane, less costly, and ultimately more productive way to handle a protest. This is great proof that police can do it the old fashioned way – using their brains and common sense instead of tanks, SWAT teams, and pepper spray – and have better results.”

    It can be done.

    Police will not voluntarily give up their gadgets and war toys and combat tactics, however. Their training and inclination towards authoritarianism has become too ingrained.

    As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, if we are to have any hope of dismantling the police state, change must start locally, community by community. Citizens will have to demand that police de-escalate and de-militarize. And if the police don’t listen, contact your city councils and put the pressure on them.

    Remember, they work for us. They might not like hearing it—they certainly won’t like being reminded of it—but we pay their salaries.

    We must adopt a different mindset and follow a different path if we are to alter the outcome of these interactions with police.

    The American dream was built on the idea that no one is above the law, that our rights are inalienable and cannot be taken away, and that our government and its appointed agents exist to serve us.

    It may be that things are too far gone to save, but still we must try.

  • Mt. Gox Chief Denies Stealing $500 Million In Bitcoin As Trial Starts

    Two-and-a-half years after the collapse of Mt. Gox ushered in a multi-year bear market in the world of digital currencies, the trial of former Gox chief executive officer Mark Karpeles began Tuesday in Tokyo.  Karpeles pleaded “not guilty” to charges of embezzlement and fraud stemming from the collapse of what was once the world’s most-active platform for buying and selling digital currencies. Some 850,000 bitcoins – then worth around half a billion U.S. dollars – were stolen in the hack, which was disclosed in February 2014, along with $28 million in cash from the exchange's bank accounts, according to Reuters.

    “The 32-year-old chief executive of defunct Mt. Gox pleaded not guilty on Tuesday to charges relating to the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of bitcoins and cash from what was once the world's biggest bitcoin exchange.

     

    French national Mark Karpeles filed the plea in response to charges of embezzlement and data manipulation at the Tokyo District Court, according to a pool report for foreign journalists.”

    Karpeles was indicted for transferring 341 million yen ($3 million) from a Mt. Gox account holding customer funds to an account in his name during September to December 2013. The prosecution also alleged Karpeles boosted the balance of an account in his name in Mt. Gox's trading system.

    In its opening statement to the court, Karpeles' defense team did not dispute that the transfers took place, but denied they amounted to embezzlement. Karpeles told the court he was an information technology engineer.

    While the Gox bankruptcy badly damaged the public’s perception of digital currencies – particularly among risk-averse Japanese investors – it did spur Japanese lawmakers to develop a legal framework that officially recognizes digital currencies as legal, regulated assets. It also created a system for grating licenses to digital currency exchanges. Japan this year became the first country to regulate exchanges at the national level, part of a government effort to reestablish its lost influence over the crypto market.

    That framework, passed into law earlier this year, officially took effect in April and presaged the entrance of Japanese banks into the digital currencies marketplace.

    * * *

    However, institutional investors in Japan remain wary, say those running virtual currency exchanges in Tokyo. Only 4 percent of large and mid-sized Japanese firms plan to use bitcoin in the near to medium term, showed a Reuters poll last month.

    Karpeles, who disappeared from public view shortly after Gox’s collapse, was rumored to have been the target of a super subpoena, preventing him from discussing Gox or the pending case against him.
    But now that the trial is underway, the public may soon receive some long-awaited answers about the hack. Namely: How did hackers infiltrate Mt. Gox? Exactly how long did Karpeles wait to disclose the theft to the public. Mt. Gox subsequently said it had found 200,000 of the missing bitcoins – where were they, who found them, and how?

    And, most importantly: Were any Mt. Gox employees complicit in the theft?
     

