Today’s News 12th March 2017

  • The Strategic Triangle That Is Changing The World

    Authored by Federico Pieraccini via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    While the world continues to decipher, or digest, the new Trump presidency, important changes are afoot within the grand strategic triangle that lies between Russia, Iran and China

    Away from the current chaos in the United States, major developments are progressing, with Iran, Russia and China coordinating on a series of significant moves crucial for the future of the Eurasian continent. With a population of more than five billion people, constituting about two-thirds of the Earth's population, the future of humanity passes through this immense area. Signaling a major change from a unipolar world order based on Europe and the United States to a multipolar world steered by China, Russia and Iran, these Eurasian states are carving out a leading role in the development of the vast continent. As part of the challenges faced by these leading multipolar countries, the disruptive events originating in the post-WWII Euro-Atlantic world order will need to be tackled.

    Looking at major projects within the Eurasian continent, one thing that stands out is the role of China, Russia and Iran in different areas under their influence. The One Belt, One Road project proposed by Beijing (investments of around one trillion dollars over the next ten years); the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) advanced by Moscow to integrate the former Soviet republics of Central Asia; and Iran's role in Middle East aiming to bring stability and prosperity to the region – all are central to Eurasian development. Of course, being multipolar, all these projects fully converge, requiring concerted and joint development for the overall success of the Eurasian continent.

    In this sense, the areas of greatest turmoil include areas that fall under the sphere of influence of these leading Eurasian states. The main concentrations of upheaval can be easily identified in the Middle East and North Africa, not to mention the area of ??the Persian Gulf, where Saudi Arabia's criminal war against Yemen has now continued unabated for the past 24 months.

    Islamic terrorism, a source for cooperation.

    The common source of instability for the Eurasian continent stems from Islamic terrorism, deployed as an instrument of division and conflict. In this sense, the Saudi and Turkish role in nurturing and spreading Wahhabism as well as the Muslim Brotherhood means that they are directly opposed to the stability of the Chinese, Russian and Iranian sphere. With the full financial support of China, and military support of Russia, Tehran’s role in the region unsurprisingly becomes decisive. Iran is the country in which Sino-Russian influence is manifested at all levels in the region and beyond. The deterioration of the military situation in Syria has nevertheless obliged Moscow to intervene militarily in support of Syria, a key regional ally of Iran, but also provided a perfect way to counter Saudi-Turkish influence in the region. The growing Shia crescent linking Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon is vital for retaining the influence of a multipolar world in the region. Washington has thus far been able to dictate matters through the actions of Saudi Arabia and Turkey, its regional cat’s paws, whose interests often align with that of Zionist elements, neoconservative and Wahhabi, that exist within the US deep state. Of course, Washington seeks to preserve the unipolar world order through its regional allies, aiming to remain the ultimate arbiter of Middle Eastern affairs, an area reverberating with instability from the Persian Gulf to North Africa.

    It is no wonder, then, that Moscow has sought to establish a special relationship with the post-Morsi (Muslim Brotherhood) government in Egypt, which will curtail the Saudi-American influence on Cairo and North Africa, especially following the destruction of Gaddafi's Libya. Al Sisi’s signals are encouraging, representing one of clearest examples of a multipolar world in the making. Egypt accepted Saudi funding during the time of highest tension between Doha and Riyadh, an obvious moment of weakness on the part of Cairo, especially after the coup that removed Morsi, who was supported by Qatar, Turkey and the United States. Yet in recent times, Egypt has been happy to cooperate with Moscow, especially in regard to arms. (The purchase of two Mistral ships from France assumes the further purchase of weaponry from Moscow; the same is the case with nuclear-energy development as an alternative to the massive importation of oil from Saudi Arabia, which was suspended by Riyadh following the commencement of dialogue between Cairo and Damascus). Egypt seeks a strategic positioning in the region that winks at the Russo-Sino-Iranian triangle (talks on Egypt joining the EAEU have been in the air for quite some time), although not completely ruling out the economic contribution of Saudi Arabia and the United States. On the contrary, the influence of Turkey and Iran is rejected and declared hostile, mainly because of the continuing relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood, a major concern in the Sinai.

    Stability in the Middle East and North Africa relies on an expansion of Iran’s mediating role; important financial contributions from the People's Republic of China (take a look at the situation in Libya and the reconstruction in Syria); and military cooperation with the Russian Federation. The importance of focusing on these areas of the globe can not be overstated, representing the first steps towards a more fundamental restructuring of the world order in different parts of the Eurasian landmass.

    Caucasus, Central Asia and Afpak: Syria as a case study.

    Often when looking at the danger posed by political Islam and Wahhabi extremism, three key areas of the Eurasian continent are usually under consideration: the former Soviet republics of Central Asia; the complicated border between Afghanistan and Pakistan; and the Caucasus area. In these areas, cooperation between China, Russia and Iran is once again playing a key role, seeing many attempts to mediate tensions and conflicts that would potentially be catastrophic for economic-development projects. The recent terrorist attacks in Pakistan in Lahore showed the true face of cooperation between Afghanistan and Pakistan, strongly encouraged by China and Russia. Shortly after a brief exchange of fire between the militaries of Afghanistan and Pakistan on their common border, an agreement was reached between Kabul and Islamabad to reduce tensions and advance the peace talks heavily sponsored by Moscow and Beijing. The need to halt the escalation of tensions between Pakistan and Afghanistan is one of the primary focuses of Russia and China in what is one of the most unstable regions of the world and what are transit lines for future projects led by the China-Iran-Russia alliance. The instability of this particular area depends largely on the role that India, Saudi Arabia, the US and Turkey intend to play to counterbalance the Eurasian trio. It is not at all coincidental that Moscow is trying in various ways to reach a complex understanding with each of these players. Saudi Arabia and Turkey are the center of control and administration for international terrorism, Riyadh and Ankara’s negative influence being felt from Syria and Libya through to Pakistan, Afghanistan and the Caucasus. The determining factor is not always the United States, though Washington naturally encourages all kinds of destructive efforts directed against the integration of the Eurasian continent.

    Syria appears to be the first point of understanding reached on paper between Turkey and Russia, and could, if it obtains a positive outcome to the conflict, represent a foundation on which to build a strategic cooperation in areas like Afpak and Central Asia. In this sense, the energy-corridor incentives represented by pipelines, of which Russia is the main player, should not be underestimated, as in the case of the Turkish Stream. Also in the Caucasus, another area of extreme instability, the role played by Russia and Iran was decisive during the four days of war in Nagorno-Karabakh.

    The energy factor is certainly a big incentive for Saudi Arabia, which has long observed energy diversification with interest by focusing on civilian nuclear power, something of which Russia is a world leader. Moscow plays its cards variously by providing military and economic cooperation to its closest partners (Iran, China, Syria, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan); strengthening bilateral alliances through the incentive of cooperation in weapons systems (India, Pakistan and Egypt); and energy cooperation with seemingly distant nations (UAE, Qatar, Saudi Arabia) in order to pry open a breach through which to gather broader geopolitical arrangements.

    The overall strategy of the three leading Eurasian nations aims primarily to strengthen the national borders of the countries with the most turbulent regions. Putin's recent trip to Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan aims to strengthen the soft underbelly of the Russian Federation, eliminating the threat and influence of radical Islamic terrorism in order to allow for the expansion of economic cooperation in the Eurasian Union. While not an easy task, it is certainly encouraged by the prospect of mutual gain for the nations involved, with mutually agreeable bilateral agreements in the place of diktats. In a sense, it is what the People's Republic is attempting to establish in Central Asia, one of the most volatile regions of the world, endeavoring to reach agreements and expand its pool of energy resources as occurred recently in Turkmenistan. Another example of the reduction of threats to the Eurasian landmass can be seen in the Xinjiang province, which China has focused on as an area that needs an easing of socio-political tensions, in the interests of obviating outside efforts to destabilize China, directed mainly from Turkey through its partner Turkmenistan.

    The Indian role in this context is more difficult to understand, compressed within an anti-Pakistan and anti-Chinese sentiment, as well as a subjection to the United States, together with good historical friendship with the Russian Federation. The role of New Delhi in this part of the world is the most indecipherable, seeing India’s (inscrutable) efforts to advance its own strategic goals. The strategic importance of Moscow and Tehran are essential in balancing the Indian position. Historically India was an important ally of the USSR, and India militarily continues to advance important military projects with the Russian Federation. In recent years, the Islamic Republic of Iran has greatly contributed to the Indian diversification of energy supplies. The fact that Tehran is a privileged partner of Beijing shows what a multipolar world looks like, and also helps to balance the anti-Chinese sentiment deeply rooted in the Indian establishment. In this case, Russia and Iran are clearly playing a mediating role between China and India. The fact that India and China are both important gas customers of Iran, as well as the fact that both China and India are cooperating with Russia on a military base, helps understand how Moscow and Tehran are cutting out Washington and diluting the anti-Chinese sentiment in India.

    The tensions that Washington fans in India is increasingly being doused, not least because it is at odds with India’s need to create a stable business environment for development without precluding any opportunity for partnership. The most difficult challenge is the peace process between Afghanistan and Pakistan, which goes against Indian geopolitical interests that are aligned with the American position in the region. To mitigate this situation, strong joint cooperation is required. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) will try to implement a framework within which to discuss and reach all-inclusive agreements between the parties involved. Once again, a regional discussion between Eurasian powers does not include the old world order of the US and Europe.

    The role played by China and Russia in Central Asia can not be overstated, because of the importance of the potentially available energy resources. This is not to mention the future cooperation between the two gigantic economic areas, such as with the European Union and Asia, that will transit through Central Asia, transforming the Eurasian Union into a golden bridge linking Europe and Asia. At the moment, the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) is an organization like the SCO that tends to prioritize the fight against terrorism; but increasingly it is seen as offering a place for discussion, an organization that offers a path toward economic cooperation by first laying down the necessary foundation of territorial stability. In this area of ??the globe, economic prosperity depends heavily on social, political and military stability.

    After all, this is the great challenge that Russia, China and Iran are facing, namely to de-escalate the hot zones (Middle East, Persian Gulf and North Africa) by eradicating the terrorist problem, and preventing the escalation of tensions in neighboring regions lying immediately within their sphere of influence (the Caucasus, Afghanistan-Pakistan and Central Asia), thus avoiding destructive destabilization.

    It is only once an international framework is in place that these areas will see the stability that will allow for the deep and wide-ranging economic cooperation that will be of historic significance. In this sense the entry of India and Pakistan into the SCO was the first step of a complicated deal led by China and Russia that covers a dozen nations. The same situation can be observed with the future entry of Iran into the SCO, with the specific objective of expanding the influence of the SCO in unstable areas like the Persian Gulf and Middle East. In this sense the discussions regarding the entry of Egypt into the SCO as a full member is aimed at expanding the SCO’s positive influence even as far away as North Africa.

    Russia, China and Iran are laying down the foundations for developments that will make the US irrelevant in its struggle to extend its unipolar moment. Combining the population of the Eurasian continent with the demographic and economic growth of these areas, it is not too difficult to understand how, in the space of just over two decades, the area stretching from Portugal to China, which includes dozens of nations of all latitudes and longitudes that extend from the Arctic regions of the Russian Federation to the Indian sea or the Persian Gulf, will be the central pivot around which the global economy will revolve. The combination of land and sea trade corridors will make the Eurasian continent the world's core, not only in terms of production but also in terms of trade and consumption, due to the increase of wealth of the middle-class areas of the world.

    In a strategic vision that historically incorporates decades of planning, Tehran, Moscow and Beijing have fully understood that stability is the primary objective to be achieved in order to effectively promote economic development that benefits all the nations involved. In Asia, ASEAN has begun to have a less belligerent attitude towards China, although Beijing continues to ensure its strategic interests with the construction and militarization of artificial islands in the South China Sea. The Philippines’ president, Rodrigo Duterte, seems to understand the potential gains of multipolar cooperation, and the path followed by his country in recent months forges a path for all other Asian nations, especially following the abandonment of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) project by Washington. It remains to be seen what role the old European continent can play while still being shackled to the American strategy that is focused on isolating Russia, China and Iran, committed to advancing Washington's global hegemony at cost, even if it involves committing economic suicide, as can be seen in Ukraine with the sanctions against the Russian Federation.

    One should not rule out a future change in direction in Europe as a direct result of failed policies that for too long have genuflected before American interests at the expense of the interests of European citizens. It is not accidental that many parties considered populist and nationalist have every intention of turning to the East and pursuing cooperation that for too long has been denied by the stupidity of Western elites.

    China, Russia and Iran appear to have every intention of accelerating the project of global cooperation and show no intention of shutting the doors to new players from outside Eurasia, especially in an increasingly globalized and interconnected world. Just take a look at the links of the People's Republic of China with the development projects in South America to understand how the scope of these projects aim to include all nations without exception. This is the foundation on which the new multipolar world order is based, and sooner or later the American and European elites will understand this. The dilemma for Western elites lies in their diminished role in the future international order: no longer will the US and Europe be the lone protagonists but actors who are part of an international cast. The unipolar international order is running out of time and the old world order is in crisis. Will Europeans and Americans be able to accept a role as co-protagonists, or will they reject inevitable historical change, condemning themselves in the process to oblivion?

  • Trump Deploys Dozens Of Judges To Battle Massive Backlog Of Deportation Cases

    In response to the 'paralysis' facing immigration courts, dealing with over 500,000 pending cases, President Trump is deploying 50 judges to immigration detention facilities across the United States, according to two sources and a letter seen by Reuters.

    As the Associated Press points out, there are 58 immigration courts in 27 states around the country with a total of 301 judges.  The problem, of course, is that those 301 judges already face a mountain of 534,000 pending immigration cases which is likely to balloon even higher under Trump's administration.

     
     

    Of 374 authorized immigration judge positions, 301 are filled. Fifty more candidates are in various stages of the hiring process, which typically takes about a year, said Kathryn Mattingly, a spokeswoman for the Executive Office for Immigration Review.

     

    In all, more than 534,000 cases were pending before immigration courts nationwide in February, according to a recent memo from Kelly.

    The massive backlog means that processing errors are a common occurrence and ultimately just result in illegal immigrants getting a free pass to reside in the country even longer, which is unacceptable to President Trump, and as Reuters reports the Department of Justice is also considering asking judges to sit from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m., split between two rotating shifts, to adjudicate more cases, the sources said. A notice about shift times was not included in the letter.

    Two sources familiar with the Justice Department's plan said the department would ask more judges to volunteer for one or two month deployments at detention centers. If the department cannot find enough volunteers, the department would assign judges to detention centers, the sources said. Judges who volunteer for the first 50 deployments would be sent to detention centers in Adelanto, California; San Diego, Chicago and elsewhere, according to the letter.

    Judges are employed by the Justice Department to oversee cases that determine if immigrants are given protections, such as asylum, or ordered deported. A handful of judges work from detention centers but most work from courts around the country.

    Of course, as we noted previously, one way to relieve the court burden is to simply increase deportations without using the court system at all, a strategy that has the American Civil Liberties Union Immigrants' Rights Project, and the 1,000s of immigration lawyers that earn a living filing appeal after appeal, up in arms.

    Advocates worry the Trump administration will increase the use of procedures that allow authorities to deport people without using the court system at all.

     

    "Instead of actually trying to make the courts better, they just want to use them less, even though that obviously is deeply problematic from a due-process standpoint," said Omar Jadwat, director of the American Civil Liberties Union Immigrants' Rights Project.

     

    Mehlman agrees the system is broken, but said advocacy groups and lawyers who keep filing new motions and appeals are part of the problem.

     

    "They understand that time works to their benefit and that the longer you can drag this out, the more bites at the apple you can get, the greater the likelihood that you can find some plausible reason for remaining here in the United States," he said.

    The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment.

  • Gold In Uncertain Times: "The West Doesn't Get It… They've Been Indoctrinated By Paper Money"

    In this fascinating interview on RealVision TV, Grant Williams and Egon von Greyerz cover a very broad range of subjects from gold, wealth preservation to debt, interest rates, Brexit, the EU and much more.

    https://player.vimeo.com/video/201008947?color=31fee8&title=0&byline=0&portrait=0

    The interview was recorded in London at the end of 2016 but the discussion is timeless and extremely relevant in regard to future events and risks.

    The biggest risks ahead according to Egon is the global bond markets. He predicts rates going to very much higher levels like in the 1970s. That will lead to more money printing, faster currency debasement and the demise of the bond market.

    Grant and Egon also discuss that in every period of panic and crisis combined with economic mismanagement, which we are seeing today, gold has always acted as insurance. The setup is now perfect for gold to act to protect wealth against the coming problems in financial markets and the world economy…"the Indians know this, the Chinese know this but the West doesn't understand because they have been indoctrinated by paper money…"

    As inflation rises institutions will be obliged to hold gold as a hedge. Since gold production is coming down substantially over the next 8 years there will be less gold available. No one will trust paper gold. This will lead to major upward pressure in the price of physical gold. Future increases in demand can only be satisfied at much higher prices.

    *  *  *

    Full interview below: One of the most respected names in the gold market, Egon von Greyerz illuminates the discussion on the long term trend for the precious metal, against the current climate.

    https://player.vimeo.com/video/201007978?color=31fee8&title=0&byline=0&portrait=0

    Source: GoldSwitzerland.com

    *  *  *

    Real Vision: Raoul Pal and Grant Williams created Real Vision which is great financial video-on-demand service with over 500 in-depth interviews with the world’s sharpest independent analysts, fund managers, geopolitical strategists, economists and investors. Free from groupthink, advertising or bias, Real Vision presents its viewers with the very best economic information and financial insight available and then allows them to make up their own minds, and profit from knowledge.

  • As Millions Of Venezuelans Try To Flee The Country They Run Into A Problem

    While shortages of basic foods, medicines, and toilet paper may be a major societal problem, the people of Venezuela face an even more existential problem: the nation now lacks the materials to meet the soaring demand for new passports – making it almost impossible to leave the socialist utopia.

    "People used to move to Venezuela from all over the Americas, Europe and Asia and now they are all trying to leave," Sonia Schott, the former Washington, D.C., correspondent for Venezuelan news network Globovisión, told Fox News.

    While estimates of how many passport requests the socialist government received last year vary from between 1.8 million to 3 million, only 300,000 of the elusive documents were doled out.

     

    Everyday, hundreds of people line up outside the passport agency, known as Saime, in the capital of Caracas in the hopes of obtaining one.

     

    It’s an ironic, and yet sad situation, for a country that used to be one of Latin America’s wealthiest and one that was used to seeing people flock to, not away from.

    Tomás Páez – author of “The Voice of the Venezuelan Diaspora” – told Bloomberg that since Chávez took power in 1999 nearly 2 million Venezuelans have fled the country and hundreds of thousands are marking their time until they obtains the funds and the passport that will allow them to leave.

    Maduro has acknowledged the issue of the chronic shortages in passports and last week launched a new “online” option that will rush a passport to customers within 72 hours for about double the price of waiting in line. The website, however, has crashed numerous times and it is unclear how many passports have been expedited through this process. Saime has stated that the backup in processing passport applications is because the agency lacks enough “materials,” but did not specify what that means. Observers say that while the government may not be able to afford the paper to make the passport. Paper products in the country, including toilet paper, are in short supply in Venezuela. But skeptics think the Maduro government may also be trying to keep people from leaving the beleaguered nation.

    “People with the means to get out want to, but the problem is you need a passport and you can’t get it,” Cynthia Arnson, the director of the Latin American Program at the Woodrow Wilson Center told Fox News.

     

    “It’s kind of an excuse by the Venezuelan government that they don’t have materials, because they know the real reason people want a passport is to leave the country.”

    Most of Venezuela’s 30 million resident, however, don’t have that kind of money as the monthly minimum wage in the country comes to less than $30 a month on the black market.

  • Trump Wall – How Exactly?

    By Chris at www.CapitalistExploits.at

    Market dislocations occur when financial markets, operating under stressful conditions, experience large widespread asset mispricing.

    Welcome to this week’s edition of “World Out Of Whack” where every Wednesday we take time out of our day to laugh, poke fun at and present to you absurdity in global financial markets in all its glorious insanity.

    While we enjoy a good laugh, the truth is that the first step to protecting ourselves from losses is to protect ourselves from ignorance. Think of the “World Out Of Whack” as your double thick armour plated side impact protection system in a financial world littered with drunk drivers.

    Selfishly we also know that the biggest (and often the fastest) returns come from asymmetric market moves. But, in order to identify these moves we must first identify where they live.

    Occasionally we find opportunities where we can buy (or sell) assets for mere cents on the dollar – because, after all, we are capitalists.

    Join the INSIDER membership and find out what we’re doing with our own money… targeting asymmetric investment opportunities

    Capitalist Exploits Insider

    In this week’s edition of the WOW: Trump Wall – How Exactly?

    How many people voted for “Herr Von Trump” because he promised to build a “great and beautiful wall”?

    Likely the same folks that fervently believe stable jobs at shuttered coal mines and steel factories are actually coming back (they’re not).

    He made it a pillar of his campaign – the beautiful wall, that is. Which makes me wonder about his use of speech. I mean, I know I’m going to be accused of nitpicking but I’ve seen a lot of walls, none I’d describe as beautiful. Charlize Theron is beautiful. Walls are not.

    Understandably the folks south of the border got testy. Surprisingly, they don’t appreciate being called rapists and drug pushers:

    Even the former Mexican Grand Mufti honcho got stuck in.

    And Nieto’s turn:

    “Mexico will not pay for that wall, we will pay for ladders though,” Nieto said. “Trump can do whatever he wants, he can spend as much money as he wants, but the fact is, so many of our people have friends and family in the United States. And unfortunately for these people they cannot afford a visa or citizenship or cannot wait the long delays in getting one, so ladders are the answer.”

    Trump wasn’t backing down.

    Football hooligans couldn’t do it better. This is the best these countries have to offer, folks. God help us all!

    It’s enough to drive a man to drink. I’m sorely tempted to pop down to the local liquor store for a litre of Kalashnikov Vodka – guaranteed to blow my head clean off.

    Still , I’ve become accustomed to dealing with the fact the world is littered with the dullest and most useless people steering the ships. But what’s more concerning is why nobody has asked the obvious questions.

    Meatheads never ask the obvious questions. Mental arithmetic requiring independent thought being something strongly discouraged.

    What sort of wall? Concrete? Wire fencing? If so, how much?

    How will the materials get there? Take a look, there are no roads in much of the territory.

    Who builds it? Mexicans?

    What about housing for what will have to be a sizeable workforce? What about water, food, medical supplies?

    How high? Not high enough and a USD10 ladder trumps (pun intended) a multi billion dollar wall.

    What about tunnels under it? Smugglers, after all, have been tunneling for years where the wall already exists. Reminds me of Einstein’s definition of insanity. Why would they stop what already works?

    Then there’s the little issue of this being 2,000km of wall. That’s an awful lot of wall. Wall that has to go through private land which begs the question. What about imminent domain?

    What about the environment protection agency and the mating habits of the endangered red-eared slider?

    Has any of this been thought about? Did voters, in their desperate desire to rid themselves of the sclerotic, nepotistic, basilisk and the establishment she represents, bother to ask themselves these questions?

    The US Department of Homeland Theatre Security estimate the wall will cost USD21.6 billion and take more than 3.5 years to build. Trump doesn’t think so.

    ‘It’ll get done so quickly your head will spin.’