  • CFPB Makes It Easier For Customers To Sue Banks

    The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau just made it easier for ordinary citizens to sue banks by restricting how they can use mandatory arbitration to block class-action lawsuits, according to Bloomberg. But the decision – inspired by a 2015 investigative series in the New York Times about how US companies, particularly credit card companies and payday lenders, abuse the practice – likely won’t stay on the books for long. As the LA Times writes:

    It's all but certain that Republican lawmakers in control of the House and Senate will move quickly to overturn the rule as part of their ongoing efforts to cripple the consumer-watchdog agency and create a more business-friendly regulatory landscape.”

    Clauses requiring arbitration to settle disputes are inserted routinely in contracts for credit cards, payday loans and other financial products. They typically prevent consumers from filing lawsuits or banding together in class actions.

    "Arbitration clauses in contracts for products like bank accounts and credit cards make it nearly impossible for people to take companies to court when things go wrong," CFPB Director Richard Cordray said in a statement.

     

    “These clauses allow companies to avoid accountability by blocking group lawsuits and forcing people to go it alone or give up. Our new rule will stop companies from sidestepping the courts and ensure that people who are harmed together can take action together.”

    From the time they formally receive the ruling, lawmakers have 60 legislative days to overturn the bureau’s decision. Republicans have been using the Congressional Review Act, a little-known provision, to undo more than a dozen Obama-era regulations during the closing days of his presidency, including the CFPB’s plans to implement tougher standards for prepaid debit cards.

    “As a matter of principle, policy and process, this anti-consumer rule should be thoroughly rejected by Congress,” Representative Jeb Hensarling, the Texas Republican who leads the House Financial Services Committee, said in a statement.

    Congress isn’t the only body that’s skeptical of the ruling: In an unusual move, the head of a key banking regulator wrote to Cordray to raise concerns about it. Keith Noreika, the acting Comptroller of the Currency, asked that the CFPB share data used to develop its arbitration rule, according to a letter dated Monday that was obtained by Bloomberg.

    “We would like to work with you and your staff to address the potential safety and soundness implications of the CFPB’s arbitration proposal,” Noreika said in the letter. “That is why I am requesting the CFPB share its data.”

    Noreika cited a section of the Dodd-Frank Act that gives the Financial Stability Oversight Council – a panel of regulators headed by the Treasury secretary – power to set aside any CFPB rule that can be shown to put the safety of the wider financial system at risk.

    However, studying the fairness of arbitration clauses appears to be well within the bureau’s remit: Dodd-Frank says the CFPB "may prohibit or impose conditions or limitations on the use" of arbitration clauses if it determines that restricting such provisions "is in the public interest and for the protection of consumers,” according to the LA Times.

    During its study, the CFPB found that hundreds of millions of contracts include arbitration provisions and that companies have used the clauses to keep fights out of court almost two-thirds of the time. Very few consumers even consider bringing individual actions against financial-service providers in court or in arbitration.

    Despite the rule’s near-certain erasure, Christine Hines, legislative director for the National Assn. of Consumer Advocates, told the LA Times that the CFPB isn’t thumbing its nose at Republican lawmakers who have insisted for years that the agency is a rabid regulatory pit bull in need of either a very short leash or a trip to a farm.

    “The agency has to continue doing its job,” she said, “even though there are very anti-consumer people in power.”

    Other consumer advocates echoed that sentiment.

     

    “The rule will help to combat the culture of companies profiting from charging illegal fees and committing other crimes against their customers,” said Rohit Chopra, senior fellow at the Consumer Federation of America.

     

    Said Lisa Donner, executive director of Americans for Financial Reform: “The consumer agency’s rule will stop Wall Street and predatory lenders from ripping people off with impunity, and make markets fairer and safer for ordinary Americans.”

    The new rule will cover new agreements for products such as credit cards, auto loans, credit reports and even mobile phone services that provide third-party billing. Companies can still include arbitration clauses in contracts, but they must state that those can’t be used to stop individual consumers from joining class-action cases.