    Guess we’ll see. Anyway, considering government estimates I think it’s safe to double both of these figures – USD44 Billion and 7 years sounds about right then. That’s bigger than the GDP of Slovenia, it’s twice that of Iceland, and 3 times that of Jamaica. Personally, I’d rather just buy Jamaica, lie in the sun and collect all the rum revenues while stashing a little in the cellar, of course. But then, I’m not running the mess show.

    I wonder: Did Trump think through the fact that the US has a pact with Mexico on shared water rights? Did he know one existed before making this part of his campaign? Annoyingly, he’s failed to brief me but I have my suspicions he didn’t.

    The same report estimates that this agreement alone could bring the cost from USD11 million per mile to USD15 million per mile in one area.

    This is the Rio Grande. Perhaps many Americans haven’t been down here or thought about this much. You gonna build a wall here?

    This doozy sits in the report, too:

    “It also does not account for major physical barriers, like mountains, in areas where it would not be feasible to build.”

    Take another look at the Rio Grande. This, folks, isn’t merely a 2x on opex estimation. Just sayin’…

    So what’s up with Trump? Can he not do arithmetic? Does he simply speak like most politicians (lie)? Or does he simply shoot from the lip.

    Has he looked at the fact that more Mexicans are leaving than entering the United States?

    That a Mexican border wall is impractical, impossible, ludicrously expensive, and will create (rather than solve) the problems it’s purported to solve but that won’t stop Washington from doing what Washington does: stupid things.

    The Question is…

    Trump Wall Poll

    Cast your vote here and also see what others think

    – Chris

    “Walls in people’s heads are sometimes more durable than walls made of concrete blocks.” ? Willy Brandt, Erinnerungen

    ————————————–

    Liked this article? Don’t miss our future missives and podcasts, and

    get access to free subscriber-only content here.

    ————————————–

  • Caught On Video: Man Brutally Beaten In Lower Manhattan As People Walk By

    A man was brutally beaten on a sidewalk in Manhattan’s Lower East Side in broad daylight on Friday afternoon as pedestrians walked by while the entire attack caught on camera. The incident took place around 2:45 p.m on Friday and NY Police is searching for two suspects.

    The police said two men chased a 24-year-old man north on Orchard Street towards Stanton Street. The men caught up to the victim in front of 156 Orchard Street and began to punch and kick him multiple times in his head, face and body, according to NY1. The two men then fled in a black livery vehicle.

    An owner of a nearby gallery, interviewed by Pix11, was stunned not so much at the violence, but at how pedestrians simply walked by the scene of the crime with nobody offering to help or stop the brutal beating.

    The victim was transported to the hospital in serious condition.

    The NYPD asks anyone with information is asked to call Crime Stoppers at 1-800-577-TIPS (8477). The public can also submit their tips by logging onto the Crime stoppers website at WWW.NYPDCRIMESTOPPERS.COM or by texting their tips to 274637 (CRIMES) then enter TIP577.

  • Manhattan Luxury Housing In Freefall: J.Crew CEO Slashes Tribeca Loft Price By Over 40%

    While in recent weeks we have documented various instances of sharp pullbacks in the ultra-luxury segment of New York’s housing market (here, here and here), a dramatic example of just how sharp the drop in the high-end housing segment has been comes courtesy of Mansion Global which reports that J. Crew CEO Mickey Drexler has slashed a whopping $15 million from the asking price of his Tribeca loft after it languished on the market for close to two years, unable to find a buyer.

    The 72-year-old fashion boss’s 6,226-square-foot spread has just reappeared for sale with a $19.95 million price tag, way below the original $35 million it was first listed for in April 2015, according to listing records. Between its original listing in 2015 and today, there were several other price cuts, with the loft last appearing on the market for $22.5 million last August. That listing was removed entirely in January, only to reappear for $2.5 million less.

    Listing images reveal the five-bedroom pad’s stylish interiors designed by French architect Thierry Despont, including arched windows, original columns and industrial doors, par for the course for what one would expect from a fashion industry bigwig. The building located on Franklin Street is a boutique, 12-unit, full-service condominium with 24-hour doorman and is just down the block from Taylor Swift’s Tribeca pad.

    Even with the hefty haircut, Drexler stands to make a nearly $6 million profit should he find a buyer: property records show that 140 FRANKLIN STREET LLC paid $14.3 million for the apartment in 2012. PropertyShark’s records link the LLC to J. Crew’s headquarters in New York.

  • Putting Global Debt Into Perspective – 13 Stunning Silver Stats

    Although gold has a bigger reputation today as a monetary metal, it was often deemed too valuable for everyday transactions throughout history.

    But, as Visual Capitalist's Jeff Desjardins notes, for the most part, common people in places like Ancient Rome used silver to buy daily staples like grain or wine. As a result, silver has a strong reputation through monetary history as the “people’s money”.

    Even today, silver is still much more widely accessible. With one ounce of gold being 70x more expensive than an ounce of silver, it’s difficult for someone who is just starting to accumulate wealth to own gold.

    Visualizing Silver

    What do savings and debt look like, using the “people’s money”?

    Below is everything from the average paycheck to global sovereign debt visualized as silver cubes.

    1. A median U.S. family brings in $2,355 per pay period (semi-monthly) pre-tax.

    Average U.S. Paycheck as a Silver Cube

    2. However, the median American family only has about $5,000 of savings.

    Median U.S. Savings as a Silver Cube

    3. The standard silver delivery bar holds 1,000 oz of silver.

    Silver bar

    4. Average household debt is $98,312, with mortgage debt being the primary component.

    Average household debt as a silver cube

    5. A Lamborghini worth over $400,000 needs a silver cube with 16-inch (0.4m) sides.

    A Lamborghini's value as a silver cube

    6. Using a silver price of about $18/oz, here’s what $1 million looks like.

    $1 million as a silver cube

    7. Every day, the world’s mines produce about 75 tonnes of silver, worth over $44 million.

    Daily Silver Production as a silver cube

    8. Silver Eagle sales have jumped considerably since the Financial Crisis.

    Silver Eagle Sales as a Silver Cube

    9. When the Hunt Brothers tried to corner the silver market, they hoarded 200 million oz.

    Hunt Brothers Stockpile as a Silver Cube

    10. Today, almost 900 million oz of silver is mined each year.

    All Silver Mined Each Year as a Silver Cube

    11. JP Morgan’s market capitalization, in comparison to previous cubes.

    JPMorgan's market capitalization as a silver cube

    12. All silver ever mined would not compare to the Fed’s balance sheet, which is now $4.5 trillion.

    All Global Debt Visualized as a Gold Cube

    13. Global sovereign debt is 13X bigger than all previous cubes combined.

    All Sovereign Debt Visualized as a Gold Cube

    Liked our visualizations of silver cubes?

    Don’t forget to check out 11 stunning visualizations of gold.

  • The "World's Most Bearish Hedge Fund" Capitulates After Surge In Redemptions

    “At some point in my life, and I can’t remember exactly when, I learnt two things that define my approach on how to deal with problems. The first is simply to tell the truth, while it may be unpleasant, at least it is then out in the open and you can begin to work towards a solution. The second is that if something is unavoidable, then just accept the fact it will happen and deal with it.”

           –  Russell Clark, CIO of Horseman Global

    At the end of 2016, we reported that having successfully avoided a calamity for most of 2016 despite being massively net short, somewhere to the tune of around -90%, at times rising as high as -105%, Horseman Global, finally had a bad month. In fact, losing -12.80% in November the hedge fund which we previously dubbed “the world’s most bearish hedge fund” due to its staggering net bearish bias, had just suffered its worst month in history as “the short book, the bond book and the forex book lost money.” We also wondered if Horseman would also have it worst year ever, outpacing the -24.7% return in 2009.  The answer was no, but just barely. After a 7.81% drop in December, Horseman Global has closed the books on 2016 with a 24.03% net loss, its second worst in history.

    Unfortunately, 2017 did not start well for Horseman Global’s CIO Russell Clark; in fact, while two months ago we noted that the fund had started to close parts of its short book and was actively reducing “gross” exposure (perhaps Clark here meant net), it was “still long bonds and short equities.” As a result, as the next table shows, Horseman has started off the year with the worst two-month stint on record, losing 6.55% YTD. Never before in its history has the famously bearish hedge fund had such a dour start to a calendar year.

    Just as importantly, as previewed two months ago, as part of the fund’s net exposure drop, what was as recently as December a net -100% short, has since collapsed to only -12%, effectively a neutral , following a short covering rampage by Clark.

    At the start of the year, Clark told his LPs that after losing 24% in 2016 on what ultimately ended up being a failed bearish bet, he would start covering his net short:

    Despite what I think, we are beginning to close parts of our short book. We have largely exited airline related shorts. We have also closed staple shorts, as they were largely there to protect against a fall in yields, which they did to a degree. We have also closed many developed financial shorts to make some space for Chinese financial shorts. We have also reduced the bond position and moved much of in to German bunds. The majority of the bund position is in 5 year bunds, the buy case I made a few months ago.

    In retrospect that Bund long may not have been the best bet, and the LPs appear to agree. The result: a redemption spike amounting to 10% of AUMs.

    Currently we have redemption requests for about 10% of AUM. Changing strategies means saying goodbye to old investors who bought into the old strategy, and welcoming new investors who buy into the new strategy. That’s just the nature of the way I manage money, where once I change my mind I move quickly to where I want to be. The upshot is that we are reopening the fund to new investors April 1.

    This in turn forced even more liquidations in the Horseman Fund, and prompted the CIO to change his startegy from an outright bearish, to a far more netural – and outright bullish on Emerging markets – one, a move some may say could have top-ticked the market.  How did Clark explain away his 2016 error, and the shift in strategy? To his credit, quite directly:

    The truth is that in 2016, I was finding many short themes in developed markets, while not seeing any resolution in China. To square these observations up, I had assumed we would get some sort of financial crisis in China, which would take down all markets. However, in the end it looks like China has managed to enact capacity cuts that have reduced the risk of a major financial crisis.

     

    What I find interesting, is that US markets have moved up on the promise of reform, even though they look fully valued in my view. China and India we have already had reform take place, and the stocks are not priced for these benefits. Plainly the choice is obvious for me. Long emerging markets, short developed markets is the strategy for the fund.

    Finally, for those who are leaving their funds with the hedge funds in hopes that Clark will turn things around in 2017, here are his parting words:

    While the drawdown is disappointing, what I find really exciting about markets, is that I am going long assets that used to own all the way back in 2007. These assets have been in close to a ten-year bear market. Typically, they have fallen 90% or more over that time, and have become forgotten by the market. They also incredibly cheap. Even more exciting is that all the other fund managers that used to own these assets back in 2007 and were my competitors, have essentially left the industry. This is a typical result in the fund management industry where most managers are unwilling to short sell. Most people only know Russell Clark the short seller, but some older investors still remember Russell Clark emerging market bull of 2006/7. And now we have a synthesis. We are now long emerging markets and short developed markets.

    * * *

    Below is the full letter

    You fund lost 3.23% net this month. Losses came from the short book and the currency book.

     

    At some point in my life, and I can’t remember exactly when, I learnt two things that define my approach on how to deal with problems. The first is simply to tell the truth, while it may be unpleasant, at least it is then out in the open and you can begin to work towards a solution. The second is that if something is unavoidable, then just accept the fact it will happen and deal with it.

     

    The truth is that in 2016, I was finding many short themes in developed markets, while not seeing any resolution in China. To square these observations up, I had assumed we would get some sort of financial crisis in China, which would take down all markets. However, in the end it looks like China has managed to enact capacity cuts that have reduced the risk of a major financial crisis.

     

    In India, we have had three huge reforms over the last few years. Digital ID system, the reform of the tax system, and now demonetisation. These reforms will make doing business far easier in India. The nexus of a China cutting commodity production, and an India with a strong growth outlook, is to be bullish commodities, and this is where most the long book is now focused. The flip side of this is that higher commodity prices will impact spending and margins for western consumers. So we have spent the last two months, expunging bearish positions on EM and replacing them with long positions. At the same time we have been adding developed markets shorts.

     

    What I find interesting, is that US markets have moved up on the promise of reform, even though they look fully valued in my view. China and India we have already had reform take place, and the stocks are not priced for these benefits. Plainly the choice is obvious for me. Long emerging markets, short developed markets is the strategy for the fund.

     

    The second thing about changing strategy is that there are various unavoidable things that will happen, about which much there is little we can do. First, with a change of strategy, there will be people that will wish to redeem. Currently we have redemption requests for about 10% of AUM. Changing strategies means saying goodbye to old investors who bought into the old strategy, and welcoming new investors who buy into the new strategy. That’s just the nature of the way I manage money, where once I change my mind I move quickly to where I want to be. The upshot is that we are reopening the fund to new investors April 1.

     

    The other negative with changing strategies, which is why I don’t do it very often, is that it costs money to do, somewhere between two to three percent. This is a rule of thumb, and comes from recently closed shorts falling after you close, and recently purchased stocks tending to have a give back after being bought. It also because it normally takes a while to get the balance between different parts of the portfolio right. I have tried different ways in the past to minimise this, but the outcome is always the same. This cost of changing is a large part of the performance this month.

     

    While the drawdown is disappointing, what I find really exciting about markets, is that I am going long assets that used to own all the way back in 2007. These assets have been in close to a ten-year bear market. Typically, they have fallen 90% or more over that time, and have become forgotten by the market. They also incredibly cheap. Even more exciting is that all the other fund managers that used to own these assets back in 2007 and were my competitors, have essentially left the industry. This is a typical result in the fund management industry where most managers are unwilling to short sell. Most people only know Russell Clark the short seller, but some older investors still remember Russell Clark emerging market bull of 2006/7. And now we have a synthesis. We are now long emerging markets and short developed markets.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 11th March 2017

  • Preppers Stuck In Cities: Elite Chartering "Getaway Boats In Case Of Manhattan Emergency"

    Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

    There is an inherent dilemma for most of the people living in cities.

    Even those who are aware of the extremely fragile fabric of society are often stuck living urban lives. Perhaps they plan to retire to a country abode, or construct a hideaway to escape to if the need ever arises, but for now, they are stuck in the city making a living.

    This is true even for the rich, but now, they have a back-up plan.

    The biggest of American cities, and one of the most gridlocked, is New York City, with Manhattan and Long Island both isolated islands – trapped during emergencies from the rest of the world.

    That’s why those with means, and forethought, are now chartering emergency charters to get out of the city – probably a good idea, especially if the helicopter is out of your price range.

    via NY Post:

    “A lot of people don’t want to wait on a line to get on a ferry, and they don’t want to worry about walking off of Manhattan, as people had to do in the past,” [Chris Dowhie, co-owner of Plan B Marine] told The Post.“They know a boat is the fastest way, and we take the worry out of maintaining and preparing and always readying your vessel,” he added.

    Not only does the company promise a speedy getaway, it plans individual evacuation routes for each person, depending on their personal needs.

     

    […]

     

    “You don’t have a captain. You have to drive this boat yourself,” Dowhie told The Post, adding that in a crisis, people are more concerned with helping their own families than maneuvering someone else’s escape vehicle.

     

    […]

     

    The unique evacuation service costs an annual fee of $90,000 and is catered toward wealthy individuals and corporations who don’t have time to mastermind their own escape.

     

    Clients access the boats with an individual punch-in number, and should they need to abandon it at any time, Dowhie’s company will locate it.

    Interesting concept, and the fact that this has become a business model is also telling of the times.

    Estimates have placed evacuation from major coastal cities at more than 24 hours:

    Estimated evacuation times during major emergencies.

    For Long Island, where millions of New Yorkers live, it would be 20-29 hours to get off the island – during that time, people will lose their patience, run out of gas, become hungry, be denied access to medications and drugs, need emergency services, resort to crime, etc.

    The one percenters have long been serious about their prepping, for they know too well about the very real dangers being constructed, and the house of cards that is ever poised to collapse.

    There has been a steady rise in the upper class investment into underground bunker communities – typically decked out with furnishings and amenities that nearly compare with above-ground living.

    They have also been the high profile investors buying up getaway farms in places like New Zealand or South America, and hedging with mountain retreats and fortified safe rooms.

    While the amount of money they are spending remains mostly pocket change the biggest players, it represents a serious consideration of the high risk for social disruption, chaos and mega-disasters, such as the collapse of the power grid.

    The good news is that while the rich may indeed be living the high life, with escape hatches built in, there are many steps that the average, and more modest, individual can also take to increase your chances of survival during modest times.

    Todd Savage, who specializes in strategic relocation, says that finding balance is key. For some, a permanent move isn’t possible because of work, medical needs or family life:

    Not everyone will prepare for the same threats. It’s a personal choice. Some folks think that a nuclear exchange is imminent, others a socioeconomic collapse, maybe an EMP (solar or military), or a worldwide pandemic.

     

    Everyone who is concerned with a potential disaster should perform a personal threat assessment. It can help you decide to either relocate permanently to a rural homestead or acquire a bug-out survival property.

    (Survival Retreat Consulting)

    When it comes to elite prepping, you have to always ask yourself: ‘Do they know something that I don’t know?

    Considering their access to power, and their insider vision of human affairs, the chances are very good that they may.

    Boats and hideaway properties can be arranged at lower prices as well, or DIY. If you’re not on an island, there are likely some back roads that can save your life, and keep you out of the major chaos. Plan your escape route, with several alternate routes, that avoid the major intersections with highways, bridges and other points at which the majority of traffic is forced to flow, at a slow, grinding and dangerous pace.

    Safe rooms can been adapted to almost any space, and for relatively little money, and fortifications can be retrofitted where ever you need them. Just food for thought, better now than too late.

    Something big is coming.

  • Sessions Considering "Outside Special Counsel" To Review "Highly Politicized" Actions Of Obama DOJ

    Even though Obama spent the waning days of his administration boasting about how he had managed to spend 8 years in the White House without a single ‘scandal’, current Attorney General Jeff Sessions seems to have a slightly different view of how to define ‘scandal’. 

    But perhaps Obama just “did not recall” some of the highly controversial efforts of his administration including the intentional IRS targeting of conservative political groups, Eric Holder’s “Fast and Furious” gun running program which ultimately resulted in him being held in contempt of Congress and, of course, that infamous meeting between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch on the tarmac in Phoenix just as the DOJ and FBI were contemplating whether or not to press charges against Hillary Clinton over her email scandal.

    Appearing on the air with radio host Hugh Hewitt, Sessions was asked if he would consider designating an outside counsel “not connected to politics” to take a second look at Justice Department actions that provoked Republican ire over the last eight years. Hewitt contended during his radio interview that the department had become “highly politicized” during the Obama administration and floated the idea of a special review by an attorney with the authority to bring criminal charges and “just generally to look at how the Department of Justice operated.”

    While Sessions was somewhat noncommittal, he did leave the door open, saying he would do everything he could to “restore the independence and professionalism of the Department of Justice.” According to the AP, Sessions said that “generally, a good review of that internally is the first step before any such decision is made” but continued on to say that he “would have to consider whether or not some outside special counsel is needed.”

    Hewitt:  Now let me switch to the Department itself, Mr. Attorney General.  It has a bad eight years.  I’m a proud veteran of the Department of Justice as you are, but the IRS case, the Fast and Furious case, Secretary Clinton’s server.  The Department of Justice came under great criticism.  How about an outside counsel, not connected to politics, to review the DOJ’s actions in those matters with authority to bring charges if underlying crimes are uncovered in the course of the investigation, and just generally to look at how the DOJ operated in the highly politicized Holder-Lynch years.

     

    Sessions:  Well, I’m going to do everything I possibly can to restore independence and professionalism of the DOJ, so we’re going to have to consider whether or not some outside special counsel is needed.  Generally, a good review of that internally is the first step before any such decision is made.

    <

     

    Sessions went on to say the outcome of the IRS case, in particular, remained “of real concern.” The Justice Department in 2015 found mismanagement at the tax agency but no evidence that it had targeted a political group based on its viewpoints or obstructed justice.

    But we’re sure this is just all ‘much ado about nothing’ as they say…after all Loretta Lynch already said Bill just stopped by her plane to chat about his grandkids for 30 minutes…surely she wouldn’t attempt the mislead the American people just to protect her administration, right?

  • Dear Washington Post: Costco Carrying Orwell's '1984' Is Not A F**king Joke

    Authored by James Holbrooks via TheAntiMedia.org,

    “Next time you’re at Costco, you can pick up a jumbo bag of Cheetos and a copy of ‘1984.’ Doubleplus good!”

    That’s how the Washington Post opened its quick little entry on Wednesday. Continuing, Ron Charles, editor of Book World for the Post, wrote:

    “The discount store is now stocking Orwell’s classic novel along with its usual selection of current bestsellers.”

    If the significance of the fact that a dystopian masterwork can now be purchased alongside a three-ton bag of cheese puffs instantly strikes you, it should. Strangely, though, Charles and the Post don’t seem to see it.

    In fact, it seemed to be a joke to them. The entry closed in the manner it opened. With humor:

    “Appropriately, Costco is offering a reprint of the 2003 edition of ‘1984,’ which has a forward by Thomas Pynchon. That reclusive satirist must love the idea of hawking Orwell’s dystopian novel alongside towers of discounted toilet paper and radial tires. SHOPPING IS SAVING.”

    In the one and only instance Charles even approached something that could be considered commentary, he linked the surge in the book’s sales to “alternative” news items:

    “Last month, amid talk of ‘alternative facts’ from the Trump administration, Signet Classics announced that it had reprinted 500,000 copies, about twice the novel’s total sales in 2016.”

    Note Charles was certain to use the word “alternative” when mentioning Trump. Why? Very clearly, “fake news” is the man’s go-to phrase when speaking of the media. So why go with “alternative” instead? Hell, the Post itself was the driving force behind the “fake news” frenzy in the first place.

    I could go on about how this is the Washington Post, corporate media juggernaut, attempting, rather pathetically, to poison the notion of “alternative” in the minds of its readers — or, I should say, what’s left of them — but that’s not really what this is about.

    What it’s really about is journalism. The fact that “1984” is being sold at Costco, the fact that demand for the classic tale has skyrocketed, is significant. It’s societal. And journalists are supposed to write about things like that.

    And what does the Post do? They make a joke of it.

    This is an organization that, as recently as January, has been busted publishing false news stories. You would think that with its credibility among a growing division of society hanging on by a thread — at best — the Post would turn an event like this into social commentary. This was an opportunity to speak about a changing world.

    But instead, the Post went for laughs.

    Let it sink in, friends. George Orwell’s “1984,” a dystopian tale about a society being crushed under the boot of authoritarian regime,  is, once again, flying off bookshelves. To the extent that you can now get it at Costco. Let the significance of that truly dig in deep.

    Meanwhile, the Washington Post is talking about Cheetos and toilet paper.

  • Credit Suisse: Customer Blowback Over Starbucks' Refugee Hiring Spree Could Crush Same Store Sales

    A few weeks ago we wrote about how the controversial decision of Starbucks’ CEO Howard Schultz to hire 10,000 refugees, a clear shot at the Trump administration’s immigration policies, seemingly backfired as his “brand perception” took a sudden and massive hit, a clear signal once again that coffee drinkers would prefer to not have a side of political propaganda with their $5 morning java (see “Starbucks’ ‘Brand Perception’ Takes A Massive Hit After Announcing Plans To Hire 10,000 Refugees“).

    Now, Credit Suisse’s Restaurant team, led by Jason West, is warning that Schultz’s latest attempt to cram his political opinions down the throats of his customers could cause the company to miss upcoming same-store-sales estimates.

    We have analyzed online “net sentiment” data (positive vs. negative online mentions) provided by NetBase to gauge changes in Starbucks’ brand perception. This follows recent media reports that SBUX’s decision to hire 10,000 refugees over the next five years could have upset some customers, perhaps negatively impacting sales trends. Our work shows a sudden drop in brand sentiment following announcement of the refugee hiring initiative on Jan. 29th, to flattish from a run-rate of ~+80 (on an index of -100 to +100). Net sentiment has since recovered, but has seen significant volatility in recent weeks. While this is only one data point, the analysis leaves us incrementally cautious on SBUX’s ability to meet consensus US SSS forecasts, which call for SSS to accelerate from +3% in F1Q17 (Dec. qtr.) to ~+3.5% in F2Q and ~+5.5% in 2H17.

     

    Potential impact to F2Q SSS: NetBase data show that net sentiment remained depressed for 10 days in late Jan. and early Feb. and was particularly volatile through the remainder of Feb. We see potential for a scenario in which US SSS slowed for a few weeks following news of the refugee hiring initiative, negatively impacting full-quarter SSS by ~70-80bps under a reasonable bear case. This assumes that (1) SSS during the initial 10-day stretch were ~flat, (2) SSS averaged +2% during the remaining 3 weeks of Feb. (when net sentiment saw particularly high volatility) and (3) SSS during the rest of the qtr (Jan. and Mar.) average +3.5% (in line with consensus forecasts for F2Q), putting F2Q US SSS at ~+2.8%. We caveat that we found little to no correlation over longer time periods between the net sentiment data and US SSS. However, in our past work on Chipotle (CMG: Neutral), we found that large and sudden spikes in net sentiment coincided with similar shifts in SSS trends.

    CS

     

    For those who missed it, here are some excerpts from the politically charged message drafted by Schultz to his employees with “deep concern and a heavy heart”:

    I write to you today with deep concern, a heavy heart and a resolute promise. Let me begin with the news that is immediately in front of us: we have all been witness to the confusion, surprise and opposition to the Executive Order that President Trump issued on Friday, effectively banning people from several predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States, including refugees fleeing wars. I can assure you that our Partner Resources team has been in direct contact with the partners who are impacted by this immigration ban, and we are doing everything possible to support and help them to navigate through this confusing period.

     

    Hiring Refugees: We have a long history of hiring young people looking for opportunities and a pathway to a new life around the world. This is why we are doubling down on this commitment by working with our equity market employees as well as joint venture and licensed market partners in a concerted effort to welcome and seek opportunities for those fleeing war, violence, persecution and discrimination.  There are more than 65 million citizens of the world recognized as refugees by the United Nations, and we are developing plans to hire 10,000 of them over five years in the 75 countries around the world where Starbucks does business.

     

    Building Bridges, Not Walls, With Mexico: We have been open for business in Mexico since 2002, and have since opened almost 600 stores in 60 cities across the country, which together employ over 7,000 Mexican partners who proudly wear the green apron. Coffee is what unites our common heritage, and as I told Alberto Torrado, the leader of our partnership with Alsea in Mexico, we stand ready to help and support our Mexican customers, partners and their families as they navigate what impact proposed trade sanctions, immigration restrictions and taxes might have on their business and their trust of Americans.

    Unfortunately, Schultz quickly found out the hard way that while most adult-aged Americans can agree that they like coffee, roughly 50% disagree with his leftist political opinions.

    Meanwhile, the only folks that don’t seem to be noticing the controversy surrounding Starbucks’ latest mishap are the company’s shareholders.

    SBUX

  • Welcome To Totalitarian America, President Trump!

    Via AntoniusAquinas.com,

    If there had been any doubt that the land of the free and home of the brave is now a totalitarian society, the revelations that its Chief Executive Officer has been spied upon while campaigning for that office and during his brief tenure as president should now be allayed.

    President Trump joins the very crowded list of opponents of the American State which includes the Tea Party, tax resistors, non-interventionists, immigration opponents, traditional family advocates, and a host of others who have been spied upon, persecuted and badgered by federal “intelligence” authorities.  While Congress conducted some feeble hearings and investigations of the shenanigans of the US spy agencies during the interminable Obummer Administration, no real action or reform was taken to reign in the eavesdropping and spying by the national security state on American citizens.

    Hopefully, the surveillance of President Trump will change his outlook on the US “intelligence community” especially in regard to those courageous souls who have spoken out and risked life and limb to alert the public about their rulers’ nefarious activities.  Edward Snowden should be among the first to receive a pardon while the person who provided him sanctuary from his American persecutors, the reviled Vladimir Putin, should be commended for his noble act, a rarity among world leaders in this democratic age.

    President Trump has demonstrated throughout his life loyalty to those who have supported him.  He should, therefore, do all in his power to extricate Julian Assange from the Ecuadoran Embassy in Great Britain and provide him with safe conduct to the US or any destination in which the heroic whistleblower prefers.  Without the deluge of Wikileaks during last fall’s presidential contest exposing the massive corruption of the Clintonistas, it is unlikely that Trump would have ever prevailed never mind winning by an electoral landslide.

    Not only has candidate and President Trump been monitored, but just about every American citizen is under surveillance, the data of which can be used against them at the appropriate time if and when they should challenge the American Leviathan.  NSA whistleblower William Binney confirmed what has been long known in government circles and by those Americans awake to Washington’s tyranny.

    Binney confirmed Trump’s suspicion about surveillance to Fox News, “I think the president is absolutely right.  His phone calls, everything he did electronically was being monitored.” He added that, “Everyone’s conversations are being monitored and stored.”

    Ironically, it has been the immense wealth generated by a relatively free market in America that has provided the means for the government to create, expand, and maintain such a sophisticated and dangerous spying apparatus that is now being used on the very people funding it.  That such a situation could emerge under the supposed “checks and balances” of the US Constitution demonstrates again how truly worthless the document is in the protection of individual rights.

    While reform of the current system has proven to be futile and without any constitutional restraint, it, unfortunately, will mean that spying and the murderous US empire of which it is a part will continue as long as the economy does not collapse and the dollar retains its world reserve status.  A silver lining, therefore, from a dollar crisis, would mean a decline in the US military and security state.

    Of course, the demise of the US spy and military establishment will not be a simple process, but will be fraught with tremendous social and political upheaval and more than likely bloodshed as the Deep State will do everything in its power to protect its turf.

    While a collapse may be a ways off, it is hoped that the spying on President Trump will move him to rethink his position on the Deep State which wants to sabotage his every move that goes against its interests most notably a potential detente with Russia.  Talk of deescalation of American military presence in world affairs is anathema to the powers that be.

    In his Inaugural Address, President Trump repeatedly promised to put America first.  The nation’s intelligence agencies do not share that vision, but instead owe their allegiance to the New World Order.  If the President has not figured this out after having been secretly monitored, there is little hope for the near future.

  • NYC Isn't The Only Place The "Rent Is Too Damn High"; Euros And Canadians Also Struggle To Make Rent

    Jimmy McMillan III, the now infamous founder of the “Rent Is Too Damn High Party”, as well as a self-described karate expert, Vietnam War vet, former postal worker and male stripper, has made it his mission for the past two decades to fight rising rents in New York City that have persistently pushed lower-income families out of Manhattan to make more room for America’s Ivy-League educated, entitled snowflakes.

    But according to recent data published by Harvard’s Joint Center for Housing Studies (JCHS) and the  Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the Big Apple isn’t the only place where a significant portion of the population is struggling to meet monthly rent payments.  In fact, per the JCHS, the U.K., Spain and Canada join the U.S. to round out the list of the top four countries in the developed world where 20-30% of renters spend more than 50% of their gross income on rent alone.

    The US, along with Spain, exhibits more pervasive and severe rental affordability problems than the other countries considered. The analysis indicates that the greater cost burdens found among renters in the US, relative to most of the other countries, are largely due to greater income inequality, to more limited housing assistance programs, and perhaps to a housing supply consisting of units that are larger and better-equipped but that are consequently more expensive. This paper is largely focused on lessons for the US from comparisons to other countries, but hopefully it will be useful for those interested in comparisons among those other countries
     as well.

    Rent

     

    As Bloomberg points out, when you lower that threshold to 40%, the numbers are even more staggering and includes a large portion of Europe.

    REnt

     

    Meanwhile, Spain wins the award for the highest percentage of gross income that goes directly to landlords, while the U.S. and United Kingdom are a close 2nd and 3rd at around 30%.

    REnt

     

    That said, while a significant portion of renters across Europe receive some type of taxpayer-funded rent subsidy, renters in the U.S. just have to rely on their federally-subsidized student loans to cover their rent and spring break trips to Cancun.

    REnt

  • The Uncivil War And What You Can Do About It

    Authored by David Galland via GarretGalland.com,

    Not to be overly dramatic, but a civil war has begun in America. Everyone knows it to be true, but no one knows what comes next.

    The conflict of visions between freethinkers and the socialists who believe government should hammer humanity into model citizens has reached what divorce lawyers call “irreconcilable differences.”

    Evidence of the hostilities is abundant. Starting with the daily exchange of conflicting, angry “news” stories pandering only to viewers on one side of the great divide. These stories offer no conciliatory or constructive narratives, just animus, angst, and cold anger. 

    As with the first US Civil War, wide schisms have formed that now separate families and friends. Schisms that will take years to heal, and maybe never.

    The odds of this turning into an armed conflict, other than sporadic violent incidents, may seem remote. Yet the vast majority of people living in Sarajevo didn’t see that civil war coming either.

    Violent or not, the turmoil is just beginning, with the progressives and their allies in the media determined to end the Trump administration by any means possible.

    Lined up against them are the forces aligned with Trump, staunchly determined to hold the hard-won political ground.

    There can be no compromise, because Trump is the antithesis of everything his opponents believe in their heart of hearts to be sacrosanct in the Brave New World they have worked so long to create.

    It matters not a whit that history, science, and culture are replete with lessons proving that the socialist agenda leads to ruin—a ruin that is being hurried along today by sticky globs of political correctness and multiculturalism that supersede the rights of individual expression.

    But my intention this week is not to delve into the current state of US politics. Besides suffering from blistering overexposure, the topic holds less and less interest to me, living as we do in the pacific climes of the Argentine outback.

    In fact, here in Cafayate I can go the entire day without hearing Trump’s name, let alone his latest purported outrage against humanity. The decision to check in on the US “news” is, therefore, an entirely voluntary form of self-flagellation.

    I wish I could care more, but the fact is that half of the country has its head buried so far up its nether regions, it can only stumble from one excruciatingly inane idea to the next, common sense be damned. You can decide which half.

    Yet the US is a democracy, which means that for me to hope for a certain political outcome is to wish a pox on the house of about half of my fellow citizens.

    Given the country is so solidly divided, with zero chance of reconciliation, the democracy is effectively broken. Which takes us back to the point that we are in the equivalent of a civil war and no one can really know what comes next.

    In The Fourth Turning, Neil Howe and William Strauss’s excellent thesis on the generational waves that sweep through history, the “fourth turning” is a period of crisis like the Civil War or the Great Depression or World War II that fundamentally rips apart the status quo.

    The thing about these “turnings” is that you can’t anticipate them. For example, having lived through the “second turning” in this cycle, the 1960s, I can tell you that no one, but no one, anticipated the anti-government riots, the Black Panthers, the rise of recreational drugs, the drastic changes in societal attitudes about sex, fashion, etc.

    The key theme of the earth-shaking “Consciousness Revolution” of the 1960s was a desire to be free from societal norms. A revolution I personally supported.

    By contrast, the source of the conflict today—a conflict that could very well signal the beginning of a disastrous fourth turning—has to do with two different interpretations of the role of the state. That sets about half of the population against whichever government holds the reins of power.

    Given the irreconcilable differences, it can’t end well.

    The Uncivil War…

    Some years ago, my family and I voted with our feet, a decision we haven’t regretted for a moment. My father, a restless soul, always claimed to be a citizen of the world. As I aged, I came to share that opinion because, in reality, the corner of the earth we are born in is little more than the result of a cosmic crapshoot.

    Of course, those of you dear readers imbued with nationalistic fervor will feel differently.

    But imagine, if you will, being a resident of Sarajevo and seeing signs pointing to the outbreak of hostilities. Would you and your family really have been better off staying cemented in place out of some notion of national pride?

    Or wouldn’t it have been better to get the hell out of Dodge, before Dodge turned into hell?

    Don’t get me wrong, I love the now fading ideas that made America so exceptionally successful. And I think it is highly unlikely that the current unrest in American society will devolve into a bitter, armed conflict of the sort that engulfed Sarajevo.

    However, as a person who firmly believes in the principle of live and let live, and who appreciates harmony and peaceful coexistence, living in the US today with all its acrimony and hostility would be like consenting to live in a bad dream. Why would I do that when I could simply pack up, as we did, and move to a more agreeable location?

    Which finally brings me to the question of what someone living in the United States, circa now, can do to live a life free of the daily stress of walking the razor’s edge of the political divide.

    What You Can Do About It

    When you get right down to it, there are only four realistic options for dealing with the situation in the US at the moment. Or, for that matter, any country with a politically or culturally divided society, of which there are now many.

    1. Keep Your Head Down and Your Opinions to Yourself.

    If you intend to stay put, consider simply checking out of the political debate. At this point, no one is going to change their mind based on a rational discussion of the facts. So why bother?

    Sure, you can be secretly happy when your side gets a leg over on the opposition, but like bedtime gymnastics, that happiness is best left behind closed doors.

    For people like me, who suffer from a genetic disposition toward a mild form of Tourette’s Syndrome, holding my tongue while someone mindlessly spouts off socialist drivel isn’t really an option. But maybe you can pull it off.

    2. Don’t Give a Damn.

    I have a number of friends who have reached the point where they simply don’t care what the other side thinks. If someone starts a political argument, they’ll firmly tell them they are wrong and suggest various ways they might enjoy sex with themselves, or perhaps with the farm animal they rode in on, and walk away.

    They don’t get invited much to the family gatherings, but in many cases, that’s not such a bad thing.

    Unfortunately, in many parts of the US these days, publicly displaying an affinity for the ideas espoused by Trump will expose you to social ostracism and even physical attacks. If you are okay with that risk, carry on.

    3. Give a Damn.

    Go on the offensive and join the political apparatus with a steely determination to beat the opposition into submission. Raise funds for your favorite candidate, write letters to members of Congress, organize your friends to knock on doors come election time, go undercover to try and get dirt on the opposition that you can later use to chase them to ground, or even run for elected office yourself.

    Who knows, maybe your side will ultimately reduce the opposition to the point where they are politically powerless to stop the agenda you support.

    In the case of Trump, the only way his political regime will take hold for any duration is if he is able to pass his full economic agenda and it actually has time to work. Sadly, the odds of that happening are not good.

    But if you feel strongly enough about the situation, and have the time and inclination to get involved in politics, then why not go all in? At least that way, if things go badly, you can take comfort by telling yourself you did everything you could… as you are being ushered into the nearest reeducation camp.

    4. Vote with Your Feet.

    Per my earlier comments, that was the choice we made. As my then-girlfriend and now-wife and I traveled the world for three full years actively looking for our version of paradise on earth, I can provide a few tips that may help you locate your personal Shangri-La.

    A. Move in Stages.

    Some expats I know approached their exodus by selling everything and hitting the road. The first time I expatriated, that’s what I did.

    Sometimes this works out, but often times it doesn’t. That’s because without actually experiencing day-to-day life in a new culture for a reasonable period of time, it’s very hard to know whether it will suit you for a longer stay.

    That’s why I always recommend people put their primary residence in mothballs, or rent it out to generate some useful income, then rent in the new locale for three months or so.

    That gives you the time to groove into the local culture (or not), meet other expats, and question them on the pros and cons.

    Then, if everything passes the test, make the jump.

    B. Start by Deciding What Your Vision of Paradise Looks Like.

    The reality is that every place has its drawbacks. For instance, if the place is green, it means it rains a lot.

    Start with a wish list prioritized from “non-negotiable” to “nice to have, but not essential.” Our list of non-negotiables included:

    • Nice weather. It speaks volumes that over the past seven years here in Northwest Argentina, we have had to cancel exactly one game of golf due to inclement weather. One of the expats living here commented that he thought Cafayate might have the best weather in the world, and I’d have a hard time arguing with him.
    • Nice people, low or no crime. During our three-year world tour looking for paradise, we spent time in Central America but couldn’t help but noticing that every single house had walls topped with razor wire or broken bottles. Here, that is very rare. Mind you, in other places in the country like Greater Buenos Aires, Mendoza, and Cordoba, that’s not the case. But those are big cities far, far away and so not my concern. The locals here couldn’t be more friendly and welcoming. I believe it is because we are off the beaten path and the place isn’t overrun with tourists. And what tourists there are tend to be of the sort that the locals welcome because they tip well.
    • An unintrusive government. At least here in the Argentine outback, members of officialdom are largely of the night-watchman sort. Of course, after years of corruption dressed up as socialism, there is a hefty bureaucracy, but you can minimize your interaction with it by hiring competent local representation. I sincerely think that my various interactions with the government here in Argentina amount to no more than an hour a year, and I am involved in three different businesses
    •  No Mold. I am quite allergic to mold, which eliminates wet, humid areas, beach communities, etc.… so probably half of the world, if not more.
    • Low Taxes. Provided you manage your affairs intelligently, the taxes are very reasonable. And far less than the brutal toll taken by the US government.

    That pretty much covers the non-negotiables. In terms of “nice to have, but not essential,” the list is much longer, so I won’t go into it, except to mention that here in Cafayate we very much enjoy the wine, the horses, the food, the low cost of household help, and, in particular, the lively culture.

    The Argentines as a whole possess a great attitude. They love to sing, laugh, and otherwise live life to its fullest. In all sincerity, if asked how the place might be improved, I’d have a hard time coming up with an answer. I have even learned to appreciate standing in the lines that occasionally slow one’s forward progress. It’s an opportunity to practice patience, meet people, and take in your surroundings.

    C. Do Your Homework.

    Be sure to fully understand the tax regime, the sorts of banking services available, visa requirements, what it will take to buy a house or car, etc. Fortunately, in the Internet age, much of this research can be done from a distance, though in the end putting your boots on the ground is always essential.

    While the idea of cutting loose from your cultural roots may seem complicated or make you feel a bit uneasy, in my experience, making the move can radically reenergize your life.

    But in order for you to make it a positive, life-changing event, you must accept the new culture you are moving to. If you arrive expecting it to be much the same as the one you left, or try to retool it to suit your needs, you’ll set the stage for disappointment.

    On the big positive side, within a day or two of arriving, you’ll be happily surprised to find that you are free of the unending stream of acrimonious “news” that is such a prominent feature of life back in the US.

    That leaves you time to focus on more important matters, like what to have for lunch, who to play golf with, or, in my case at this particular moment, where to ride my horse this afternoon.

    I am sorry things have eroded to the point they have in the United States. It’s a damn shame, and ultimately may become a damn shame I’ll have to deal with.

    For now, however, I’ll thank my lucky stars that my path brought me to this beautiful life among the vines far from the maddened crowd.

  • The Real Obamacare Replacement Worry

    Presented with no comment…

     

    Source: Townhall.com

  • How The Black Market Is Saving Two Countries From Their Governments

    Authored by Shaun Bradley via TheAntiMedia.org,

    Ever since governments began banning and licensing different parts of the economy, the black market has made sure people still have access to the things they need. Unstable governments always turn on their own citizens by using price controls, heavy taxes, and even the threat of imprisonment to prop up their failing systems. As conditions inevitably deteriorate, as they have in Venezuela and Greece, the underground economy becomes invaluable to those living through the crisis.

    The shadow economy refers to more than just the trade of illegal goods. A grey market, for example, provides legal products that have become difficult to find. Since basic things like toilet paper, medicine, and even food have disappeared from store shelves in Venezuela, the peer-to-peer network has become the only reliable way to secure life’s necessities. In desperate situations like this, the existence of independent merchants can mean the difference between life and death.

    Even the value of Venezuela’s currency has started to move away from the government’s control.  At one point, the official exchange rate was fraudulently set at 10 bolivars per U.S. dollar, while on the black market it was trading at 1,000 to one. This action hurt millions by suppressing wages across the country and eroding any remaining trust. Inflation has quickly become the most imminent threat to the Venezuelan people, stealing the value of their labor and savings. For years, the bolivar has experienced hyperinflation, increasing the cost of living almost exponentially.

    The State’s desperate response was to institute price controls, but that has only led to shortages across the board. Luckily, the unregulated markets have been able to determine the true value of goods and provide vital support for the struggling communities. Many people think that so-called price gouging is unethical, but isn’t it better to buy what you need at twice the price than to not be able to get it at all?

    Greece is going through a transformation of its own — but in response to a very different set of circumstances. The Greek people have endured a series of tax increases and pension cuts over the past several years to fund debts owed to the European Union. These austerity measures have created a dire situation for those trying to secure their financial independence. The result has been widespread tax evasion, which has helped grow Greece’s underground economy to nearly 25% of the country’s GDP.

    Surprisingly, it’s not only the poor who are utilizing the shadow economy in Greece, but also the professional class. Those earning large amounts of money are subjected to extremely high tax rates, driving many business owners and entrepreneurs to either seek better opportunities abroad or take steps to conceal their income.

    By persecuting the most successful members of society and not allowing them to keep what they earn, authorities are only encouraging disregard for the law. Without the grey market in Greece, many more skilled workers would have already left the country. Even though the black market is consistently blamed for taking away tax revenues, it ironically may be the only thing keeping the debt crisis from spiraling even further out of control.

    Scarcity is more than just a mindset; it’s a harsh reality that people born in developed nations rarely see firsthand. But any time a bankrupt government seizes control over their citizens’ lives and the economy, the end result is always despotism. The consolidation of power into the hands of a few is rationalized during chaotic times but ultimately puts the rights of all citizens at risk.

    Just last year, Venezuelan law enforcement carried out raids that killed 245 people. There was no accountability regarding whether the shootings were justified, but reports claim that many of the victims posed no threat and some were even killed after being taken into custody. Such violent crackdowns are the inevitable result of governments attempting to maintain control amid the chaos of broken economic systems.

    In 2011, Robert Neuwirth wrote a report for Foreign Policy that highlighted the importance of this untaxed, unlicensed, and unregulated global marketplace. He called it “System D.”

    “They say that inventive, self-starting, entrepreneurial merchants who are doing business on their own, without registering or being regulated by the bureaucracy and, for the most part, without paying taxes are part of ‘l’economie de la débrouillardise.’ or, for street use, ‘Systeme D.’ This essentially translates as the ingenuity economy, the economy of improvisation and self-reliance, the do-it-yourself, or DIY, economy.”

    The nanny state has done an excellent job attacking anything outside of the government’s jurisdiction, but a lack of regulation is what allows for the most rapid growth and productivity. Legislators notoriously overestimate their influence on the millions of people they attempt to rule over, but ultimately, grassroots decisions made by individuals have the greatest impact. People who rely on their own skills and reputation rather than a bureaucratic stamp of approval are labeled criminals, but they’re the ones providing real value to society in many cases.

    Merchants in these off-grid markets are often associated with danger and violence, but in reality, they provide the purest form of voluntary transactions. Negative aspects, like organized crime, are only made possible because of the profits created as a result of prohibition. Without the State intimidating the public at gunpoint, there would be no incentive for people to seek out the services of nefarious organizations.

    These organic free markets are only strengthened with the circulation of assets like cash, bitcoin, and precious metals. Anonymity mixed with technology is empowering people in ways never imagined. The adoption of cryptocurrencies is bringing the shadow economy into the digital age and expanding its reach internationally. This new economic system represents a very real threat to the current financial and political structures.