    According to Bloomberg, it is also possible that industry groups will sue to overturn the CFPB rule. Groups including the US Chamber of Commerce have said arbitration is a valuable tool to prevent frivolous, expensive lawsuits that often don’t do much to benefit borrowers. Meanwhile, consumer advocates say restricting arbitration clauses will deter bad actors and force companies to reconsider certain activities because consumers will be more inclined to sue.

  • Paul Craig Roberts Warns Of "Ever More Official Lies" From The US Government

    Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,

    The false reality constructed for Americans parallels perfectly the false reality constructed by Big Brother in George Orwells’ dystopian novel 1984.

    Consider the constant morphing of “the Muslim threat” from al-Qaeda to the Taliban, to al-Nusra, to ISIS to ISIL, to Daesh with a jump to Russia. All of a sudden 16 years of Middle East wars against “terrorists” and “dictators” have become a matter of standing up to Russia, the country most threatened by Muslim terrorism, and the country most capable of wiping the United States and its vassal empire off of the face of the earth.

    Domestically, Americans are assured that, thanks to the Federal Reserve’s policy of quantitative easing, that is, flooding the financial markets with newly printed money that has driven up the prices of stocks and bonds, America has enjoyed an economic recovery since June of 2009, which must be one of the longest recoveries in history despite the absence of growth in median real family incomes, despite the growth in real retail sales, despite the falling labor force participation rate, despite the lack of high value-added, high productivity, high wage jobs.

    The “recovery” is more than a mystery. It is a miracle. It exists only on fake news paper.

    According to CNN, an unreliable source for sure, Jennifer Tescher, president and CEO of the Center for Financial Services Innovation, reports that about half of Americans report that their living expenses are equal to or exceed their incomes. Among those aged 18 to 25 burdened by student loans, 54% say their debts are equal to or exceed their incomes. This means that half of the US population has ZERO discretionary income. So what is driving the recovery?

    Nothing. For half or more of the US population there is no discretionary income there with which to drive the economy.

    The older part of the population has no discretionary income either. For a decade there has been essentially zero interest on the savings of the elderly, and if you believe John Williams of shadowstats.com, which I do, the real interest rates have been zero and even negative as inflation is measured in a way designed to prevent Social Security cost of living adjustments.

    In other words, the American economy has been living on the shrinkage of the savings and living standards of its population.

    Last Friday’s employment report is just another lie from the government. The report says that the unemployment rate is 4.4% and that June employment increased by 222,000 jobs. A rosy picture. But as I have just demonstrated, there are no fundamentals to support it. It is just another US government lie like Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, Assad’s use of chemical weapons against his own people, Russian invasion of Ukraine, and so forth and so on.

    The rosy unemployment picture is totally contrived. The unemployment rate is 4.4% because discouraged workers who have not searched for a job in the past four weeks are not counted as unemployed.

    The BLS has a second measure of unemployment, known as U6, which is seldom reported by the presstitute financial media. According to this official measure the US unemployment rate is about double the reported rate.

    Why? the U6 rate counts discouraged workers who have been discouraged for less than one year.

    John Williams counts the long term discouraged workers (discouraged for more than one year) who formerly (before “reforms”) were counted officially. When the long term discouraged are counted, the US unemployment rate is in the 22-23 percent range. This is borne out by the clear fact that the labor force participation rate has been falling throughout the alleged “recovery.” Normally, labor force participation rates rise during economic recoveries.

    It is very easy for the government to report a low jobless rate when the government studiously avoids counting the unemployed.

    It is an extraordinary thing that although the US government itself reports that if even a small part of discouraged workers are counted as unemployed the unemployment rate is 8.6%, the presstitute financial media, a collection of professional liars, still reports, in the face of the government’s admission, that the unemployment rate as 4.4%.

    Now, let’s do what I have done month after month year after year. Let’s look at the jobs that the BLS alleges are being created. Remember, most of these alleged jobs are the product of the birth/death model that adds by assumption alone about 100,000 jobs per month. In other words, these jobs come out of a model, not from reality.