    However, innovators in this environment have to be careful, and after the Silk Road was taken down, real legal implications became apparent. Most famously, Silk Road co-founder Ross Ulbricht was sentenced to life in prison and targeted specifically for challenging the existing system.

    The growing progression towards decentralization he attempted to catalyze is on a direct collision course with the central banks and their war on cash.  As the public’s faith in fiat money continues to wane, there will be more and more opportunities to show the benefits that come from peer-to-peer networks over central planning. Those who recognize the inherent extortion of the old system have to lead by example and educate others, regardless of which tactics of intimidation are deployed against them.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 10th March 2017

  • What The Hell Is Going On? – Part 3

    Via Jim Quinn of The Burning Platform blog,

    In Part One and Part Two of this article I revealed how the Deep State’s fake data and fake news propaganda machine can be overcome by opening your eyes, observing reality, understanding how Fed created inflation has destroyed our lives, and why the election of Trump was the initial deplorable pushback to Deep State evil.

    “The notion that a radical is one who hates his country is naïve and usually idiotic. He is, more likely, one who likes his country more than the rest of us, and is thus more disturbed than the rest of us when he sees it debauched. He is not a bad citizen turning to crime; he is a good citizen driven to despair.”H.L. Mencken

    “This new regime will enthrone itself for the duration of the Crisis. Regardless of its ideology, that new leadership will assert public authority and demand private sacrifice. Regardless of its ideology, that new leadership will assert public authority and demand private sacrifice. Where leaders had once been inclined to alleviate societal pressures, they will now aggravate them to command the nation’s attention. The regeneracy will be solidly under way.” – The Fourth Turning – Strauss & Howe

    We are now seven weeks into the Trump presidency and it seems like seven years with amount of incidents that have occurred before and since his inauguration. When in doubt, Trump’s brain dead, hyperventilating with hate, opponents either blame the Russians or declare him Hitler. The histrionics displayed by the low IQ hypocritical Hollywood elite, corrupt Democratic politicians, fake news liberal media and Soros paid left wing radical terrorists over the last two months has been disgraceful, revolting, childish, and dangerous.

    A counter-revolution by the gun owning normal people in the 85% red area of the country that voted for Trump would not be a pleasant experience for the paid protesters, vagina hat wearing feminazis, and the safe space anti-free speech lefties on campuses across the land.

    I must admit I love Trump’s pugnacious style. I love how he treats the despicable corporate media. I love how he responds to baseless accusations by his contemptible opponents on the left and right. The representatives of the Deep State – Schumer, Pelosi, Obama, McCain, Graham, Kristol, CNN, NYT, Washington Post, MSNBC, Soros, and anyone else willing to confront Trump are met with disdain, contempt, and abuse from the president. I love that he continues to go on the road and hold rallies with the people who elected him. I love how he demoralized his opponents by giving one of the best State of the Union speeches in history.

    I love how he put his opponents back on their heels by accusing Obama of wire-tapping Trump Tower. No punch is taken without two being thrown. He will never conform to the way the liberal corporate media and his opponents want him to behave. Twitter is the dagger he uses to avoid the fake news media filter and plunge into his opponents hearts. The faux journalists despise his use of Twitter. When you see the violence beginning to break out between Trump haters and Trump supporters, and read stories about Obama leading an insurgency to undermine Trump’s presidency, every normal person must be prepared to do whatever necessary to support his radical agenda of draining the swamp.

    “Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”H.L. Mencken

    The fake news media scoffed when Trump declared what an awful economic mess Obama had left after eight years of a debt fueled Keynesian failure of epic proportions. These fake journalists are good at looking stylish, speaking in serious tones, and reading false narratives written for them by their corporate bosses, but impartially assessing our economic situation is beyond their pea brain comprehension.

    The eye opening chart below shows you how far we’ve come since 2000, or how far we’ve fallen, depending on your point of view. It looks to me like Trump has been handed a bucket of shit by his egotistical sociopathic boastful predecessor. Obama can now concentrate on his true passions – his NCAA pool and golf – while Trump is left to try and clean up a $20 trillion mess.

    The Bush and Obama administrations frittered away any chance for a sustainable long-term economic paradigm by fighting unnecessary wars of choice, expanding unfunded entitlements, and allowing Wall Street and their Federal Reserve puppets to fraudulently pillage the nation’s wealth. Trump has been left with a debt saturated stagnant economy with rising interest rates and declining corporate profits. This is where reality meets slogans like Make America Great Again.

    This is where understanding what happens during Fourth Turnings keeps you focused on what is likely to happen, not what you wish to happen. Slogans and false hope don’t fly during Fourth Turnings. My natural skepticism kicks in when politicians, including Trump, make promises that are mathematically impossible.

    I know we are less than two months into his presidency and no legislation has actually been submitted, let alone passed, but impartially assessing his wish list of economic priorities makes me uneasy. I’m not hubristic enough to declare his presidency a failure already, like Karl Denninger, Paul Craig Roberts and some other blowhards. Judging a man before he’s actually done anything tells me more about the judger rather than the man being judged.

    He has certainly made some questionable cabinet choices and the number of senior advisors with ties to the Vampire Squid on the Face of America (aka Goldman Sachs) is worrisome. But whenever my doubts about Trump’s agenda begin to surface, I immediately picture the crooked globalist Deep State tool Hillary Clinton making the State of the Union speech last week. And all is well with the world again. My mental funk would be a full blown suicide watch level depression if Crooked Hillary was running the show.

    US Debt and Budget

    But that isn’t going to keep me from pointing out the mathematically provable impact of his plans on the budget. We already have a $20 trillion national debt, with 10,000 Baby Boomers turning 65 years old every day for the next decade. Annual deficits are already on automatic pilot to reach $1 trillion over the next few years. This is reality. Slogans won’t change it. Hope won’t change it. Delusional optimism by consumers won’t change it. With this backdrop, Trump has proposed the following economic initiatives:

    • He’s vowed to not touch entitlements, even though they account for 50% of current spending and will grow to 60% over the next ten years.
    • He’s vowed to rebuild the military, with 50,000 more soldiers and upgrades to fighting hardware, at a cost north of $50 billion.
    • He’s floated the idea of a $1 trillion infrastructure plan.
    • The border wall will cost between $15 and $25 billion.
    • His tax reduction plans will add between $2.6 trillion and $3.9 trillion, after accounting for increased growth, over the next decade.
    • His much discussed tariffs on foreign produced goods may result in jobs staying in America, but will surely result in higher prices for people buying those goods. Whether this will be a net positive or net negative is open to debate.
    • With inflation beginning to accelerate, interest rates will rise. A 1% rise across the yield curve would result in an additional $200 billion per year in interest, a 50% increase from the current level of $400 billion.

    Discretionary spending only accounts for 15% of the entire budget. There isn’t savings anywhere near the level of spending increases baked into the budget, let alone Trump’s new grand spending plans. If Trump gets everything he has proposed, without touching entitlements, he would depart in eight years with a $30 trillion national debt and an entitlement crisis just over the horizon. Of course, the likelihood of reaching $30 trillion in debt without triggering a global financial catastrophe beforehand is about as likely as Trump making a sobbing apology to Obama for accusing him of wiretapping Trump Tower.

    As I stated at the beginning of this article, I am less sure about just about everything, as time goes on. Every day I see pronouncements from people I respect like David Stockman, Chris Martenson, Peter Schiff, Jim Rogers, Marc Faber and many others predicting a great crash in the immediate future. They will be right eventually, but they’ve been saying the same thing for the last five years. I agree with their reasoning, but I’ve given up on predicting the timing. They all have one thing in common – their living depends on you buying their newsletters and books. Certainty about looming disaster sells. Since my living doesn’t depend on selling anything, I’m comfortable pondering possibilities and trying to understand how the mood of the country will ultimately propel the unfolding events of this Fourth Turning.

    Trump has been referencing the 16% rise in the Dow since his election as proof his proposed economic policies will create millions of jobs, 4% GDP growth, and a new economic boom. That seems a little bit disingenuous, as during the debates and on the campaign trail he said the stock market was a giant bubble. He said the Fed had created multiple bubbles in stocks, bonds and real estate with their QE and ZIRP “Make Bankers Rich Again” schemes. Of course, he was right.

    His honesty was refreshing. When an extremely overvalued market rises another 16% over a four month period, one might ponder whether we’ve got a blow-off top in progress. Certainly the brainless spokesmodels on CNBC or the bevy of Bloomberg stock shills paraded on camera to bloviate about why this seven year Fed induced bull market is just getting started, will not be telling Joe Sucker to sell.

    Any honest financial analyst, who has taken a Statistics course in college, knows whenever something is 2 standard deviations beyond the mean you have a rarely occurring extreme outcome. In fact, the average stock has only been more overvalued one time in stock market history – 2001. Since that market overvaluation was solely driven by dot.com stocks, median stock valuations today are even higher than 2001. This isn’t opinion or survey data.

    Doug Short and John Hussman have used impartial valuation metrics which have been accurate for over 100 years. These valuation levels are 160% above historical norms and imply a market crash of 50% to 60%, which would only bring the market back to historical averages. I wonder how many Boomers and GenXers could survive the third stock market bust in the last seventeen years.

    The cock sure Wall Street analysts are as smug about this market as they were in 2000 and 2007. They scoff at the possibility of a 50% crash even though the market crashed by 45% in 2000/2001 and plummeted by 51% over a sixteen month period in 2008/2009. As usual, there are a myriad of ridiculous rationales for why it’s different this time. There will always be absurd justifications for outlandish valuations made by those whose paychecks depend on the greater fool theory.

    John Hussman, Doug Short, Robert Schiller, and dozens of other rational thinking, honest, data oriented people are right. But that doesn’t mean the market won’t go up another 20% before the inevitable collapse. I have no idea when it will happen, but it will happen. Considering we are in year nine of a twenty year or so Fourth Turning, with the worst part yet to come, I’d venture a guess we will see the next financial crisis during Trump’s first term.

    The nattering nabobs of nonsense at the Fed and in the financial mainstream press insist their monetary machinations over the last eight years have not created inflation. They clearly believe in the theory of the bigger the lie, the more likely it is to be believed by a math challenged, technologically distracted, normalcy bias ridden populace. Anyone who thinks the $3.5 trillion of QE money was to help the people on Main Street is either a government bootlicker or an establishment crony paid to spread false propaganda. In addition to the BLS under-reporting inflation by 100%, the Fed’s monetary inflation was pumped straight into the veins of the monetary drug addict Wall Street banks.

    While Main Street wages declined and senior citizens have gotten minuscule increases in their life sustaining Social Security payments, the Wall Street bankers, who committed the greatest control fraud in world history, have gotten record bonuses and the freedom to fake their profits through legal accounting fraud (mark to fantasy).

    The purpose of TARP, QE and ZIRP has been to sustain, enrich, and keep in power a ruling class of sociopaths hell bent on pillaging the last vestiges of global wealth from unsuspecting citizens. Jamie Dimon believes everything done by the Fed and Treasury has been wonderful, as he plays tennis in his $5 million opulent NYC penthouse suite. Meanwhile, your granny has to decide between her overpriced heart medication or groceries driven higher by the Fed generated inflation.

    I don’t know when the center will give way. I don’t know when the stock market will crash. I don’t know when the Federal’s Reserve and other central banks’ shamefully reckless and illegal monetary machinations will blow up the world. I don’t know whether Trump will succeed or fail in his quest to drain the swamp. I don’t know whether the Deep State forces will take him out. I don’t know whether a civil war is on the horizon. I don’t know whether a global military conflict is in the offing. I don’t know when this greater depression will be revealed in all its glory to the millions of people with their heads up their asses in denial about reality. But, I do know whatever happens during the remainder of this Fourth Turning will be driven by debt, global disorder and civic decay, just as it has from the beginning.

    I don’t know what the hell is going on. And more often than not, I don’t care anymore. I’m tired of howling at the moon, with no result. Life gets put into perspective when a family member is struck with a totally random health issue and you have to see them suffer through treatments that make them sicker than the actual condition. I know times are going to get much tougher. I have no misconceptions Trump can somehow reverse the course of the US Titanic after it has struck the iceberg of debt.

    I believe what’s wrong with this country is unfixable. I think Trump’s legacy will be the tearing down of the corrupt, decrepit, self-serving, evil status quo. His in your face, no holds barred style so angers the established social order; they come out of the shadows to fight him. The sinister intelligence services and Soros/Obama left wing terrorists are being revealed as the true enemies of the common people. We know our enemy. That’s the first step.

    I will do my best to get my kids through college debt free as long as they pursue a serious degree. I will continue to pay down my mortgage debt as quickly as possible. I will try to deal with my own health issues and help my wife deal with hers. We will take care of our aging mothers. Family will always come first. We’re only on this earth for a short time and while I get intellectual satisfaction from trying to change hearts and minds through writing, the only thing that truly matters to me is my wife and the futures of my three sons.

    I’ll prepare to the best of my ability for the worst, while trying to enjoy the present. Over the last nine years we’ve created a dysfunctional family of internet misfits on my website. I feel an obligation to keep that alive, especially for the talented writers who have blossomed with an open platform for their views, even though my own enthusiasm has been waning for a while.

    I’ve tried my best to seek truth, reveal government deception, and generally be a thorn in the side of the establishment. Based on Mencken’s definition, I’m a dangerous man to the government, who has spread discontent among those capable of thinking things out for themselves. You may not realize it, but the war has already begun. No matter what the hell is going on, I sure hope the good guys win.

    “The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable, and so, if he is romantic, he tries to change it. And even if he is not romantic personally he is very apt to spread discontent among those who are.”H.L. Mencken

  • Caught On Video: Radioactive Wild Boar Roam Fukushima

    With humans long gone, and robots dying off amid the radiation, Fukushima has become home to 'something else'.

    When the exclusion zone was set up almost exactly 6 years ago this week – with the surrounding towns population evacuated to a safe distance – The Mirror reports that hundreds of the wild boars, which have been known to attack people when enraged, descended from surrounding hills and forests into the deserted streets.

    Now they roam the empty streets and overgrown garden's of Japan's deserted seaside town of Namie, foraging for food.

    However, the people of Namie are scheduled to return to the town at the end of the month, which means the bloody-toothed interlopers have to be cleared.

    "It is not really clear now which is the master of the town, people or wild boars," said Tamotsu Baba, mayor of the town.

     

     

    "If we don't get rid of them and turn this into a human-led town, the situation will get even wilder and uninhabitable."

    Reuters reports that more than half of Namie's former 21,500 residents have decided not to return and face the wild boars, however, a government survey showed last year, citing concerns over radiation and the safety of the nuclear plant, which is being decommissioned.

    Wild boar meat is a delicacy in northern Japan, but animals slaughtered since the disaster are too contaminated to eat. According to tests conducted by the Japanese government, some of the boars have shown levels of radioactive element caesium-137 that are 300 times higher than safety standards.

    Authorities in the town of Tomioka say they’ve killed 800 so far, but officials there say that’s not enough, according to Japanese media. The latest statistics show that in the three years since 2011, the number of boars killed in hunts has grown to 13,000 from 3,000.

    But at town meetings earlier this year to prepare for the homecoming, residents had voiced worries about the wild boars.

    "I'm sure officials at all levels are giving some thought to this," said Hidezo Sato, a former seed merchant in Namie. "Something must be done."

    Why not send in some robots? Oh wait you tried that!

  • Republicans' Consumer Confidence Is At 9 Year Highs (Democrats Not So Much)

    Bloomberg’s consumer comfort index surged to the highest level since its peak in February 2007. However, while Republicans are the happiest since 2008, Democrats’ confidence is collapsing…

     

    But the divided America is extremely evident. Republican consumers in America have not been this ‘comfortable’ since January 2008, Democrats are the least ‘comfortable’ in 10 months.

    The last time Democrats’ consumer comfort plunged like this
    relative to Republicans was in September 2013, when President Obama
    authorized the use of force against Syria (over crossing his chemical
    weapons red line).

  • Why Force Parents To Keep Their Children In Failing Public Schools?

    Via Duane of Free Market Shooter blog,

    The nomination of Betsy DeVos was fraught with criticism from the left.  She was derided for having “no experience with public education, no political experience, no government administrative experience,” and her support for school vouchers/charter schools, among many other things.  Notably, most of the criticism came from educators, many of them members of the teachers’ unions, who have had many years and more than enough funding to fix failing public schools, with little (if any) success.

    Which all begs the question – if your student is enrolled at a failing public institution, why should he/she be forced to remain enrolled there?

    Recently, someone shared the experience of “Madeline” (the mother of a Philadelphia school student) and “Steve” (the student himself).  Their names have been changed for the purpose of this article, which as Madeline explains, is more than likely necessary, so they do not face reprisal from public school educators and administrators.  For her and her son, having a choice has meant the difference between years wasted in a failing school, and a real chance at a real education.

    Madeline and Steve, both African Americans, live with Madeline’s husband in West Philadelphia, where most families are hard working but underpaid by any standard.  Steve attended John Barry Elementary School (Grades K-8) from Kindergarten through 3rd grade.  They both described the school as “terrible,” among several other less than savory terms.  Every day there were fights, with girls pulling hair out, and kids would turn over desks/chairs before running through the halls while class was in session.  Teachers would try to break up fights, but would more often call security, who would remove the offending student.  If the issue couldn’t be resolved, parents would be called, who wouldn’t always show up to take the child away.  If teachers took away phones from students who used them during class, they would curse at teachers and administrators with little fear of reprisal, sometime assaulting teachers.

    Security consisted of one police officer.  Lockers were not considered safe, and oftentimes items left in them would be stolen by other students.  The food was considered to be “awful” by Steve, and the bathrooms were filthy, with urine on the floor and by the drains.  Classes were approximately 30 students each, with the principal changing every year.  Notably, Steve was academically ahead of his classmates – most of the students did not want to be in school, and were extremely disruptive.  Steve had one good teacher, but he noted that the teacher had difficulty actually teaching anything, since there were so many disruptive students.  Steve stated his only positive experience from the school were his field trips to a farm and a circus.

    If you look at the performance of John Barry Elementary School, you can see this for yourself.  Reproduced below are the PSSA charts for Grade 3 (the one grade listed that Steve was in attendance for), and unsurprisingly they are far below the SDP average. 

    Also below is the teacher attendance for John Barry, which is far below the SDP average as well.

    Madeline (unsurprisingly) did not want to keep Steve in John Barry, seeing it as a hostile environment to not just learning, but Steve’s safety, and his development as a person.  She feared that leaving him in this school would bring out the worst in him, and that could lead him to a life of crime or worse.  Madeline put her son on a waiting list to get into a charter school, later finding out that only 1 of every 3 applicants were accepted, and she believes some schools have a lottery.  Her son got into Mathematics, Civics, & Sciences Charter School of Philadelphia (K-12), courtesy of two friends’ cousins who used to teach at the school.

    Her son said that from the day he got to the school, he was actually learning.  The kids were all serious, and not playing around.  The teachers were “not soft, striking fear into unruly students,” and the students subsequently respected the teacher and wanted to be productive.  The teachers, in turn, trusted the kids, but there is still far more security, with one guard in each hallway.  The principal frequently interrupts classrooms and asks students what they are learning, sometimes having “guests” present to evaluate the teachers.  The most positive experience that Steve shared is the teachers are “top notch,” and he feels he is finally learning something at school.

    It’s not all perfect for Steve though – the school doesn’t have a gym, and not a lot of sports and physical education are available.  There is a basketball program, but the school needs to use facilities at other schools.  Still, that was the only negative relative to John Barry that MCS Charter had in everything that was discussed.  A recent article in Philly.com which described a similar charter school in Northeast Philadelphia was described by Madeline as “very similar” to her experience with MCS.

    Finally, Madeline was asked about Betsy DeVos – if she know who she was (she did), and of the criticisms that were sent her way.  Her answer was brief – “the criticisms are true – she doesn’t know much about public school.”  But then she added, “would anyone really want to know more about John Barry, besides how to get their student out of the school?”

    Which brings me back to the criticisms lobbed at DeVos, again by HuffPo.  They quoted some things the DeVos said in March 2015 at the SXSW conference in Texas.  Some excerpts:

    Government really sucks. And it doesn’t matter which party is in power. Having been around politics and government my entire adult life, I have five observations about government for you:
     
    Government tends to believe in top down solutions and government fears of bottom up solutions.
     
    We don’t pay teachers enough, and we don’t fire teachers enough.
     
    In that one sentence, I have raised the ire of both the Republican and Democrat political establishments.
     
    The Republicans don’t want to pay our best teachers enough, and the Democrats don’t want to reform tenure laws. It’s another partisan standoff.
     
    But I am willing to bet that every one of you had one or more teachers who made a big difference in your life, who opened your eyes to possibilities and to opportunities. You probably recall them in your mind’s eye right now.
     
    And likewise, I am pretty sure that every one of you had one or more teachers who should not have been teaching. That doesn’t mean they were bad people, or maybe they were, but regardless, they weren’t any good at teaching. You are probably thinking of those teachers right now.
     
    And by the way, teaching is hard. It takes a lot of skill. Not everyone who tries can do it well. We need to admit that and act accordingly.
     
    We should reward and respect great teachers by paying them more, and we should stop rewarding seniority over effectiveness.

    As it applies to education, you would be hard pressed to find Madeline not in agreement with DeVos.  Top-down solutions to education and government (read: teachers’ union) fears of bottom up solutions to education have led to a public school system that is behind the curve in nearly all examples.

    This is not hyperbole – the US spends approximately $115,000 per student, which is fifth globally, behind only Austria, Luxembourg, Norway and Switzerland.  But throwing money at the problem has not led to increased performance, as the Pew Research Center recently analyzed – our students score similar to the Slovak Republic, which spends less than half, at $53,000 per student:

    What a surprise – a PISA report has noted the following:

    …among OECD countries, “higher expenditure on education is not highly predictive of better mathematics scores in PISA.”

    We can reasonably conclude that instead of trying to throw money at the problem, it appears Betsy DeVos intends to “fix” the public school system by giving parents a choice of where to send their students to school.  She appears prepared to use the exorbitant cost of public education to finance this choice, and forcing all schools financed with public dollars to become far more accountable for their own performance.  Who ends up the big loser?  Obviously, failing public schools – if enough students leave the failing schools behind, they will be forced to shutter their doors.

    It should be of no surprise then, that teachers’ unions are fighting charter schools at every turn.  A recent Forbes article did an exemplary job of dissecting their opposition:

    Teachers’ unions often fight charter schools by claiming that they are less accountable to students and families because many operate under less burdensome regulations than do traditional public schools. The real reason for their opposition, of course, is that charter school teachers are not unionized. The reality is that charter schools are much more accountable to young people and their parents than are traditional public schools. If parents do not like their children’s charter schools, they can send their kids elsewhere. This threat of exit gives charter schools an incentive to raise the quality of the education they offer in order to retain students.

     

    Despite union scaremongering, the verdict is in on charter schools: The public favors them 2 to 1. Among African Americans, who are arguably the biggest beneficiaries of alternative schooling options, the favorability ratio is greater than 3 to 1. Even public school teachers desert the union position on charter schools by a slim margin—38% of teachers favor them, and 35% are opposed.

    With a favorability rating of 3 to 1 among African Americans, the ethnic group with the largest percentage of students in failing public schools, it should be quite surprising to learn that the NAACP opposes charter schools.  Recently, the NAACP ratified a controversial resolution calling for a moratorium on expansion of charter schools, and stronger oversight of charter schools currently in existence.

    Publications ranging from U.S. News to The National Review have struggled to answer this question:

    The NAACP board will vote this weekend on a resolution urging a moratorium on the creation of new charter schools, on grounds that they worsen segregation and erode local control. This is not a new position for the nation’s oldest civil-rights organization, but it’s gotten more support than ever before — for example, from groups such as those affiliated with Black Lives Matter — and has drawn thoughtful repudiations by the New York Times and the Washington Post as well as the Wall Street Journal. As the Post’s editorial board noted, “that the beneficiaries of [charters] are, in large part, children of color hopefully is not lost on an organization that is supposed to be looking out for the interests of minority people.”

    But Education Week said what no one else would:

    “The African-American community was shut out of power and authority for so many years, even if African-Americans see the warts on the local district, it’s their district.”

    So something else needs to be said, because no one else has said it: if you want your failing public school, you can keep your failing public school – no one is forcing anyone to put their kids into a charter school.  But do not take away the option for someone else to remove their child from a toxic environment, and make their own choice on whatever they feel is the best place to send their children to school.

    Betsy DeVos wasn’t brought in to enact more “reforms” or toss more money at what appears to be an unsolvable problem – instead, it appears she intends to do something that no one else has done in the past – give more students a choice of what to do with their education.  The criticisms about her are all correct – she isn’t well versed in public school education, something she readily admits, but knows that it is failing our country’s students, no matter how much time and money has been spent for who knows how long to repair it.  Isn’t a new approach long overdue?

    Take note – former President Obama sent his kids to Sidwell Friends, a private school in the D.C. area.  And who can blame him?  D.C. public schools recently ranked dead last in the nation.  Why should the rest of our nation’s students be given a “one size fits all” approach to public education, when that “one size” is a well-funded yet underperforming public school system?

     

  • South Korea's President Has Been Removed From Office After Court Upholds Impeachment

    South Korea’s constitutional court has voted unanimously, 8-0, to uphold the impeachment of President Park Guen-hye, removing her from office after a 92-day leadership crisis and triggering a presidential election in the weeks to come. A snap election my be held within 60 days.

    The ruling, which was announced by the court’s acting chief and televised live, made Park the nation’s first democratically elected leader to be ousted. She was impeached by parliament on Dec. 9 on charges of letting a close friend meddle in state affairs, colluding with her to extort money from conglomerates, and neglecting her duties during a 2014 ferry sinking that killed more than 300.

    The court’s decision strips Park of her immunity from criminal prosecution, which will force her to undergo interrogation by prosecutors over her alleged crimes.


    President Park Geun-hye (R) and Lee Jung-mi, acting chief of the Constitutional Court

    “The Constitutional Court’s decision is equivalent to demanding legal accountability for President Park’s failure to properly run state affairs,” said Yang Seung-ham, honorary professor at Seoul’s Yonsei University. “Now the public should accept the ruling.”

    The nation has been sharply divided along ideological and generational lines since the scandal broke in October, pushing millions of people into the streets to rally for or against the impeachment.

    Park’s problems began in October, when revelations emerged about the influence Park’s confidante and adviser Choi Soon-sil had over the President. Choi is currently on trial for abuse of power and fraud. What followed later was 5 months of at times sheer chaos (see full timeline below) culminating with today’s decision.

    Local media and opposition parties had accused Choi of abusing her relationship with the president to force companies to donate millions of dollars to foundations she runs. She denies all charges against her.

    Hundreds of thousands of South Koreans braved the brutally cold winter temperatures to take to the streets of Seoul and call for Park’s ouster.

    In a brief televised apology however, Park made it clear that she had no intentions of resigning. In December, the National Assembly voted 234 to 56 to impeach her.

    Park was impeached in December after being accused of corruption. She is alleged to have let her close confidante Choi Soon Sil meddle in state affairs and conspired with her to extort money from major companies including Samsung.

    Local pundits cited by Yonhap said the court’s decision demonstrated that South Korea’s democratic system is firmly in place. “We have undergone a process of resolving considerable conflict and differences in a predictable manner through legal procedures stipulated in the Constitution,” said Park Myoung-kyu, a sociology professor at Seoul National University. “Now is the time to calm down and turn (the conflict) into policy debates and arguments.”

    The president’s supporters and detractors rallied outside the court as police officers and police buses were deployed to prevent a possible clash.

    * * *

    Below is the full timeline of the Park scandal:

    October

    24 – South Korean cable TV network JTBC reports that Park’s longtime friend Choi edited some of the president’s speeches. Prosecutors were already investigating claims that Choi had used her relationship with Park to raise funds for two foundations.
    25 – Park apologizes on national television, saying Choi had access to dozens of presidential speeches before they were made public.
    29 – Thousands of anti-government protesters gather in Seoul, calling for Park’s resignation. Organizers estimate the crowd at 20,000; police put attendance at 9,000.
    31 – As Choi arrives at the prosecutors’ offices, following a two-month stay in Germany, she apologizes, saying she has committed “an unpardonable crime.” Late that night, prosecutors place Choi in emergency detention.

    November

    1 – Prosecutors raid the offices of eight banks. Choi is suspected, among other things, of getting preferential treatment from local banks for loans.
    2 – Park nominates a new prime minister, Kim Byong Joon, a member of an opposition party, in a bid to quell the controversy.
    3 – A South Korean district court issues an arrest warrant for Choi. Kim, the prime minister-designate, says Park could be investigated, saying, “Everyone is equal before the law.”
    4 – Park again apologizes on TV, saying she will cooperate in the investigation.
    5 – Thousands of protesters take to the streets of Seoul to demand Park’s resignation. Organizers say about 100,000 people participate; police put the number at 40,000.
    6 – Prosecutors issue warrants for two of Park’s former aides, AnChong Bum and Jeong Ho Seong, who both resigned the previous week. Prosecutors continue to question Choi.
    8 – Prosecutors search the offices of electronics giant Samsung. Park says she will withdraw her nominee for prime minister.
    12 – The biggest protest yet takes place near the presidential palace in Seoul. Organizers say 500,000 people participate; police put the number at 190,000. Protests are planned in 40 other cities in South Korea and abroad.
    13 – Prosecutors say they plan to question Park.
    17 – South Korea’s parliament passes a bill to open up an independent enquiry into Park’s friendship with Choi. The legislation seeks 60 investigators and a special prosecutor to lead the case.
    19 – Protestors again gather in Seoul.
    20 – Prosecutors say Park is likely to have played a role in the corruption scandal but that they cannot indict her, as the country’s constitution guarantees the president immunity “except in cases of insurrection or treason.”
    21 – The country’s largest opposition party says it will take steps to begin impeachment proceedings against Park.

    December

    1 – South Korea’s ruling party pushes for Park to resign in April, saying presidential elections planned for the end of 2017 could be brought forward to June.
    2 – The country’s three opposition parties say they will vote December 9 on impeachment, even if Park announces a plan to resign. Park plans to meet with members of her own ruling party over the weekend.
    3 – Hundreds of thousands of demonstrators march within 100 metres of Park’s official residence.
    6 – Park says she won’t immediately resign if impeached. Five thousand South Koreans file a lawsuit demanding compensation from Park for mental suffering caused by the scandal.
    9 – Lawmakers including members of her own party vote to impeach Park
    16 – In a 24-page document, Park’s lawyers argue that there is no legal foundation for her removal.
    19 – Park’s influential friend Choi Soon Sil goes on trial on charges of abuse of authority and attempted fraud.

    January

    3 – The first open hearing in Park’s impeachment trial is held. As expected, she does not attend.

    February

    17 – Samsung heir Lee Jae Yong is arrested over bribery allegations linked to the corruption scandal.

    March

    9 – Lee denies bribing Park and Choi on the first day of his trial
    10 – The Constitional Court upholds Park’s impeachment

  • Illinois State Senator Pushes Bill Allowing Government To Confiscate Guns Without Due Process

    Via Daniel Lang of SHTFPlan.com,

    There are people in our government who are determined to chip away at our Second Amendment rights, and they are an insidious bunch.

    Rarely do they make blatant gun grabbing attempts. Typically they push for policies that quietly set back gun rights. They like laws that merely set precedents without alarming the public, and they’ve been doing it successfully for decades.

    The latest of these attempts comes from Illinois, one of the least gun friendly states in America. State Senator Julie Morrison has proposed a bill titled SB 1291, which would allow the government to confiscate firearms from citizens without any due process. According to Breitbart:

    SB 1291 would create a “Lethal Order of Protection” whereby the firearms of Illinois residents could be confiscated if a family member or “law officer” files a petition stating the gun owner “poses an immediate and present danger of causing personal injury to himself, herself, or another by having … [a firearm] in his or her custody or control.”

     

    SB 1291’s summary states:

     

    [The bill] provides that the petition shall also describe the type, and location of any firearm or firearms presently believed by the petitioner to be possessed or controlled by the respondent. Provides that the petitioner may be a family member of the respondent or a law enforcement officer, who files a petition alleging that the respondent poses a danger of causing personal injury to himself, herself, or another by having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm. Establishes factors that the court must consider before issuing a lethal violence order of protection. Provides for the issuance of ex parte orders and one year orders.

    Basically if this bill passes, then a resident of Illinois could have his or her firearms confiscated if a family member alleges that the person in question is an immediate threat to himself or others. All they have to do is file a petition and report that allegation to the government. I say allegation, because under this bill, no real proof is required to take away someone’s firearms.

    Moreover, the input and presence of the person who is targeted is not required during this process. If this happened to you, it wouldn’t even be your word against theirs. You wouldn’t be able to defend yourself in court at all.

    However, what may be more alarming about this bill, is it that states that a “law enforcement officer” can file one of these petitions. Does that mean that the cops could have your weapons confiscated on a whim?

    The gun grabbers in our society have tried to set a lot of bad legal precedents over the years. Let’s pray that this doesn’t become one of them.

  • "It Can Only Disappoint" – What Wall Street Expects From Friday's Payrolls Report

    Following Wednesday’s blowout ADP report, which printed some 40K jobs higher than the highest estimate, the only possibility for tomorrow’s nonfarm payroll report, the last major economic data point before the Fed’s March 15th rate hike announcement, is to disappoint, especially in terms of wages (which in light of the recent downward revision of Q1 GDP by the Atlanta Fed to 1.2% is not out of the question). That possibility, however, is slim to none if one looks at Wall Street’s forecasts, where virtually every sellside analyst boosted their NFP estimate in the hours after the ADP number. Still, with the market pricing in a 100% chance of a rate hike, only a very disappointing – think less than 100K – report will derail the Fed from hiking for the second time in three meetings.

    Here are some of the more notable forecasts for tomorrow’s number::

    • Westpac 170K
    • Bank of America 185K
    • BNP 185K
    • Barclays 200K
    • Deutsche Bank 200K
    • Goldman Sachs 215K
    • Nomura 235K
    • Morgan Stanley 250K

    Putting it all together, here is what Wall Street expects from the February payrolls report due out at 8:30am ET tomorrow morning:

    • Change in Nonfarm Payrolls: Exp. 193K (Prey. 227K, Dec. 157K)
    • Unemployment Rate Exp. 4.70% (Prey. 4.80%, Dec. 4.70%)
    • Average Hourly Earnings M/M Exp. 0.30% (Prey. 0.10%, Dec. 0.20%)

    Consensus calls for an increase of 193K jobs in February, with the unemployment rate falling to 4.7% from 4.8%. Much of the focus could be on average hourly earnings for signs of inflationary pressure. Last month, average hourly earnings disappointed with Y/Y wage growth slowing to 2.5% from 2.9%. This month, average hourly earnings are expected to pick up to 2.7% Y/Y with monthly growth of 0.3%.

    A look at recent data, courtesy of RanSquawk

    Labor market data has continued to be strong. Initial jobless claims have fallen their lowest level since March 1973. The employment components from the two most recent ISM reports also indicate an improving labour market. The non-manufacturing ISM employment component showed increased from 54.7 to 55.2 while the manufacturing component showed further expansion, albeit at a slightly slower pace at 54.2. Wednesday’s ADP employment report showed a massive 298K jobs created in February, above the expected 190K, although there is often a large discrepancy between the ADP and the official Nonfarm Payrolls figures and it cannot be relied on as an accurate indicator of Friday’s report.

    Factors arguing for a stronger report:

    • Jobless claims. Initial claims for unemployment insurance benefits moved lower, averaging 244k during the five weeks between the January and February payroll survey periods. This represents the lowest level of claims on this basis since the 1970s. The impact of seasonal adjustment difficulties on the jobless claims data is most pronounced in January, the sustained improvement in jobless claims through February suggests improvement in the underlying pace of layoffs, and in the labor market more broadly.
    • ADP. ADP reported a 298k rise in private payroll employment in February, its fastest pace in nearly three years and well above expectations of +187k. Large surprises in the ADP report tend to be predictive of the subsequent nonfarm payroll surprise. Additionally, the 66k rise in ADP construction employment suggests scope for above-trend growth in weather-sensitive payrolls categories.
    • Warm temperatures and minimal snowfall. February exhibited unseasonably warm weather and relatively limited snowfall, both of which are likely to boost payrolls in weather-sensitive industries. According to NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) data, snowfall during the calendar month totaled 4.0 inches, the third lowest accumulation in a February since 2006. Snowfall was also unseasonably low during the payrolls survey week, and as shown in Exhibit 1, such a pattern is associated with strong growth in weather-sensitive industries, including construction, retail trade, and leisure and hospitality.
    • Service sector surveys. Most employment components of service sector surveys either improved or remained at elevated levels in February, and all remained in expansionary territory. The ISM non-manufacturing employment component rose to a 5-month high (0.5pt to 55.2), the New York Fed index increased to a 18-month high (+1.8pt to +18.9, SA by GS), and the Dallas Fed employment component edged up (+1.1pt to +5.9). Meanwhile, the Philly Fed non-manufacturing employment index pulled back from a 1-year high (-7.1pt to +12.4) and the Richmond Fed employment index edged down (-1pt to +7), though both indices remained at encouraging levels. The key labor market subcomponent of the consumer confidence report also remained strong (-0.1pt to +5.9), less than a point below cycle highs. Service sector payroll employment increased 192k in January and has increased 165k on average over the last six months.
    • Seasonals. Since 2010, February payroll growth has surprised positively relative to consensus in six of the seven instances, with an average surprise of +36k. This may suggest some additional upside risk to the extent the BLS seasonal factors have not fully evolved to reflect this tendency.

    Factors arguing for a weaker report:

    • Federal Hiring Freeze. The new administration’s hiring freeze for federal workers (excluding defense and public safety) went into effect on January 23rd, one week into the February payrolls survey period. Some departments may be able to circumvent the impact of the hiring freeze though reduced attrition or increased contracted hiring. However, news reports have indicated reduced government hiring in some subindustries/departments, such as shipbuilding and social assistance/child care. Accordingly, the hiring freeze may weigh on government payrolls in tomorrow’s report, with an overall drag in categories affected of 10k-15k.
    • Labor Supply Constraints. Economists view the labor market as close to full employment, and as slack diminishes further, this should exert upward pressure on wages and potentially downward pressure on job growth – particularly as the unemployment rate in a given industry or geography falls meaningfully below its structural rate. In the February NFIB small business survey, 32% of firms reported having job openings that were hard to fill, the highest percentage since 2001. Additionally, the Beige Book for the March FOMC meeting included anecdotal evidence of more widespread labor scarcity, as some districts reported labor shortages of skilled workers and of workers in the leisure and hospitality, construction, and manufacturing sectors.  Over the past two years, this trend toward diminished slack has coincided with slowing payrolls growth, raising the possibility that labor supply issues may already be constraining job growth at the margin. The right panel of the same exhibit compares job growth with labor market slack across industries. Below-average unemployment rates in 3Q16 were associated with below-trend job growth over the subsequent four months, potentially suggestive of labor supply effects.
      Tentative Evidence that Labor Supply Constraints Are Beginning to Weigh on Job Growth

    • Transportation jobs. Transportation and warehousing payrolls have seen elevated growth in December in recent years followed by softer growth or outright declines in January and February, a phenomenon likely driven by the combination of the secular shift toward online holiday sales and the slow evolution of the BLS seasonal factors. Payroll data this winter have so far exhibited the same pattern, and we expect tomorrow’s report to show restrained growth in the transportation and warehousing industry as a result.
    • Job availability. The Conference Board’s Help Wanted Online (HWOL) report showed a sharp decrease in online job postings (-7%), the third consecutive monthly decline. However, we place limited weight on this indicator at the moment in light of research by Fed economists that suggests the HWOL ad count has been depressed by higher prices for online job ads.

    Neutral Factors:

    • Manufacturing sector surveys. The employment components of manufacturing surveys were mixed in February, though all remained in expansionary territory. The ISM manufacturing employment component pulled back from to a 30-month high (-1.9pt to 54.2), and the Philly Fed employment index also slowed (-1.7pt to +11.1). Meanwhile, the Kansas City Fed (+11pt to +17), Empire State (+3.7pt to +2.0), Dallas Fed (+3.5pt to +9.6), and Richmond Fed (+2pt to +10) employment indices improved. The Chicago PMI employment index also rebounded back into expansionary territory. Manufacturing payroll employment rose 5k in January, its second consecutive increase.
    • Job cuts. Announced layoffs reported by Challenger, Gray & Christmas after our seasonal adjustment declined by 2k to 33k in February, though the level of announced layoffs remains somewhat above recent lows.

    Fed Impact

    The Fed speak in the week before the blackout period was consistent with a hike at the March meeting, but despite signalling rate increases going forward, most cautioned that path of rate increases will be gradual. Most have also stated that the labor market is at or near full employment and so focus will be on the wage data for expectations on the number of hikes this year. As mentioned previously, the average hourly earnings data disappointed last month but if earnings pick up faster than expected it could lift expectations for the number of rate hikes in 2017, with markets currently split between two to three hikes this year. The Fed’s most recent projections also saw most Committee members favouring either two or three hikes in 2017.

    Market Reaction

    As usual with the NFP report, there is often a kneejerk reaction to the headline payrolls number. A stronger than expected number historically sends the USD higher and Treasuries lower and vice versa for a weaker number, before markets digest some of the other details of the report.

    If wages disappoint for the second month in a row, then markets may begin to ease back their hiking expectations for the rest of the year and we could see some steepening of the Treasury curve after the flattening observed in the wake of the strong ADP report on Wednesday. For markets to price out a rate hike in March, wage growth would probably need to slow markedly and the headline NFP number to fall well below 100K.

    * * *

    Finally, here is the all-important Goldman’s preview (exp. +215K):

    • We estimate that February nonfarm payrolls increased 215k in February, following +227k in January and compared to the three-month moving average of +183k. Reasons to expect a strong report include favorable weather effects, the strong hiring trends indicated in the ADP employment report, and a further drop in jobless claims to their lowest levels since the 1970s.
    • We estimate that the unemployment rate fell one tenth to 4.7%, driven by continued household employment growth and a potential pullback in the participation rate following last month’s 0.2pp rise. The January unemployment rate rose to 4.78% on an unrounded basis after hitting a cycle low of 4.65% in November. 
    • We also forecast average hourly earnings increased 0.3% month over month and 2.7% year over year, reflecting tightening labor markets and the continued impact of state-level minimum wage hikes.
    • Labor market indicators generally strengthened in February, with a drop in jobless claims to four-decade lows, an acceleration in ADP employment growth to its fastest pace in nearly three years, and improvement in the ISM services employment index to a 5-month high. We also believe unseasonably warm temperatures and minimal snowfall boosted job growth in weather-sensitive industries. On the negative side, we look for a 10-15k drag in the government sector from the federal hiring freeze implemented in late January (we forecast +225k for private payrolls). Additionally, we believe diminished labor market slack may exert upward pressure on wages and possibly some downward pressure on job growth in certain industries.
    • We estimate the unemployment rate fell one-tenth to 4.7%, driven by continued household employment growth and a potential pullback in the participation rate following last month’s 0.2pp rise. The January unemployment rate rose to 4.78% on an unrounded basis after hitting a cycle low of 4.65% in November.
    • Finally, we estimate average hourly earnings increased 0.3% month over month and 2.7% year over year, reflecting diminished labor market slack, firming wage growth, and the continued impact of January’s state-level minimum wage hikes, which affected 19 states and increased the effective national minimum wage by about $0.25 (to $8.50 per hour). In this context, we were surprised by the relatively muted wage growth in the January report (+0.1% mom), and we note the possibility of upward revisions or above-trend growth in tomorrow’s report.

  • "They're Erupting": Alaskan Volcano Throws Ash 35,000 Feet Interrupting Commercial Flights

    Via Mac Slavo of SHTFPlan.com,

    Volcanic eruption in Alaska’s Aleutian Islands as seen from ISS.

    Is a major seismic event headed our way?

    There is no way to know for sure, but science warns that hotspots like the San Andreas fault in Southern California are “overdue” for the big one, which frequently occurs every hundred years or so. If the earth doesn’t release enough steam from time to time, larger pressures can build up, creating event more catastrophic disasters.

    A volcano in Alaska’s Aleutian Islands has been erupting quite a bit lately – and has now had its biggest eruption so far in recent months, sending volcanic ash hurling some 35,000 feet into the air, high enough to disrupt commercial flights. That was the Bogoslof Volcano.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    It was a spectacular, if not unsettling event.

    Meanwhile, there was a new lava outbreak that was observed in Hawaii.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    It seems clear that things are heating up – they are beginning to erupt.

    Though things are not necessarily causally linked, there is often a chain of seismic disruptions that occur during a short span of time, and when things heat up in one part of, say, the Pacific Ring of Fire, things sometime explode elsewhere down the line.

    Could the intense three hour eruption at Bogoslof Volcano be a sign of bigger events to come? There is frequent seismic activity in the Aleutian Islands, to be sure, but there is also the sense of something immense building up from inside an angry earth.

    via RT:

    An Alaskan volcano experienced its largest eruption to date and created a large ash cloud. For the past several months, Bogoslof Volcano has had minor eruptions, but the most recent was its strongest, sending ashes 35,000 feet above sea level.

     

    Residents of the Aleutian Islands are under ash advisory …

     

    The spectacle lasted three hours and was marked by 200 lightning strikes, until it “just shut off,” according to Wallace. While the event did not disrupt air traffic, that may have been sheer luck. Any eruption above 20,000 feet can pose a risk to flights traveling between Asia and the US. In addition, Bogoslof could again erupt at any time.

    #Bogoslof volcanic ash cloud, 12:45 am March 8 ASKT. Cloud height >35K ft. Img by Dave Schneider, #USGS/AVO. https://t.co/YJkZa2ZT38 pic.twitter.com/FVE98ahxf8

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Are things heating up? Is something massive about to happen?

     

    Stay vigilant, have your preps and escape routes ready, and steady yourself for what may well be trying times ahead.

  • 31% Of College Students Spend Their Loans On Spring Break

    As Washington D.C. liberals continue their fight for ‘free’ college education for all (which, of course, is just a nicer way of saying largely useless community college education crammed down the throats of taxpayers) and student loan forgiveness programs, a new study from LendEDU reveals some of the shocking realities behind where college students are really spending their $1.3 trillion worth of student debt. 

    Per a survey of 500 college co-eds, LendEDU found that 31% of students, or roughly 2.4 million kids, admitted to using student loan money to fund their binge drinking trips to Cancun and Daytona Beach for spring break.

    According to the LendEDU poll, 30.60% of college students with student debt claim that they are using money they received from student loans to help pay for their spring break trip this year. For reference, you can use student loan funding for living expenses.