    Where are these reported jobs? They are where they always are in lowly paid domestic services. Health care and social assistance, about half of which is “ambulatory health care services,” provided 59,000 jobs. Leisure and hospitality provided 36,000 jobs of which 29,300 consist of waitresses and bartenders. Local government rose by 35,000. Manufacturing, once the backbone of the US economy, provided a measly 1,000 jobs.

    As I have emphasized for a decade or two, the US is devolving into a third world workforce where the only employment available is in lowly paid domestic service jobs that cannot be offshored and that do not pay enough to provide an independent existence. This is why 50% of 25-year olds live at home with their parents and why there are more Americans aged 24-34 living with parents than living independently.

    This is not the economic profile of a “superpower” that the idiot neoconservatives claim the US to be. The American economy that offshoring corporations and financialization have created is incapable of supporting the enormous US debt burden. It is only a matter of time and circumstance.

    I doubt that the United States can continue in the ranks of a first world economy. Americans have sat there sucking their thumbs while their “leaders” destroyed them.

  • Former DOJ Official: Trump Jr. Didn't Commit a Crime

     

    Content originally published at iBankCoin.com

    Unfortunately, the smoking gun evidence of Trump Jr. meeting with a Russian lawyer isn’t a crime, according to Robert Driscoll, former Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Chief of Staff, Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of Justice.

    This man’s integrity and mastery of the law cannot and will not be repudiated. All of you crackpot internet lawyers need to shut up and take those nooses that were made for Trump Jr. and save them for Comey. More on that in a minute.

    “I think people will make hay over the willingness to have the meeting. At the end of the day, it’s still very vague as to what statuary violations there would be. Collusion, in and of itself, isn’t a crime. There would need to be conspiracy to violate another law. And so this notion that there was a meeting, it may be politically unpalatable, but it’s certainly not a crime to say ‘ok I’ll listen.’ If you wanted to piece together a legal theory of criminal activity… I haven’t seen anything, other than esoteric campaign finance theories that don’t make a lot of sense.”

    On the matter of Comey, inquiring minds want to know why he was seen walking into the NY Times building on June 22nd, 2017. The official story was Comey’s attendance of nice charity event. But that easily could’ve been arranged by the Times as a cover to meet with him.


    Disgraced Former FBI Head, James Comey, heading into NY Times, most likely in tow with Rod Goldstone emails
     
    While everyone is fixated on the contents of the Trump Jr. emails, which of course are important, I think more energy should be directed into finding out who leaked them. After all, these leaks are far more serious than the Wikileaks that the democrats bemoan over. They were used in an effort to derail a reviled and corrupt Presidential candidate, whereas these leaks are meant to destroy and take down a sitting President. The implications of the latter could have profound effects, including loss of life, should the schemes bear any fruit.

    Enter Ben Wittes, Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution, a close friend of James Comey.

    Shortly after Comey got fired, Wittes told CNN’s Anderson Cooper that Comey ‘had a story to tell’ and that the President should be scared.

    I want you to pay attention to the following timeline, illustrated beautifully by Zerohedge.

    On May 16th, Wittes tweeted this, just before the contents of Comey’s memo contents were leaked to the NY Times.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    He did it again on May 18th, just before a story broke that said Comey asked AG Sessions to not leave him alone with Trump.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Then on June 23rd, just 1 day after Comey was seen entering the NY Times building, Wittes, aka Mr. Tick, tweeted this gem.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Today, following Trump Jr. published the Goldstone emails, Wittes gloated with a “Boom” tweet.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Perhaps he’s just a shitposter and this is all one big odd coincidence. Or, on the maniacal side, he’s a sociopath who cannot help but attract attention to himself by blurting out cryptic messages to his sycophantic fans regarding illegal intelligence leaks.

    Your call.

  • The Most And Least Popular U.S. Senators

    According to a new poll by Morning Consult, the most popular senator in the U.S. is independent and once presidential candidate Bernie Sanders.

    As Statista's Martin Armstrong points out, voters in his state of Vermont have given him a net approval rating of 54 percent – 75 percent saying they approve of the job he is doing, 21 percent saying they disapprove.

    Infographic: The Most and Least Popular U.S. Senators | Statista

    You will find more statistics at Statista

    At the other end of the scale is Republican Jeff Flake, who with 37 percent approval and 45 percent disapproval is sitting on a minus 8 percent net rate in Arizona.

    The Grand Canyon State is generally unhappy with its Senators – John McCain has a net rating of minus 4 percent.

  • Welcome To Donald Trump's Very Own Big, Fat, Ugly Bubble

    Authored by David Stockman via The Daily Reckoning,

    The overwhelming source of what ails America economically is found in the Eccles Building. During the past three decades the Federal Reserve has fostered destructive financial mutations on Wall Street and Main Street.

    Bubble Finance policies have fueled an egregious financial engineering by the C-suites of corporate America. This bubble has skyrocketed to the tune of $15 trillion of stock buybacks, debt-fueled mergers deals and buyouts of the last decade.

    The Fed fostered a borrowing binge in the household sector after the 1980s. It eventually resulted in Peak Debt and $15 trillion in debilitating debts on the homes, cars, incomes and futures of what used to be middle class America.

    It also led politicians down the path of free lunch fiscal policy. By monetizing $4.2 trillion of Treasury and GSE debt during the last three decades, the Fed numbed the US economy from effects of crowding out and rising interest rates that would have come from soaring government deficits. This left the public sector impaled on Peak Debt.

    Ever since Alan Greenspan launched Bubble Finance in the fall of 1987, public debt outstanding has increased by nearly 9 times. Measured against national output, the Federal debt ratio has risen from 47% to 106% of GDP.

    These actions have stripped-mined balance sheets and cash flow from main street businesses. The Fed has stifled economic growth while delivering multi-trillion windfalls into the hands of a few thousand speculators on Wall Street.

    These rippling waves of financial mutation are why the US economy is visibly failing and why vast numbers of citizens in Flyover America voted for Donald Trump for president.

    Ironically, even as he stumbled to his victory on November 8, Trump barely recognized that the force behind all the economic failure that he railed against was the nation’s rogue central bank.

    Only when it occurred to him that Janet Yellen was doing everything possible to insure Clinton’s victory did he let loose an attack on the Fed. In his famous warning, he leveled that America was threatened by a big, fat, ugly bubble.

    Unfortunately, there was never even a hint of policy content behind this campaign statement. It said nothing of a coherent plan to liberate the American economy from the nation’s central bank.

    When Wall Street launched a phony Trump Reflation trade during the wee hours of election night, the Donald forgot all about the great bubble. In fact, he quickly embraced it as a sign that investors were enthusiastically embracing Trump-O-Nomics.

    No new arrival in the Oval Office was ever more mistaken. The gambling halls of Wall Street were a clear and present danger to his presidency, but Trump had only a small window of time for a counter-strategy.

    He needed to quickly puncture the bubble, not embrace it; and his first, second and third actions on the economic policy front should have been to clean house at the Fed. He should have named names and insured that the current Fed incumbents get the blame when the inflated stock and bond markets finally implode.

    All the tools were there. The Fed had three vacancies out of seven seats on the Board, and he could have cleared more by demanding the resignation of Janet Yellen and Stanley Fischer from day one.

    Instead, the Donald got off-track from the get-go with aiming his efforts against immigrants and refugees; nonsense about the Mexican border; and the hideously bloated Pentagon budget.

    While all of that was bad, the Donald’s fatal error was delegating economic policy to Wall Street errand boys. Trump handed economic power to Steve Mnuchin, Wilbur Ross and Goldman Sachs’ next-in-line gatekeeper to Washington, Gary Cohn.

    These characters are a slap-in-the-face to the populations in the rust belts which elected him.