     

    The National Center for Education Statistics calculated that 20.5 million students will be attending college this year in the United States. Orbitz reported that 55% of students will be going on spring break. Using this data, we can roughly calculate that 11,275,000 students will be going on spring break this year. And, it is estimated that 69% of all current college students use student loan debt by the time of graduation. By doing some additional arithmetic, we can calculate that roughly 7,779,750 student debtors are going on spring break this year.

     

    Factoring in our data, and assuming the claims made in our survey are accurate, this means that 2.38 million students are using money received from student loans to pay for their spring break excursion this year.

    But don’t worry yourselves you silly taxpayers…it’s only $1.3 trillion (and counting) of debt that you’ll soon have to cover.

    Student Loan Debt

     

    Adding insult to injury, 24% of students admitted to using their student loan money for alcohol and 7% use those federally-subsidized checks for drugs.

    Nearly a quarter (23.80%) of respondents stated that they have used money received from student loans to pay for drinking some type of alcohol. This answer also included spending money at bars.

     

    A third (33.40%) of students answered that they have used money received from student loans to pay for clothing and other accessories.

     

    Similarly, the same amount (33.40%) of students said that they have used money received from student loans to pay for restaurants and take-out.

     

    6.60% of respondents responded saying that they have used money received from student loans to pay for drugs.

     

    Finally, 5.60% of students that participated in our survey stated that they used money received from student loans on gambling or sports betting.

    “Students should minimize their borrowing during their college years and live a sparse lifestyle — but no one wants to hear that when their fraternity brothers or sorority sisters are packing up to Cabo for the week,” said Greg McBride, chief financial analyst of Bankrate.com.  “It’s like putting spring break on a credit card, but this one is subsidized by taxpayers,” McBride added.

    Meanwhile, as we pointed out before (see “Obama Student Loan Foregiveness Plan To Cost Taxpayers $137 Billion, GAO Finds“), the GAO currently estimates that taxpayers will ultimately have to cover $137 billion of student loan debt outstanding…an obligation we’re certain will only grow over time.

    Student Loans

     

    So fight on, Bernie…and while you continue your crusade for “free college,” America’s entitled millennials will be laughing all the way to Cancun. 

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 9th March 2017

  • Are We Witnessing The Weirdest Moment In Economic History?

    Via Brandon Smith of Alt-Market.com,

    It is an unfortunate reality that most people tend to be oblivious to massive sea changes in geopolitics and economics. You would think that these events would catch the immediate attention of everyone as they happen, but usually it is not until they realize that the microcosm of their personal lives is subject to the consequences of the macrocosm that they wake up and take notice.

    There are, however, ways to train yourself to pick up on signals within the news cycle and within political and financial rhetoric; signals that indicate a great shift is perhaps on the way. Sometimes these initial signs are subtle, sometimes they are as subtle as a feminist slut-walk. I would point out that over the next few months there are dangerous correlations so numerous and blatant in the economic sphere that I would almost rather watch a marching gaggle of frumpy feminists wearing nothing but electrical tape than bear witness to the mayhem that is about to strike the unwitting public.

    What am I talking about? Well, let’s go through the list…

    Federal Reserve Meeting March 14-15th

    As my readers know well, I have been warning since before the election that the Fed would use a Trump presidency as an opportunity to pull the plug on near-zero interest rates and remove a primary pillar supporting stock markets — stock buybacks made possible by free overnight loans to numerous banks and corporations. Without QE and low interest rates the equities bubble will inevitably implode.

     

    Corporate earnings certainly aren’t holding up stocks, neither is GDP or consumer spending. The Fed is the only determining factor of the ongoing bull market. Anyone who claims otherwise is probably a mainstream analyst or overzealous day trader with a vested interest in keeping the illusion going.

     

    It is not surprising to me at all that the “rate hike odds” for March have been increased by mainstream analysts to 90% in the span of a week. I don’t know why anyone uses these arbitrary odds as an indicator of anything. I’ve been receiving emails all month asking me if I still believe the Fed will hike rates while the odds are “so low.” Look, the Fed does not make decisions at these meetings. They make decisions months in advance and the meetings are window dressing.

     

    Too many people operate under the delusion that the central bank wants to continue propping up stocks, which is why they cannot grasp why the Fed would raise rates. In reality, the stage has been perfectly set to allow the bubble to implode. When the elites have a perfect scapegoat, they use it, and conservative movements represent that perfect scapegoat today.

    The important thing to remember, though, is the timing of this particular meeting…

     

    U.S. Debt-Ceiling Suspension Ends March 15th

    So, in case you weren’t tracking the economic situation two years ago, the U.S. government almost went bust (in a sense) in 2015. The debt ceiling sets limits on how much the government can borrow to fund itself, and that limit was hit hard under the Obama administration after he managed to nearly double the national debt during his tenure. Congress passed legislation to allow borrowing to continue until March 2017, and of course, much of that capital was “borrowed” from the Federal Reserve, which, of course, creates it out of thin air. With the return of the debt ceiling, the question is — will Congress be able to extend and delay again? With Trump running on a platform of fiscal responsibility, CAN they extend again?  Do they even want to, or is this an engineered crisis event?

     

    Once again, the timing of all this is a little odd. The Fed is raising rates into the first year of the Trump presidency leaving equities increasingly open to destabilization. In addition, the government might not be able to continue borrowing from them, or there will be a renewed extension but the costs of borrowing will run much higher. In either case, this month seems to pronounce the beginning of something; a considerable move away from the standard operating procedures that the elites have been using for the past several years. With such changes come consequences, always.

     

    Formal Initiation Of Brexit On March 15th

    The skeptics have been telling me for months that even though I was right about the Brexit vote victory the elites “would never allow” the British to leave the EU. Well, it doesn’t look that way to me so far. Theresa May plans to formally notify the EU of British exit on March 15th triggering two years of negotiations which will undoubtedly send economic shock waves throughout the globe on a regular basis.

     

    Of course the Brexit will move forward! Why not? Globalists need a continuing atmosphere of crisis to distract the masses from their great global reset, and they need multiple scapegoats for the economic disaster that their reset will cause. Enter conservative movements in Europe; once again the perfect target to pin a crisis on.

     

    French Elections Start April 23rd, End May 7th

    Yet another election in which the EU hangs in the balance. Recent polls indicate that Marine Le Pen, the designated “populist" candidate, is falling behind. I have to ask, though, have we not learned our lesson yet on the meaninglessness of political polls? I think most of us have.

     

    I believe Le Pen will be one of the final two candidates to move on to the election in May, and though I am not as certain as I was on Brexit and Trump, I am going to go ahead and predict a Le Pen win. If there is any sizable terrorist event in the next couple of months in the EU, or expanded Muslim riots, she is a guaranteed win. This brings up the very real prospect of a “Frexit” in the near future, and analysts should expect that a Le Pen win will be met with some panic in the financial world.

     

    Potential Italian Election Move On April 30th

    The Italian political process is a little confusing to me, but what I can tell you is that this spring or early summer you will probably be hearing a lot more about it. Former Italian prime minister and current Italian Democratic Party leader Matteo Renzi is set to decide on a the date for a leadership vote, which may come as early as April 30th. The outcome of this vote will likely decide how soon the next official Italian election will take place.

     

    The election is required to be held before May 2018, but there is increasing pressure to hold elections in 2017, perhaps even this coming summer. I would not be at all shocked to see a surprise announcement of an early Italian election after the leadership vote is held.

     

    Why should anyone care? The consensus is that Renzi’s party will be overrun by anti-EU factions and that this may result in a kind of “Italiexit.” The outcome of Italy’s series of votes and political restructuring will have wide reaching effects on the psychology of the markets for many months to come.

     

    German Federal Election Held September 24th

    Yes, even Germany is quaking this year in the wake of a potential “populist” tsunami. Angela Merkel is exceedingly unloved by her own people lately as her approval ratings collapse. Once-silent sovereignty champions in the country are becoming more and more vocal about Merkel’s rather insane open immigration policies which were the key element that drew millions of Muslims into the EU. It was the German government’s promise of endless entitlement programs that created the incentive for the mass migration in the first place, and now, finally, the German people are fed up with the complete lack of cultural assimilation and what many see as the destruction of western values.

     

    I do not think that Germany will abandon the supranational concept of the EU regardless of the outcome of the election, but the removal of Merkel would signal a less agreeable Germany, which would exacerbate the already tottering European Union. Meaning more economic uncertainty in 2017.

    If You Thought 2016 Was Weird…

    If you thought 2016 was weird, I suggest you get comfortable with the surreal because it is not going away anytime soon. 2017 is a veritable treasure trove of falling elevators, and I haven’t even covered half of the issues facing the economy this year. But what about the macro-analysis?

    To summarize, it seems to me that many of these events, stacked so closely together, are not coincidental in their timing. As I have noted in articles such as The Economic End Game Explained, globalists have been openly planning for decades to set in motion a vast financial overhaul and the launch of a single global economy and currency (the seeds being planted starting in 2018). If this is still their timeline, then it would follow that they would need a series of fiscal earthquakes designed to shake up the “old world order” to make way for a “new world order.”

    Perhaps each of these events will result in a “stable” outcome and there is nothing to be concerned about. That said, I don’t believe in chance. Most geopolitical outcomes are influenced by internationalist players, which makes the outcomes of these events predictable. This is what made the Brexit predictable, and it is what made Trump’s victory predictable. Everything about the confluence of political and economic events in 2017 suggests to me a festering crisis atmosphere.

    As I have always said, economic collapse is a process, not a singular moment in time. This process lulls the masses into complacency. You can show them warning sign after warning sign, but most of them have no concept of what a collapse is. They are waiting for a cinematic moment of revelation, a financial explosion, when really, the whole disaster is happening in slow motion right under their noses. Economies do not explode, they drown as the water rises one inch at a time.

  • The Seven Stages to a Bear Market for Bonds – by Michael Carino

    We have just lived through the most spectacular global bull
    market run for the fixed income markets.  This bull market rallied the bond market to
    the lowest yields ever!  Over a third of
    all global fixed income was trading with a negative yield.  The most accommodative central bank policies
    made heroes out of bond fund managers. Bond investors that stayed fully
    invested with fingers crossed, hoping for the greater fool theory to eventually
    take them out of their overvalued position were rewarded handsomely.  These bond managers are now managing hundreds
    of billions in assets, have attained rock star status in the investment
    community and are living the life of Riley.  After such a spectacular run that has spanned
    a decade, most fixed income participants have never witnessed losses in their
    bond portfolios, never mind a bear market that lasts some time and delivers a
    good amount of pain.

    This recent back-up in yields has left many bond investors
    confused, nervous and unsure what to expect. Well, rest assured, I’m here to
    assist. After 25 years managing bond portfolios and trading trillions of
    dollars in the bond market, I believe I have perfected my timing model that identifies
    when a bond market selloff has run its course.

    This proprietary model stands out for being unique,
    intuitive and void of the quantitative modeling mistakes and biases.  The model is quite qualitative,
    psychologically driven and keys off the 7 stages of a bear market for bonds:

    Stage 1: Shock.  You
    can’t lose money in the bond market, right? 
    Wrong.  Losses from the recent
    bond market selloff will be staggering.  What has been significant double digit returns
    over the last decade has ended.  Yields
    have jumped higher and are still historically low.  Longer duration portfolios can be down over
    10% in the past couple of months.  Losses
    have materialized in the most liquid sectors and will eventually spread to less
    liquid bonds.  Many participants are
    dumbfounded, scratching various places but the itch doesn’t subside.  The market is at the end of this stage and
    there’s six more stages to travel.

    Stage 2: Pain and Remorse.  As bond managers and investors watch their
    bond portfolio decline in real time, the losses hurts.  But the real pain starts once these managers
    issue their clients statements and the bewildered clients look to the managers
    for answers.  This gut wrenching pain of
    disappointing investors and having a tangible negative impact on their beings
    is a visceral hurt.  These managers and
    investors realize they, not the markets, are the source of these losses.  There is an overwhelming feeling of guilt for
    these losses and that they were not, somehow, avoided.  Should these managers have told their
    investors large potential bond market losses compensated by little to no or
    negative yield probably wasn’t the soundest investment? Have you ever heard a
    manager say you’d be better off taking your money back? Bond yields continue to
    rise with no bounces.

    Stage 3: Anger and Bargaining.  Bond managers will get irate and phones will
    be broken. Misplaced anger for losses that are accumulating will keep managers
    and investors frozen, unwilling to cut their losses.  They start to talk about all the things they
    will do if markets reverse to limit their exposures.  Too late.  Everyone is making the same bargains.  This stage sees one last parabolic rise to
    higher bond yields impacting less liquid bond markets the most.

    Stage 4: Depression and reflection. As losses deepen, the
    market comes to the conclusion there is no bounce in bond prices.  The prior low yields reflected a mispricing in
    the market brought about by exorbitant enthusiasm.  Another financial bubble to go down in the
    history books.  Once confident and
    jubilant managers who knew no losses are reclusive, downtrodden and distant.  Being a mortal human as opposed to a bond
    managing deity is humbling.  Bond yields
    still grind higher and liquidity remains poor. There is a dearth of confidence.

    Stage 5: The Beginning of a New Beginning.  Depression starts to lessen and lucky shirts,
    ties, socks and rocks start to come out of the drawers and closets.  The flickering thoughts of a better future
    inside and outside of the financial markets begin to appear.  Could there be an end to this ugly chapter?  Bond yields are still inching higher and
    liquidity remains poor.

    Stage 6: Rebuilding & Reflection. New financial conferences
    on what went wrong in the bond market and how to avoid it in the future pop up
    globally and are fully attended.  Surviving
    bond managers, albeit with much smaller assets to manage, talk about the bear
    bond market and how obvious and avoidable it was.  Plans are bounced around for new strategies.
    Of course, these are strategies that learns from the past.  Volatility in bond yields has now dissipated
    and shallow rallies occur.

    Stage 7: Acceptance and a New Beginning.  Investors and managers agree that the bond
    strategies of the past were wrong and new strategies are implemented. Small
    amounts of money trickle in the markets. As profits start to materialize,
    confidence gets restored.  The first
    managers to show profits becomes known as the new and improved bond guru du
    jour.  The market has stabilized to a new
    range of yields and a normal amount of volatility.  Slowly, liquidity is returning encouraged by
    the beginning of positive reported earnings.  Stage 7 closes the bond market bear cycle and
    begins what I am sure will be the beginning of a new (and never to outdone by
    prior) bond bull market.

    Bond bull market dynamics have ended and bear market
    dynamics will be the norm for some time.  The over-subscribed quantitative, backwards
    looking models, high volume traders and bond investors that closed their eyes
    and played a fool’s game are now feeling pain and guilt.  They invested in the most overvalued market
    and were caught when the market turned.  It
    was like playing musical chairs and the music just stopped.  Tragically, there is a plethora of players and
    only one chair left.  Investors discarded
    fundamental value investing and pursued other flawed strategies for too long.
    They now must experience these seven stages before they can have closure for
    their missteps.

    The market is just entering stage 2. The most liquid sectors
    have come under intense pressure.  Less
    liquid bond managers are holding their breath with their fingers on the sell
    button looking for the first crack in their lofty prices.  If that button gets pressed, stage 2 will be
    in full swing. So buckle up.  As we
    travel down this long and windy bear market road for the bond market, it will
    have many bumps and a couple pot holes.

     

     

    Investment veteran and published author, Michael Carino,
    prophetically called the timing and amplitude of the recent move in global bond
    markets publishing “Global Bond Markets – Skydiving Without a Parachute.”  Michael has spent the last 25 years managing
    fixed-income hedge funds and trading of over a trillion dollars of investments.
     He is the CEO of Greenwich Endeavors, a
    financial service firm.  He feels
    compelled to get his unique and under-reported views on the markets out to the
    public.  It’s time a voice
    contrarian to other self-interested, behemoth Investment Managers’
    voices are heard.

  • Madame Almost President Snapchats to 'Stand Up and Resist', Plus Tucker vs Feminist Debate

    Hillary Clinton came out looking sharp this evening — donning a devil’s red toga and new bobbed haircut — telling her fellow sisters to ‘stand up and resist’ for planned parenthood and jobs etc.

    During tonight’s show with Tucker Carlson, he debated a young lady who was leading the ‘Day Without a Woman’ movement — which called for women to boycott WHITE MALE BUSINESSES ONLY. I know that sounds absurd, right? After all, if this is a women’s movement, why the fuck do chinese and black men get a pass on their boycotts? If this were a reasonable feminist movement, they’d say ‘fuck all men, equally’ (pun not intended) — instead of just the white ones. I will tell you now, this is NOT NICE! SAD!

    Regarding the stats she quoted, they’re based on stats provided by the World Economic Forum, which derives a score parsing through data regarding economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, health and survival and political empowerment. I do not pretend to be an expert on this subject matter. More importantly, I am not under the disillusionment like many of my male peers out there that America is a beacon of equality amongst races and gender. This country is fucked 10 ways ’till Sunday. Based on the stats provided by the World Economic Forum, the United States is ranked #45.

    We are ranked #1 in education for females, but when it comes to political empowerment, we’re on par with shitholes like Kazakhstan, Vietnam, China and UAE.

    The top 5 ranked nations are Iceland, Finland, Norway, Sweden, and Ireland. The rankings actually say Rwanda, but I’ve used my editorial powers to reject that horseshit — considering their educational attainment is ranked 110.

    The bottom 5 ranked nations are islamic hell holes, naturally: Yemen, Pakistan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Chad.

    Moral of the story? As advanced westerners, we should help spread the proliferation of women’s rights by IMPORTING REFUGEES FROM ALL OF THE WORST OFFENDING NATIONS IN THE WORLD, when it comes to women’s rights.

    (drops mic)

    Content originally generated at iBankCoin.com

     

  • Fed Ripples? Yuan Tumbles To 2017 Lows As Chinese Money Market Liquidity Dries Up (Again)

    In what could be the beginning of ripples from The Fed's jawboned 'certainty' of a March rate-hike, Chinese money market liquidity conditions appear to be drying up once again as overnight offshore yuan rates surge 142bps to one-month highs.

    Additionally,  1-week CNH Hibor +1.05 ppts to 4.53017%; and 1-month CNH Hibor +70bps to 4.9395%

     

    At the same, spot offshore Yuan rates have plunged to their lowest since January 4th's massive short squeeze.

     

    As it appears 2017 is Shangahi Accord Redux time – (China 'agrees' to weaken the Yuan against non-USD currencies, while "stabilizing" the Yuan against the USD… until that breaks)

     

    The question is – will a sudden renewed but of volatility in credit markets (high yield crashed this week), commodity markets (crude and copper collapse this week), emerging market stocks (tumbling), and now China money markets, be enough to stall a determined Fed, and crush their credibility once and for all?

  • Meet "Flippy", The Burger-Flipping 'Bot That CaliBurger Is Rolling Out In All Its Restaurants

    Dear Bernie Sanders, it is our great pleasure to introduce to you, “Flippy”, the burger-flipping robot that will soon replace all those fast food workers that you’re working so vehemently to get fired via your efforts to introduce artificially high $15 per hour minimum wage rates.

    “Flippy”, a robotic kitchen assistant, is the creation of Miso Robotics, an engineering firm specializing in “adaptable robotics” for commercial kitchens. Miso’s goal is to develop technology that can handle hazardous, tedious and time-sensitive aspects of cooking, from flipping burgers to frying chicken, cutting vegetables or final plating…in other words, all of the minimum wage restaurant jobs where employee costs just skyrocketed courtesy of economics-challenged politicians.

    Flippy

     

    Per Nation’s Restaurant News, ‘Flippy’ is no longer just a concept as it won its first major contract with CaliBurger which vowed to roll out the burger-flipping technology in all of its 50 global locations by the end of 2019.

    “The application of artificial intelligence to robotic systems that work next to our employees in CaliBurger restaurants will allow us to make food faster, safer and with fewer errors,” said Miller. “Our investment in Miso Robotics is part of our broader vision for creating a unified operating system that will control all aspects of a restaurant, from in-store interactive gaming entertainment, to automated ordering and cooking processes, ‘intelligent’ food delivery and real-time detection of operating errors and pathogens.”

     

    The chain declined to reveal the cost of Flippy, saying Miso Robotics is working with customers to determine the best pricing model.

     

    “The price will be in line with the productivity benefits Flippy provides to restaurant owners,” said a spokesperson.

    And while Caliburger declined to reveal the cost of “Flippy”, we’re going to go out on a limb and assume they wouldn’t be rolling out the technology unless they were getting a decent ROIC on their investment…just a hunch.

    Here are some videos of “Flippy” in action:

  • Caught On Tape: Democratic Congressman Admits The Party Stands For Absolutely Nothing

    Via Mike Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

    The problem very quickly became what Integral Metatheory calls a “legitimation crisis,” which it defines as a mismatch between Lower-Left (or cultural) beliefs and the Lower-Right systems (or actual background realities, such as the techno-economic base). The cultural belief was that everybody is created equal, that all people have a perfect and equal right to full personal empowerment, that nobody is intrinsically superior to others (beliefs that flourished with green). Yet the overwhelming reality was increasingly one of a stark and rapidly growing unequality—in terms of income and overall worth, property ownership, employment opportunity, healthcare access, life satisfaction issues. The culture was constantly telling us one thing, and the realities of society were consistently failing to deliver it—the culture was lying. This was a deep and serious legitimation crisis— a culture that is lying to its members simply cannot move forward for long. And if a culture has “no truth,” it has no idea when it’s lying—and thus it naturally lies as many times as it accidentally tells the truth, and hence faster than you can say “deconstruction,” it’s in the midst of a legitimation crisis.

     

    – From the post: How a Breakdown in Liberal Ideology Created Trump – Part 1

    My primary theme thus far in 2017, has centered around the observation that no constructive opposition to Trump currently exists in America. All we have from “the resistance” (corporate Democrats, corporate media and the deep state) thus far are endless conspiracy theories about Trump and Russia. This clownish opposition doesn’t actually stand for anything, and remains fully committed to continuing down the disastrous path we’ve been on this entire century. Simply being opposed to something isn’t going to cut it any longer, and there’s increasing evidence that the public is starting to catch on to the total fraud that is the establishment Democratic Party.

    Jimmy Dore does an excellent job exposing this sham in the following clip. Make sure to watch the entire thing, it gets better and better:

    Unless the Democratic Party begin to stand for something, it will remain dead opposition. If you want some evidence, just take a look at this incredible chart from The Huffington Post:

    As you can see, the real plunge happened right after the election when it became clear that Democratic leadership would remain in place, and rather than admit failure, began to harp non-stop on Russia conspiracy theories. This tactic clearly isn’t working.

    It’s not just the Huffington Post poll either, the evidence is everywhere. As Matt Stoller showed in a tweet earlier today.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    There’s a huge opening for a new political party in America. It’s low hanging fruit.

    I’m ready.

  • The NY Times Explains Why There Is So Much "Confusion" About Its "Trump Wiretapping" Story

    In the aftermath of the Trump accusation that Obama wiretapped his phone during the election, an allegation which the flagbearers of the “truthful” (according to their various advertising campaigns) anti-Trump media wave, namely the Washington Post and the New York Times have vehemently denied, an unexpected victim has emerged over the past few days: the New York Times itself.

    The reason is that while the NYT has repeatedly criticized and denied Trump’s allegation, it itself had written an article on January 19 titled, in the print version, “Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides’, and online “Intercepted Russian Communications Part of Inquiry Into Trump Associates“, by reporters Michael Schmidt and Michael Shear, which paradoxically corroborated much, if not all of what Trump himself said, and quotes the usual anonymous source who said that wiretapped communications had been provided to the White House” as part of an investigation into “the business dealings that some of the president-elect’s past and present advisers have had with Russia.