    At the end of the day, the lines of demarcation are crystal clear. The Fed is Wall Street’s angel and Main Street’s enemy.

    The Donald has ended up handing the keys to economic policy to a cabal of Wall Street operators, who have wasted six months doing nothing on the central banking file.

    Mnuchin has even toyed publicly with the idea that Yellen might be reappointed because she has done a “good job”.

    You cannot talk about reappointing Janet Yellen and making the American economy great again in the same sentence.

    To do so is to voluntarily take ownership of the very big, fat ugly bubble that has brought so much hardship to Flyover America.

    Yesterday’s announcement of an appointment to one of the Fed vacancies leaves nothing to the imagination.

    After finally announcing a candidate for a job which will determine whether American capitalism can even survive, the Trump White House picked the absolute worst candidate available. Trump named Randall Quarles, a veritable creature of the Wall Street/Washington establishment, as his nominee for vice chairman for supervision at the Federal Reserve.Randy Quarles is the former Under Secretary of the Treasury in the George W. Bush Administration. Before founding Cynosure, Mr. Quarles was a longtime partner of The Carlyle Group, one of the world’s largest private equity firms.

    In addition to his record as a successful investor, he has long experience at the highest levels of the international financial architecture, having represented the U.S. for many years in the G7, G20, and Financial Stability Forum, and having served the U.S. as Executive Director of the International Monetary Fund, Executive Director of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and as a member of the Board of Directors of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation.

     

    Earlier in his career, Mr. Quarles spent many years working as a partner at the Wall Street law firm of Davis Polk & Wardwell, where he was the co-head of the firm’s Financial Institutions Group and advised on transactions that included a number of the largest financial sector mergers ever completed.

     

    Do not take comfort from the fact that Quarles mimics the Hoover Institution’s version of economics. The notion that it’s fine to intrude deeply into the mainspring of capitalism in the financial markets and distort all financial asset prices, but it should be done based on formulaic rules rather than “data-dependent” policy discretion.

    Quarles has professed an affinity for the Taylor Rule, a Rube Goldberg policy contraption invented by one of Milton Friedman’s disciples, and named for himself.

    It should be clear to anybody not drinking the Fed’s kool-aid, that it is impossible to accurately measure the Fed’s goals for unemployment and inflation on which the massive $4.4 trillion balance sheet is premised.

    How else do you account for the rampant gains in the cost of living plaguing Flyover America that the BLS neglects to even measure? This measure has caused those members of the Fed working in the Eccles Building to pursue even higher levels of inflation.

    During the first 14 years of this decade the Fed claimed price levels rose by only 31.7% when everything households in Flyover America were buying to survive had inflated by multiples – in some case 100-300%.

    How can there be “full-employment” at 4.4% unemployment claimed by the BLS and the Fed’s monetary central planners, when there are 103 million adults without jobs?

    What Randal Quarles brings to the table is a vision of anti-market monetary central planning that is far worse than what has already brought American capitalism to its knees.

    The Donald now owns the Bubble and has left his Presidency and the American economy squarely in harms’ way.

    There is no doubt that they are bubble blind and have no understanding of the rampant speculation and driven risk-taking their policies have unleashed in the casino. Even Barron’s last cover story made it clear that robo-machines, ETF’s and other forms of passive “investing,” have set the markets up for a thundering crash.

    Needless to say, the Fed is only now beginning to apprehend the train-wreck that lies dead ahead. Thus, the June FOMC minutes were grasping for something dimly worrisome:

    According to the minutes, some FOMC members acknowledged that “equity prices were high when judged against standard valuation measures.”  Some are even “concerned that subdued market volatility, coupled with a low equity premium, could lead to a buildup of risks to financial stability.”

    Do ya think?

    Does the Donald have a clue?