    So with various conservative blogs taking the NYT to task over this seeming contradiction, and even the WaPo’s own fact-checker seemingly confused…

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    … today the NYT’s public editor, Liz Spayd felt compelled to address its January 19 article which, implicitly, substantiated much of Trump’s allegation, and to explain why that’s not the case.

    She starts by saying that “Trump’s assertions, however overinflated, nonetheless echo certain aspects of The New York Times’s reporting from recent weeks. That, in turn, has allowed his administration to assert that the basis for his claims rests, in part, on reporting by The Times.”

    On the surface, there are similarities. Both The Times and Trump have referred to wiretaps. Both have referenced White House knowledge of the investigations. And both have described efforts by officials from the Obama administration to involve itself in the continuing investigations of Trump and Russia.

    Maybe Trump is not a completely raving lunatic after all. So where are the differences:

    For one, as The Times (and others) has made clear, these investigations have been conducted by the F.B.I., intelligence agencies and Congress, not by Obama himself. The Times has also said Obama administration officials sought to spread intelligence about a possible link between Trump and Russia to ensure a trail of evidence for investigators, but it said Obama himself was not involved. And no Times reporter has claimed that any warrants have been issued to spy on Trump or his associates.

    And there it is again: several months after we thought we would never again hear the old “Obama had no idea what was going on excuse”, it strikes yet again, only this time we find it very difficult to believe that Obama, who expanded the distributions of confidential NSA data to multiple offices just weeks before his final day in office, had no clue that Trump was being wiretapped.

    There’s more, and this is where things get delightfully Orwellian, because as Spayd “explains”, the confusion is really just a function of readers being confused because, well, it’s complicated:

    Distinguishing between Trump’s assertions and The Times’s reporting is essential. Yet readers at this juncture may be understandably confused on what is true and not in one of the most important ongoing news stories in the country.

    More details about this pervasive “confusion” fanned by none other than the NYT itself:

    Several readers have written in this week saying they’re having a hard time squaring The Times’s own past reports of wiretapping with the paper’s assertions that there is no firm evidence that any warrants for wiretaps have been issued. Readers also expressed confusion with The Times’s assertion that it would be illegal for a White House to receive information about such investigations, when its own wiretapping story in January said the Trump White House was given some information from intercepted communications.

     

    “For months now the NY Times and many other mainstream news sources has been running stories based on anonymous leaks saying that a massive investigation was going on into Trump and company’s Russian dealings based on wiretaps and intel intercepts,” wrote John Penley of Asheville, N.C. “Now Obama officials are saying this all never happened so my question is this: Why have the NY Times and others been saying it has for months now basing their stories on anonymous leaks?”

    So to eliminate the confusion, here is the NYT’s explanation of how the wiretapping of Trump and/or his associates, which eventually made its way to the White House – as per the NYT – didn’t really happen.

    I reached out to editors in the Washington bureau to seek their help in clarifying the difference between Clapper’s — and The Times’s — assertions that no warrants had been issued, and the reference to wiretapping in the January story.

     

    Elisabeth Bumiller, the bureau chief, said the January story was referring to information picked up from wiretaps and other intelligence collected overseas, a process that requires no warrants.

    Still confused? Don’t worry: the NYT even has a Q&A to help you out of your cognitive dissonance predicament”:

    There’s a lot to parse. And doing so, in a way that is clear to readers, is not easy when the subject matter is complicated and the information that reporters receive comes under strict terms of how it can be used. One reporter, Charlie Savage, produced a helpful Q. and A. explaining the law around wiretaps and key terms. But it didn’t try to show how Trump’s claims line up against The Times’s past reporting.

    Sarcasm aside, what the NYT’s long-winded explanation boils down to is that Trump’s inner circle was wiretapped, but the difference is whether Obama knew about it or not. And if anyone harbors any gullible thoughts that the president who lied to the public about his knowledge of Hillary’s email server – arguably the biggest fiasco of her presidential campaign – but is telling the truth when he says that he has no idea whatsoever that someone, somewhere was in fact wiretapping Trump as the NYT reports, then we wish you all the best as you click away on all the other NYT “Q&A”s to help you in your misery.

  • What The Hell Is Going On? – Part 2

    Via Jim Quinn of The Burning Platform blog,

    In Part One of this article I exposed the establishment narrative of a strong economy as rubbish by providing hard data regarding imploding gasoline usage, failing bricks and mortar retailers and plunging restaurant sales.

    “Inflation may indeed bring benefits for a short time to favored groups, but only at the expense of others. And in the long run it brings ruinous consequences to the whole community. Even a relatively mild inflation distorts the structure of production. It leads to the overexpansion of some industries at the expense of others. This involves a misapplication and waste of capital. When the inflation collapses, or is brought to a halt, the misdirected capital investment—whether in the form of machines, factories or office buildings—cannot yield an adequate return and loses the greater part of its value.Nor is it possible to bring inflation to a smooth and gentle stop, and so avert a subsequent depression.” – Henry Hazlitt – Economics in One Lesson

    Inflation is the opium of the masses. The establishment’s interest in dumbing down the masses through government controlled public school indoctrination couldn’t be clearer than examining the chart below. The average non-thinking, math challenged, iGadget distracted, media controlled pawn thinks their household income has risen by $6,000 since 2008 because they have no understanding of Fed created inflation.

    Even using the ridiculously downward manipulated CPI concoction shows the median household has lost ground. While median income has remained stagnant since 2000, the CPI is up 44%. Using honest inflation numbers would likely double that figure. Stagnant incomes with living costs 40% to 80% higher doesn’t exactly match the rhetoric of a strong economy being propagandized by the Deep State and their fake news media outlets.

    Even the BLS can’t hide the inflation ravaging middle class families and senior citizens on fixed incomes. And those fixed incomes are fixed at zero, as they get .20% on their savings and no increases in their Social Security payments. CPI is now 2.5% higher than one year ago, above the magic central banker 2% goal. It has been raging at an annualized 4.4% rate over the last three months. It is poised to go even higher in the next few months.

    Yellen and her intellectual yet idiot cohort of ego maniacal central banker brethren pretend they know the ideal rate of inflation to keep the economy running just right. See how well they’ve done since 1999, with two massive bubbles destroying the lives of millions and the mother of all bubbles (stocks, bonds, real estate) currently continuing to grow before it’s predictable incineration of wealth.

    The Big Lie about the need for inflation has been pounded into the heads of the weak minded by the Fed, Wall Street shysters, fake news media outlets, and TV entertainers disguised as journalists and financial experts. This country became a worldwide industrial power while sustaining mild deflationary conditions for almost two hundred years. It wasn’t until the birth of the welfare/warfare state in the 1960s when corrupt politicians and spineless central bankers decided they needed guns, butter, and entitlements.

    Closing the gold window in 1971 and allowing politicians to run up the national debt from $400 billion (34% of GDP) to $20 trillion (106% of GDP), while making $200 trillion of unfunded entitlement promises, has been the result. Total credit market debt has risen from $2 trillion in 1971 to over $65 trillion today. Total global debt has surpassed $217 trillion, or 325% of global GDP. The only way to make these disastrously horrible decisions seem palatable has been to produce inflation at prodigious levels in order to make the debt appear payable. It’s not.

    Inflation and its supposed benefits is an example of how the Deep State has perfected the teachings of master propagandist Edward Bernays.

    “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. …We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized.

    Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. …In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.” Edward Bernays – Propaganda – 1928

    Of course, the pliable public has been convinced government debt doesn’t matter because we owe it ourselves, or some such nonsense. They have also been convinced by Madison Avenue maggots and Wall Street shysters that luxury automobiles, McMansions, Rolex watches, 72 inch home theaters, iGadgets, and a myriad of other “essential” material possessions purchased with debt actually constitute wealth. Keeping up with the joneses has been brainwashed into the minds of the ignorant masses as their only true goal in life.

    The result is consumer credit of $3.8 trillion, the highest level in history. Since the 2008 financial crisis, created by the fraudulent issuance of mountains of subprime debt by Wall Street banks and stimulated by the easy money Fed, hundreds of billions of subprime student loan and auto debt have been dispensed to artificially boost GDP. This scheme was concocted by the Obama administration, Yellen, and their Wall Street puppeteers to bamboozle the public and temporarily jolt the economy. It failed.

    Over 25% of all student loans are in default. Six million Americans are delinquent on their auto loans. The taxpayer bailout when the student loan “crisis” suddenly hits will exceed $500 billion, as Obama has doled out loans to every functionally illiterate college wannabe in the nation. You’d think the payoff from doling out $700 billion in student loan debt would be more knowledgeable young people imbibed with the inspiration to change the world with their newfound intelligence and training.

    Nothing could be further from the truth. The $700 billion has produced illiterate, violent social justice warriors who despise free speech, can’t add, can’t write a sentence, and are virtually unemployable. But they are good at protesting, burning things, and being outraged by anyone they disagree with. This student loan debacle has been a purposeful scheme to artificially lower unemployment and provide the appearance of economic recovery, as the loan money has been used for iGadgets, booze, hookers and blow. Mission accomplished Obama!!

    http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2017/01/15/Student%20Car%20Loans.jpg

    “The most erroneous assumption is to the effect that the aim of public education is to fill the young of the species with knowledge and awaken their intelligence, and so make them fit to discharge the duties of citizenship in an enlightened and independent manner. Nothing could be further from the truth. The aim of public education is not to spread enlightenment at all; it is simply to reduce as many individuals as possible to the same safe level, to breed and train a standardized citizenry, to put down dissent and originality. That is its aim in the United States, whatever the pretensions of politicians, pedagogues and other such mountebanks, and that is its aim everywhere else.” –  H.L. Mencken

    The one area of consumer credit which has not reached its previous bubble peak is credit card debt. After Wall Street wrote off $300 billion (funded by taxpayer TARP funds) they began issuing credit cards like candy, again. But consumers have been slower to whip out the plastic like the pre-2008 days. That’s why bricks and mortar retailers have closed thousands of stores and ghost malls across suburbia are the norm.

    So it begs the question as to why credit card debt has increased by $160 billion (up 20%) since its 2010 low. The answer is simple when you take into account the stagnant wages and rising cost of living documented earlier. Credit card defaults are so low because they are the only thing sustaining millions of families across the country.

    In case you haven’t noticed, the purveyors of credit on Wall Street, out of the goodness of their evil black hearts (they’ve paid $321 billion in fines since 2008 without admitting guilt or having one executive jailed), have convinced every level of government, every utility company, landlords, and educational institutions to accept credit cards for payment. Before 2000, all these bills had to be paid with cash on hand.

    Now you can pay your IRS bill, real estate taxes, monthly cell phone bill, school tuition or rent (with outrageous fees) with a credit card at 15% interest. Nothing like turning a $2,500 real estate tax payment into a $4,000 real estate tax payment, over time. It’s the American way.

    Desperate households across the land aren’t clinging to guns and bibles. They’re clinging to credit cards as their only lifeline in this failing empire of debt, deception, and delusion. When the next inevitable financial crisis strikes “unexpectedly” and even the low paying, no benefits Obama jobs disappear, even their five credit cards won’t keep them from getting kicked out on the street again.

    This isn’t just my pessimistic doom persona rearing its ugly head. My ponderings are based on common sense, an honest assessment of the real situation in this country and an understanding of the ebbs and flows of history. H.L. Mencken had similar views on government and the American people during the last Fourth Turning.

    “In the present case it is a little inaccurate to say I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of common sense, common honesty and common decency. This makes me forever ineligible to any public office of trust or profit in the Republic. But I do not repine, for I am a subject of it only by force of arms.”H.L. Mencken

    Based on anecdotal and hard verifiable data, the average American family is in the midst of a recession, if not a depression. No amount of propaganda, misinformation, fake government data, or fake news can cover-up the facts. Donald Trump was elected president, not by misogynist, white, racist, xenophobes, but by families (men and women) who have been screwed over by the establishment for decades and left impoverished, hopeless, and depressed.

    He won the election because radicals like you and me decided to send a message to the arrogant, evil, globalist ruling class that we are mad as hell and aren’t going to take it anymore. Despair of the silent normal majority is what propelled Trump to victory. Choices have consequences.

    “History offers no guarantees. If America plunges into an era of depression or violence which by then has not lifted, we will likely look back on the 1990s as the decade when we valued all the wrong things and made all the wrong choices.” – Strauss & Howe – The Fourth Turning

    In Part Three of this article I will assess the early days of the Trump presidency, the full court press by the Deep State to bring him down, his unrealistic economic plans, and how our overvalued stock, bond and real estate markets will eventually crash, leading to the next leg down in this Fourth Turning.

  • New Poll Shows Hillary Favorability Sinking to All-Time Low As Trump Jumps

    After a recent speech at her alma mater, Wellesley College, Hillary Clinton was asked by a young snowflake what she would change about her 2016 campaign if she had it to do all over again, to which she quickly responded, “I’d win.”

    But while Hillary seems to be fairly optimistic after her staggering 2016 loss, a new poll from Suffolk University reveals that her ‘favorability’ ratings among registered voters have dipped to all-time lows at only 35%.

    As the Washington Post points out, Hillary’s decline is due to both Democrats and independents apparently souring on her. While 88% of Democrats and 32% of independents liked Clinton in October, today those numbers are down to 74% and 25%, respectively. Clearly, even some who voted for Clinton — she won 89% of Democrats’ votes and 42% of independents’ — don’t have as much affection for her as they did at the tail end of the election.

    Hillary

    And lest you think this is just a fake poll with a Republican “oversample” designed to make Hillary look bad, the details actually show a 2-point sampling advantage for Democrats.

    Adding insult to injury, apparently one white, female voter from the Mid-west didn’t even seem to know who Hillary Clinton is.

    Hillary

    The same poll, however, shows Trump — for the first time ever — in significantly better shape than Clinton with a 45% favorable rating among registered voters.

    Trump

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 8th March 2017

  • What The Hell Is Going On?

    Via Jim Quinn of The Burning Platform blog,

    “The older I grow, the more I distrust the familiar doctrine that age brings wisdom.” –  H.L. Mencken

     

    “The older I get the less I listen to what people say and the more I look at what they do.”Andrew Carnegie

    I’m 53 years old. The older I get the less sure I am about things I was sure about when I was 25 years old. I believed stocks for the long run was an unquestioned truth. I believed our economy was based on free market capitalism. I believed stock prices were based upon profits and cash flows. I believed a home was a place to live – not an investment. I believed the Catholic Church was run by good men doing good things. I believed journalists and the media were watchdogs working on behalf of the public. I believed our military was protecting our interests. I believed politicians legislated on behalf of the people. I believed the main purpose of bankers was to loan money to businesses and consumers in order to support economic growth. Boy, was I dumbass.

    My skeptical nature, reliance on data I’ve personally vetted, and judging our leaders based on what they have done versus what they say, has allowed me to escape the Matrix. I wasn’t truly awakened until I watched Bush, Cheney, Powell, the rest of the neo-con prevaricators and fake news mainstream media utilize propaganda to railroad Americans into a $6 trillion unnecessary war, resulting in 36,000 American casualties, the destruction of a country and the creation of thousands of new Muslim terrorists.

    I’ve spent the last fourteen years pushing back against the establishment narrative, documenting the fake data published by government apparatchiks, and trying to open the eyes of as many people as possible to the propaganda utilized by the Deep State to keep the ignorant masses dazed, confused and distracted. The country is in deep trouble because what the majority believe regarding the economy, politics, religion, and culture just ain’t so.

    “What gets us into trouble is not what we don’t know. It’s what we know for sure that just ain’t so.”Mark Twain

    Since the start of this year I’ve found myself in a mental funk. I’m tired of the lies. I’m tired of incessant media propaganda. I’m tired of politicians. I’m tired of economic experts. I’m tired of hucksters touting their “the end is near” tale to sell me something. I’m tired of faux mainstream media journalists and their whining about Trump being mean and threatening the First Amendment.

    They don’t know jack about the First Amendment, as they work for one of the six media conglomerates whose job it is to produce fake news supporting whatever narrative keeps their Deep State benefactors in power. Regurgitating lines written for them by corporate propagandists is not journalism and has absolutely no relationship to the First Amendment. Over the last decade the only place to find some truth has been the alternative media thriving on the uncensored internet. That’s why the establishment wants to regulate the internet.

    The fake news blitz by a Deep State, flailing about trying to retain their power and wealth, has reached frantic proportions. The left wingers, egged on by Obama and funded by Soros, hold increasingly inane protests with themes like: wear a vagina hat to support feminazis; hug an illegal immigrant; everyone I hate is a Nazi; and women take another day off and no one notices. The traitorous neo-con warmongers like McCain, Graham, and Kristol see their enormously profitable never ending global conflict agenda at risk. The military industrial complex needs enemies. The left wingers and neo-cons have joined forces to utilize the fake Russian election intervention propaganda in a last ditch desperate attempt to derail the Trump presidency before it starts.

    The relentlessness, bitterness, and blatant disregard for the truth exhibited by Trump’s vast array of opponents have made TV virtually unwatchable. I’ve found myself mentally checking out. Why waste mental energy debating hacks, mental midgets and paid trolls for the establishment? After spending years obliterating fake government statistics on a daily basis, I find continuing to do so is just mental masturbation with no ultimate satisfaction. Confronting left wingers and neo-cons is like wresting with a pig, you both get dirty and the pig likes it.

    I’ve always been an observer. I’ve been observing how certain both sides are regarding their positions on illegal immigration, Muslims, Russia, Obamacare, Supreme Court nominees, executive orders, jobs, taxes, climate change, school choice, oil pipelines the First Amendment, Second Amendment, the rule of law, and the Bill of Rights. I find it exhausting. We’re lost in a blizzard of lies. I’m not certain about anything. I will remain skeptical of everything uttered by all politicians, all government bureaucrats, all corporate executives, all central bankers, all media pundits, all religious leaders, all corporate paid journalists and especially Wall Street shysters.

    “Moral certainty is always a sign of cultural inferiority. The more uncivilized the man, the surer he is that he knows precisely what is right and what is wrong. All human progress, even in morals, has been the work of men who have doubted the current moral values, not of men who have whooped them up and tried to enforce them. The truly civilized man is always skeptical and tolerant, in this field as in all others. His culture is based on “I am not too sure.”H.L. Mencken

    The dissonance between what I have been observing and what is being flogged by the establishment mouthpieces in the corporate mainstream media has never been greater. Some of my observations are anecdotal, others are based on real unadulterated truthful data, a few are based on simple common sense and the rest are based on my understanding of what happens during Fourth Turnings.

    When you understand the cyclical nature of history you are not surprised when events lead to reactions among the masses which take the linear thinking status quo by complete surprise. The 2008 global financial implosion and the subsequent election of Donald J. Trump by the deplorable white silent majority completely blindsided the oblivious establishment, but were entirely predictable if you had studied previous Fourth Turnings throughout history.

    I’ve been making a horrific sixty mile round trip commute into Philly for the last ten years. The average daily commute has been about two hours, as the entire route has been under some sort of construction for the entire decade. A fantastic one way commute is forty five minutes. I regularly have ninety minute commutes, and I’ve experienced a few which breached the two hour mark. It became immediately evident to me something changed as this new year got under way. My morning and evening commute has been consistently in the forty-five minute range for the last two months. There are less cars and trucks on the road. The question is why?

    This only happened once before over the last decade – during the 2008/2009 recession. In a shocking correlation (especially for brain dead tax and spend liberals), when there are less jobs, there are less drivers on the roads going to work. I tried to think of other reasonable explanations for why traffic appeared to be contracting so dramatically. But lo and behold, certain data can’t be easily manipulated by the government. Gasoline demand is plunging, with the year over year trend crashing to levels last experienced during the 2001 recession. Gasoline demand was higher during the 2008/2009 crisis. Demand was higher when oil was over $100 per barrel. Based on this crash in gasoline demand, Goldman Sachs issued a report saying we should be in a recession.

    Total miles driven are dramatically slowing down. It’s not because of electric cars or fuel efficiency, as the vast majority of the 17.5 million vehicles being hawked to the math challenged driving public (using low payment leases and six year 0% loans) are pickups, SUVs, or luxury sedans. The Fed induced and subprime debt fueled frenzy of vehicle sales (aka long – term rentals) has seen vehicle sales skyrocket from 10 million in 2010 to an all-time high above 17.5 million in 2016, while auto loan debt has soared from $700 billion to over $1.1 trillion during this same time frame. The truthfulness of the 17.5 million sales number may be in question, as dealer lots are stuffed with record levels of inventory. With a record number of cars in the hands of consumers, how could gasoline usage and miles driven crash?

    Vehicle Sales

    More questions emerge to those with critical thinking skills. If the unemployment rate is really 4.8%, how could 40% of the employable population (102 million) not be working? This explains the lack of cars on the road during my commute. Obama and his minions jabber about the tremendous jobs recovery during his reign of error. In 2007 there were 122 million full-time workers among a working age population of 233 million, or 52.3%. After Obama’s eight year economic “recovery”, there are 125 million full-time workers among a working age population of 254 million, or 49.2%.

    We’ve added 3 million full-time jobs in the last 9 years, and the captured mainstream media touts this as a success story. The deceitfulness – it burns. When 125 million full-time workers, of which 22 million are non-producing government drones, have to support 102 million non-working Americans, most living on the dole, you have a financially unsustainable paradigm. Trump’s slogan should be Make Americans Get Off Their Fat Asses and Work Again.

    The explanation for the plunge in gasoline demand and miles driven is quite simple if you haven’t drunk the mainstream media kool-aid about the fantastic economy, low unemployment, and soaring consumer confidence. Americans drive their vehicles to work, to shop, and to eat out. Truckers are the backbone of our just in time big box retail society. If Americans are driving less, there are less people with jobs, less spending at bricks and mortar retailers, and fewer people eating out.

    If truckers are logging less miles, retailers are ordering less inventory, manufacturers are selling less widgets, and the economy is contracting. The entire economic improvement narrative is based on soft data about feelings from consumer confidence surveys and dozens of other easily manipulated surveys. Propagandists are experts at convincing clueless dolts it’s raining when their government is actually pissing down their backs.

    Despite government reports about expanding retail sales and strong holiday sales, real info from real retailers tells the true story. Major retailers have announced 1,500 store closings in the first two months of 2017, including:

    • JC Penney – 140 stores
    • Sears – 150 stores
    • Macy’s – 68 stores
    • HHGregg – 88 stores
    • The Limited – 250 stores
    • Abercrombie & Fitch – 60 stores
    • Wet Seal – 171 stores
    • CVS – 70 stores

    Kohl’s, Target, Macy’s, Sears, and dozens of other retailers reported awful holiday sales. Wal-Mart was lauded for generating a 1% comparable store sales increase. There is virtually no store expansion by large retail chains. During the 2000 to 2007 period these chains were each opening hundreds of new stores per year. We are in the midst of a long term retail contraction which is just picking up steam.

    The closure of these stores combined with rising interest rates are a toxic concoction for real estate mall developers. The Fed allowed them to extend and pretend for the last eight years. The jig is up. A wave of retail and mall bankruptcies is baked in the cake. The government reported retail sales growth is driven by Fed induced auto sales (leases and loans), home furnishing sales financed at 0% over five years, building materials stores offering 0% financing, Amazon and until recently restaurant and bar sales.