  • 5 Charts That Explain Just How Screwed Your State Is

    We’ve spent a lot of time of late discussing the precarious financial positions of states like Illinois, Connecticut and New Jersey which each suffer from their own myriad of financial threats including massive budget deficits, monstrous unfunded pension liabilities, pending debt downgrades, etc.  In case you’ve missed those notes, here is a recap for your amusement:

    Of course, while Illinois gets all the bad press for being the undisputed champion of the “worst state in the union” honor, there are many other “up and comers” (yes, we’re looking at you California with your massive unfunded pension obligation) aggressively vying for the title.

    In fact, the Mercatus Center at George Mason University (GMU) has recently compiled a fairly comprehensive study, based on a number of objective financial metrics, ranking the 50 U.S. states according to their overall fiscal condition.  Among other things, GMU analyzed the following metrics:

    • Cash solvency.  Does a state have enough cash on hand to cover its short-term bills?
    • Budget solvency. Can a state cover its fiscal year spending with current revenues, or does it have a budget shortfall?
    • Long-run solvency. Can a state meet its long-term spending commitments? Will there be enough money to cushion it from economic shocks or other long-term fiscal risks?
    • Service-level solvency. How much “fiscal slack” does a state have to increase spending if citizens demand more services?
    • Trust fund solvency. How large are each state’s unfunded pension and healthcare liabilities?

    All of which resulted in the following ranking map. 

    Ironically (which, in case it weren’t brutally obvious, we mean in the most sarcastic way possible), the resulting map looks eerily similar to the 2016 electoral college map with the Democrat-leaning states on the bottom end of the “fiscal condition” ranking and Republican-leaning states making out a bit better, on a relative basis.

     

    Maybe it’s just coincidence…then again, maybe promising every entitlement under the sun to your residents without a clue as to how to finance those entitlements is a really bad idea over the long term…just a thought.

    But it’s not just the overall ranking where the conservative states seemed to fare better. 

    In terms of “cash solvency” (ability to meet short-term funding requirements), 8 of the 10 worst states were all blue states.

     

    Of course, the lack of near-term solvency plaguing America’s liberal states isn’t for a lack of trying to aggressively over tax their residents…

     

    Meanwhile, on net unfunded pension obligations (with liabilities discounted at the risk-free rate), the mix between red and blue states was more equal on the bottom end of the spectrum even though California’s massive $900 billion obligation is roughly 3x that of the next worst state of Illinois.  Even more staggering is the fact that the aggregate unfunded state pension liabilities total over $5 trillion…and that doesn’t count local and federal pension obligations.

     

    And the coup de grâce, when it comes to the ability of the states to meet their long-term spending obligations, literally 12 of the 13 worst states in the union are controlled by Democrats and voted Democrat in the 2016 presidential election…which is even more amazing when you realize that only 19 states voted Democrat in the 2016 election in aggregate.

     

    Perhaps it’s time to admit that liberal economic policies, which can be summarized as higher taxes and higher entitlement spending, may not be working all that well?

  • Baltimore Citizens Urge "Nobody Kill Anybody" Ceasefire At The Start Of August

    Authored by Alastair Williamson via Squawker.org,

    Breaking story out of Baltimore City, Maryland, where a citizen ceasefire is being issued by the community for August 04, 2017 through august 06, 2017.

    The ‘no violence for 72-hours’ or ‘nobody kill anybody’ campaign comes at a time where the city is spiraling out of control. According to WJZ, “Baltimore struggles with a record high murder rate, and those in power are desperate for solutions”.

    In April, Baltimore’s Mayor asked Federal Agencies including the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and Federal Bureau of Investigation for help before entering the rough summer months.

    The Federalization of Baltimore is nothing new and perhaps it’s the new trend for America’s crumbling inner cities.

    Alastair Williamson describes the ceasefire in Baltimore City, Maryland, along with taking us on a journey through two recent gun violence scenes in the highest homicide rate area in the United States. The mainstream media is not allowed to show you this, because it destroys their narrative.

Digest powered by RSS Digest