    Since I don’t go into malls or many retail establishments, and rarely eat at chain restaurants, my observations of retail and restaurant traffic are based on how full their parking lots are at peak hours. When the economy was in bubble mode prior to 2008, mall parking lots were jammed and you had a ninety minute  wait to get a seat at Outback or Olive Garden. Today, you can get a parking spot at a big box retailer near the front door on a Saturday afternoon.

    Malls are ghost towns, with Space Available as the hot new location. Except for peak dinner time on a Friday or Saturday (if then) there are no longer long waits to get a table at one of the struggling chain restaurants. We reached peak retail and peak overpriced restaurants a few years ago. The downward spiral, due to demographics, declining real income, and over-saturation, is irreversible.

    Image result for restaurant performance index

    As usual, with propaganda distributed by the government or industry organizations, they present a positive restaurant performance index based on false hope and delusional expectations. Restaurant chains like Applebees, Outback, Ruby Tuesday, Chilis, Buffalo Wild Wings and many other major chains have been reporting declining same restaurant sales. Industry comparable restaurant sales are lower than two years ago.

    Outback’s parent company announced it will close more than four dozen locations of Outback Steakhouse, Bonefish Grill, Carrabba’s Italian Grill and Fleming’s Prime Steakhouse. Ruby Tuesday is closing 100 locations. Despite government reports showing strong restaurant sales over the last eight years, annual traffic to U.S. restaurants has been flat or up just 1% since 2009, when there was a 2% drop in the wake of the Fed created financial crisis.

    The “increase” in sales was generated by price increases of 2% to 3% per year. Now these chains are paying the price for high prices, shitty food, and poor service from their college graduate millennial staff. With higher taxes, soaring Obamacare costs, student loan and auto loan debt up to their eyeballs, and low paying service jobs as their career, even clueless millennials have gotten a clue – they don’t have the money to eat out four times per week.

    Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows the majority of Americans have fallen further behind since 2009, with only the establishment and those leaching off the establishment profiting from the suffering of senior citizens and the former middle class. When real personal spending plummets at the highest rate since 2009, you just might be in the midst of a recession.

    As consumer confidence surveys, ISM surveys and Fed surveys provide fake news about consumer and corporate feelings about a glorious future, the hard data tells the truth. How could households feel confident when real median household income fell by $558 in December and is down by $529 year over year? How could Obama and his lapdogs in the mainstream media pontificate about the record economic recovery when real median income is 2% lower than it was nine years ago?

    How can anyone deny the average American household has been experiencing a depression since 2000, when real median household income is lower today than it was at the turn of the century? Do you think the lack of income growth over the last 17 years may have played a part in the deplorables electing Trump in November?

    The corporate fake news media will continue to produce the false narrative as directed by their Deep State employers. The credibility of journalists can be summed up in two pithy sentences by Hunter S. Thompson.

    “The press is a gang of cruel faggots. Journalism is not a profession or a trade. It is a cheap catch-all for fuckoffs and misfits—a false doorway to the backside of life, a filthy piss-ridden little hole nailed off by the building inspector, but just deep enough for a wino to curl up from the sidewalk and masturbate like a chimp in a zoo-cage.” – Hunter S. Thompson – Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas

    In Part Two of this article I’ll show how the Deep State/establishment/ruling class/status quo have utilized their mastery of propaganda techniques to convince the masses inflation and debt are beneficial to their interests and why Trump’s election is the pushback by a citizenry who are beginning to awake and are mad as hell.

  • 5 Dystopic Movies That Are Coming True Right Now

    From ‘border walls’ to ‘biometrics’ and from ‘economic collapse’ to the ‘surveillance state’, is life imitating art… or was it all a guidebook?

    As The Daily Sheeple’s Melissa Dykes notes, it’s actually kind of hard to watch some of these… things are hitting way too close to home these days.

  • Q&A: How Can I Stop My TV Spying On Me?

    Following today's publication, by WikiLeaks, of documents exposing the CIA's secret hacking program – describing tools that can turn a world of increasingly networked, camera- and microphone-equipped devices into eavesdroppers, AP's Frank Bajak answers the public's biggest questions. Bajak warns consumers, there's "not much you can do if you don't want to sacrifice the benefits of the device," but offers a silver-lining of sorts for the average joe, the "tools that appear to be targeted at specific people's (devices).. and many intrusion tools are for delivery via 'removable device'."

    Smart televisions and automobiles now have on-board computers and microphones, joining the ubiquitous smartphones, laptops and tablets that have had microphones and cameras as standard equipment for a decade. That the CIA has created tools to turn them into listening posts surprises no one in the security community.

    Q: HOW WORRIED SHOULD CONSUMERS BE?

    A: The intrusion tools highlighted by the leak do not appear to be instruments of mass surveillance. So, it's not as if everyone's TV or high-tech vehicle is at risk.

     

    "It's unsurprising, and also somewhat reassuring, that these are tools that appear to be targeted at specific people's (devices) by compromising the software on them — as opposed to tools that decrypt the encrypted traffic over the internet," said Matt Blaze, a University of Pennsylvania computer scientist.

     

    The exploits appear to emphasize targeted attacks, such as collecting keystrokes or silently activating a Samsung TV's microphone while the set is turned off. In fact, many of the intrusion tools described in the documents are for delivery via "removable device."

    Q: WHAT CAN BE DONE TO PREVENT A COMPROMISED INTERNET-CONNECTED DEVICE FROM COMMUNICATING WITH SPIES?

    A: Not much if you don't want to sacrifice the benefits of the device.

     

    "Anything that is voice-activated or that has voice- and internet-connected functionality is susceptible to these types of attacks," said Robert M. Lee, a former U.S. cyberwar operations officer and CEO of the cybersecurity company Dragos.

     

    That includes smart TVs and voice-controlled information devices like the Amazon Echo, which can read news, play music, close the garage door and turn up the thermostat. An Amazon Echo was enlisted as a potential witness in an Arkansas murder case.

     

    To ensure a connected device can't spy on you, unplug it from the grid and the internet and remove the batteries, if that's possible. Or perhaps don't buy it, especially if you don't especially require the networked features and the manufacturer hasn't proven careful on security.

     

    Security experts have found flaws in devices — like WiFi-enabled dolls — with embedded microphones and cameras.

    Q: I USE WHATSAPP AND SIGNAL FOR VOICE AND TEXT COMMUNICATION BECAUSE OF THEIR STRONG ENCRYPTION. CAN THE EXPLOITS DESCRIBED IN THE WIKILEAKS DOCUMENTS BREAK THEM?

    A: No. But exploits designed to infiltrate the operating system on your Android smartphone, iPhone, iPad or Windows-based computer can read your messages or listen in on conversations on the compromised device itself, though communications are encrypted in transit.

     

    "The bad news is that platform exploits are very powerful," Blaze tweeted. "The good news is that they have to target you in order to read your messages."

     

    He and other experts say reliably defending against a state-level adversary is all but impossible. And the CIA was planting microphones long before we became networked.

    Q: I'M NOT A HIGH-VALUE TARGET. BUT I STILL WANT TO PROTECT MYSELF. HOW?

    A: It may sound boring, but it's vital: Keep all your operating systems patched and up-to-date, and don't click links or open email attachments unless you are sure they are safe.

     

    There will always be exploits of which antivirus companies are not aware until it's too late. These are known as zero-day exploits because no patches are available and victims have zero time to prepare. The CIA, National Security Agency and plenty of other intelligence agencies purchase and develop them.

     

    But they don't come cheap. And most of us are hardly worth it.

    Source: AP

  • China Imports Spike As Lunar New Year Skew Creates Biggest Trade Deficit In 3 Years

    When the headline prints hit tonight on China's trade data, offshore Yuan dipped and ripped…

     

    As China faced its first trade deficit in 3 years (-$60bn vs +172.5bn exp)…

    Obviously there is some major seaonality…

    With imports exploding 44.7% YoY (and exports missing expectations dramatically +4.2% vs +14.6% exp). But it appears the economists forgot about this year's lunar new year holiday falling in January (vs Feb last year).

     

    As Bloomberg points out, the results were skewed because the week-long Lunar New Year holidays that shutter factories and ports across the nation occurred in February 2016 versus late January in 2017, distorting base year comparisons.

    Even though the specific data point is entirely worthless, we note that Imports from U.S. rose 41% to 163.5b yuan in Jan.-Feb., General Administration of Customs says in statement.

    For now it appears Bitcoin is suffering the most post-data (but this could be renewed selling pressure from this morning ahead of this weekend's ETF decision)

  • Hawaii To File Lawsuit Over Trump's New Travel Ban

    If Trump was harboring any hopes that his “new and revised” travel ban would sneak through unopposed, they were just dashed by the state in which Trump’s ex-presidential nemesis was born. 

    Just as the federal government said Washington state and Minnesota had consented to dismiss their cases before the U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco, Hawaii announced it plans to challenge Trump’s new travel ban, according to legal documents as well as tweets from one of the lawyers involved.

    “Here we go,” tweeted Hogan Lovells partner Neal Katyal Tuesday night, and one of Hawaii’s lead attorney. “Proud to stand w/State of Hawaii challenging Pres. Trump’s ‘new’ Executive Order issued yesterday.”

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “To be sure, the new executive order covers fewer people than the old one,” Katyal said in an interview with CNN. However, he added that the new order though still “suffers from the same constitutional and statutory defects.”

    The state will file its complaint and temporary restraining order in federal court by Wednesday, according to a document published on the website of the Hogan Lovells law firm, based in Washington.

    After Trump’s initial immigration order faced quick backlash, with protests breaking out across the country and many lawmakers speaking out against it, the president on Monday issued a new revised order on immigration which revised the original one by exempting green card holders, removing Iraq from the list of banned countries, and being phased in over a period of time. It still bans travelers from six mostly-Muslim countries from entering the United States for 90 days and bans all refugees from entering the country for 120 days.

    According to a briefing schedule set forth in documents filed in federal court by the state of Hawaii on Tuesday, the federal government will file its response by Monday and oral arguments would take place on March 15.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  • The Next Domino To Fall: Commercial Real Estate

    Via Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog,

    Unless the Federal Reserve intends to buy up every dead and dying mall in America, this is one crisis that the Fed can't bail out with a few digital keystrokes.

    Just as generals prepare to fight the last war, central banks prepare to battle the last financial crisis–which in the present context means a big-bank liquidity meltdown like the one that nearly toppled thr global financial system in 2008-09.

    Planning to win the next war by assuming it will be a copy of the last confict is an excellent strategy for losing the next war. The same holds true for the next financial crisis: reckoning that it will be a repeat of 2008 is an excellent way to be caught completely off-guard.

    Crises may rhyme, but they don't repeat. The next Global Financial Meltdown won't start in subprime mortgages–that sector has been wiped out, written down, or passed on to the poor tax-donkey taxpayers.

    The next crisis also won't arise on money-center banks, either. Central banks have figured out how to bail out the banks, and have rebuilt the bank balance sheets by stripping hundreds of billions of dollars in interest from savers.

    (Sorry, widows and orphans–your interest income had to be transferred to the big banks. We're sure you understand why the banks are more important than you are as you enjoy yet another meal of canned beans and saltine crackers.)

    The central banks and state treasuries around the globe may be confident they can bail out the banks, but what if the next domino to fall isn't a bank? What if it is a "safe, high yield asset" held by institutional owners such as pension funds, insurance companies and REITs (real estate investment trusts)?

    What if the next crisis isn't a spot of bother caused by excessive leverage, but a systemic collapse of collateral as an entire sector–retailers holding millions of square feet of bricks-and-mortar store space–falls off a cliff?

    Consider this chart of sky-high commercial real estate (CRE) valuations…

    and this photo of a decimated major mall…

    and this partial list of retail closures, some due to bankruptcy, others due to downsizing, and others that claim to be downsizing but are actually the initial stages of liquidation.

    Talk about an overvalued market set up for a fall. It isn't just malls becoming empty retail wastelands–it's Corporate America shifting to flex-work and work-at-home, slashing the need for floor after floor of costly business-park office space.

    It's about restaurants moving to smaller spaces as they move to serving more meals via delivery services.

    Commercial real estate is grossly overbuilt in retail and office space. Combine sky-high valuations with cratering demand and billions in short-term CRE loans that must be rolled over into new loans, and we don't have a liquidity crisis, we have a collateral crisis— the assets supporting the debt are no longer worth the loan balance.

    Unless the Federal Reserve intends to buy up every dead and dying mall in America, this is one crisis that the Fed can't bail out with a few digital keystrokes. Gordon T. Long and I discuss this brewing crisis and its potentially devastating consequences in our program Is Retail CRE The Next Financial Implosion? (YouTube)(34:12).

  • If You Think Your Job Is One That Cannot Be Automated, You're In For A Rude Awakening

    Via Duane of FreeMarketShooter.com,

    It is pretty accepted knowledge that a number of lower-skilled jobs will disappear in the coming 5-10 years, due to the human element being replaced by autonomous machines. 

    One of the most at-risk professions is that of Truck Driver, which as 13D Research points out, is one of the no.1 reasons you rarely (if ever) hear President Trump discuss automation in the workplace:

    A widely circulated NPR graphic shows “truck driver” was the most common job in more than half of the U.S. states in 2014?—?in part because how the Bureau of Labor Statistics sorts common jobs, such as educators, into small groups. Indeed, truck driving is one of the last jobs standing that affords good pay (median salary for tractor-trailer drivers, $40,206) and does not require a college degree. According to the American Trucking Association, there are 3.5 million professional truck drivers in the U.S. Entire businesses (think restaurants and motels) and hundreds of small communities, supporting an additional 5.2 million people, have been built around serving truckers crisscrossing the nation. That’s 8.7 million trucking-related jobs. It also represents one of Trump’s most important voting blocs?—?working-class men.

    And while it may be further out on the timeline, if you think your job requires a higher, special element of skill and mental acuity that just cannot be automated, you are probably very mistaken.  In fact, there are few (if any) jobs in which a machine would be inferior to a person.  And this is not as far out in the future as you may think.

    Just imagine, how Truck Drivers would have reacted if ten years ago, you told them that they would be at risk of being replaced by a machine?  And this isn’t some far-off vision of the future… it is happening now:

    But like many of the blue-collar jobs the President promised to save during his campaign, the future of these 3.5 million trucking jobs is less than certain. Fully automated trucks could put half of America’s truckers out of a job within a decade, The Los Angeles Times reported last year. This isn’t an imagined future. It’s already happening. Otto, an automated trucking company acquired by Uber, made a delivery of beer last year and has been approved to travel two routes in Ohio.

     

    Last year, Noel Perry, an analyst at industry research firm FTR Transportation Intelligence, told The International Business Times: “Despite a shortage in high-quality drivers, pay hasn’t gone up in five years. Trucks are easier to drive.” So-called “soft-automation” features, like automatic braking and lane assist, mean the trucks can already be driven by less experienced operators commanding smaller salaries. Even ahead of automation, the profession is losing traction. Perry’s final remark to IBT strikes to the heart of the matter?—?“The free market produces jobs, the government doesn’t.”

    Now imagine, telling lower level lawyers, doctors, programmers, accountants, etc, that their jobs are at risk now.  While many people would scoff at the notion, they are likely the same people who scoffed at the notion of trucks being automated ten years ago.  Denis Sproten explained a lot of the history and future of automation of labor recently:

    A short introduction, first there were the luddites, destroying machinery, which automated mundane tasks. People tell us, we should be happy that we don’t need to do these anymore. This is all history, from which we moved on:

    • Working the fields / weaving: Let’s assume that required a machine with IQ 80 or MIQ of 80, production increased and more products were sold on markets, consumption increased, transportation was needed and distribution of goods into shops. More roads were needed etc, we found a replacement occupation in the next layer.
    • Working as a driver / service industry : assume it requires a machine of IQ 100-110, more complex tasks, product knowledge, navigation, forms to be filled, start of knowledge industry. These jobs are being replaced now as we get automated trucks, drones delivering, online shops replacing shops on the street.
    • Working in an office Knowledge Industry : assume it requires an IQ of 100-120, even more complex tasks, which involve creation of new products, design, programming, lawyers, accountants, doctors etc. We are not there yet, but we soon will have AI which can do basic tasks of doctors, writing news articles, design thinking, algorithms which categorise knowledge and lets you search it.

     

    People are being pushed to become Data Scientists, AI programmers, math geniuses writing algorithms, all jobs which likely require an IQ of 130+. Programs can now write music and are starting to be creative.

     

     

    The trend I see is that, yes we will be able to find new jobs, but they will require really highly intelligent people, which covers only a small percentage of the population, no matter how much education they have received. Maybe becoming cyborgs will be the answer, if we believe Elon Musk.

    More “intelligent” machines below the scale of a true “A.I.” means a growing number of jobs will be “outsourced” to machines, and they will never be coming back.  Even now, you likely find yourself with less reason to visit the doctor, because you can just go on WebMD and see if there is a simple solution to what ails you.  Imagine that function being extrapolated across a series of machines at the basic level of medicine, to serve your needs for more common medical questions/issues.  Wouldn’t that eliminate the need for a significant number of medical professionals?

    Medicine is just one example, because truly nothing is off limits.  “Humans Need Not Apply” explained this masterfully over two years ago – if you think your job is “safe” because “a machine could never do it,” you better think again.

    (Note: This video is 15 minutes long, and while I’m hesitant to post lengthy videos, since the attention span of viewers for short clips drops significantly after one minute, you may reconsider your job security after seeing this one.)

    All of this is a precursor to a topic I plan on discussing in the future – not if, but when, a machine is created that is as capable (or more likely, far superior to and more capable than) as a human being.  What will that machine look like and be capable of?  How will it view and process the existence of humans, and/or threat human beings pose to its own existence?  It is something you have seen in many sci-fi movies, and discussed by many billionaire business moguls and scientists.  Still, there are many aspects of A.I. that have not been touched on by the ongoing discussion, mostly related to how a machine would react, knowing that it is superior to its human creators.

    In the meantime, while the machines created today and in the near future might not be more capable than their human creators, they are going to become exceedingly efficient at the jobs they are built to do.  And one of those jobs a machine might replace, is yours.  Whether this is something that a politician is willing to discuss or not, you should think long and hard about what it will take for a machine to replace you in the workplace, and what you will do with your life if that happens to you while you’re still in your working years.

  • Snowden: What The Wikileaks Revelations Show Is "Reckless Beyond Words"

    While it has been superficially covered by much of the press – and one can make the argument that what Julian Assange has revealed is more relevant to the US population, than constant and so far unconfirmed speculation that Trump is a puppet of Putin – the fallout from the Wikileaks’ “Vault 7” release this morning of thousands of documents demonstrating the extent to which the CIA uses backdoors to hack smartphones, computer operating systems, messenger applications and internet-connected televisions, will be profound.

    As evidence of this, the WSJ cites an intelligence source who said that “the revelations were far more significant than the leaks of Edward Snowden.”

    Mr. Snowden’s leaks revealed names of programs, companies that assist the NSA in surveillance and in some cases the targets of American spying. But the recent leak purports to contain highly technical details about how surveillance is carried out. That would make them far more revealing and useful to an adversary, this person said. In one sense, Mr. Snowden provided a briefing book on U.S. surveillance, but the CIA leaks could provide the blueprints.

    Speaking of Snowden, the former NSA contractor-turned-whistleblower, who now appears to have a “parallel whisteblower” deep inside the “Deep State”, i.e., the source of the Wikileaks data – also had some thoughts on today’s CIA dump.

    In a series of tweets, Snowden notes that “what @Wikileaks has here is genuinely a big deal”, and makes the following key observations “If you’re writing about the CIA/@Wikileaks story, here’s the big deal: first public evidence USG secretly paying to keep US software unsafe” and adds that “the CIA reports show the USG developing vulnerabilities in US products, then intentionally keeping the holes open. Reckless beyond words.”

    He then asks rhetorically “Why is this dangerous?” and explains “Because until closed, any hacker can use the security hole the CIA left open to break into any iPhone in the world.

    His conclusion, one which many of the so-called conspiratorial bent would say was well-known long ago: “Evidence mounts showing CIA & FBI knew about catastrophic weaknesses in the most-used smartphones in America, but kept them open — to spy.

    To which the increasingly prevalent response has become: “obviously.”

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  • Only In Cali – Strip Poker Playing Ex-Mayor Stole Money From Kids Programs To Fund Filipino Fetish

    Last summer we wrote about the arrest of Stockton, California’s mayor, Anthony Silva, after an FBI investigation resulted in charges of playing strip poker and providing alcohol to minors at a youth camp he ran for impoverished children (see “Politicians Gone Wild: Underage Strip Poker, Meth For Sex, & White Males Need Not Apply“).

    As if that weren’t bad enough, Silva is back in the news today after once again being arrested at the San Francisco International Airport on a whole new slate of charges including embezzlement, money laundering and grand theft with aggravated white collar crime enhancements.

    Charges were brought by the San Joaquin District Attorney and allege that between 2010 and 2014 Silva stole “hundreds of thousands of dollars” from the Boys and Girls Club of Stockton through a variety of embezzlement schemes.  That said, the depth of the embezzlement is still unknown as the DA is reviewing a total of $2.7 million that flowed out of Club accounts over the four year period in question. Per ABC 10:

    The DA alleges in the six felony counts, from January 1, 2010 to February 24, 2014, Silva defrauded and ripped off hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Stockton Kids Club.

     

    They allege he pocketed the cash into his own personal bank account, taking control of Kids Club bank accounts and credit cards.

     

    The DA said $2.7 million in a three year period flowed out of the Kids Club accounts in the form of “at best” 50,000 checks.

     

    “How and where it went, we don’t know,” Deputy DA Robert Himelblau said.

    So what did Silva spend the money on?  Well, apparently a good portion of the funds went to cover several trips to the Philippines as well as the monthly dues associated with an online dating website called “filipinocupid.com” and numerous stays at his local Motel 6.  We assume his Motel 6 stays were funded by the hour which helped to preserve at least some cash for the poor kids of Stockton.

    “He destroyed 45 years of good work at the Boys & Girls Club, a well-respected and heavily endowed institution for his own personal, ill gotten gains,” District Attorney Tori Verber Salazar said.

     

    Silva allegedly used the cash on dating website filipinocupid.com. He also allegedly used the money on trips to the Philippines, South Lake Tahoe, Motel 6 and Best Buy.

     

    Silva is also accused of what Himelblau called “double dipping.” He explained employees who work at the Stockton Kids Club are paid by the Stockton Unified School District.

     

    But, Himelblau said evidence was found that Silva also pocketed grant money given to the Kids Club by the national Boys & Girls Club.

     

    “Then what Mr. Silva did was create a duplicate set of time cards and submitted them to the national Boys & Girl Club. That’s the double dipping scheme. Those are the documents Mr. Silva signed saying he would not receive reimbursement for duplicate services,” Himelblau said

    Silva plead not guilty to all 6 charges and is currently being detained on a $1 million bail. 

    It’s no wonder that TV ratings are in the tank…it’s almost impossible to make up content salacious enough to compete with reality.

     

    http://interactive.tegna-media.com/video/embed/embed.html?id=2531501&type=video&title=Anthony%20Silva%20pleads%20'not%20guilty'%20to%20financial%20crimes&site=103&playerid=6918249996581&dfpid=32805352&dfpposition=Video_prestream_external§ion=home

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 7th March 2017

  • The Government Is The Enemy Of Freedom

    Via John Whitehead of The Rutherford Institute,

    “Rights aren’t rights if someone can take them away. They’re privileges. That’s all we’ve ever had in this country, is a bill of temporary privileges. And if you read the news even badly, you know that every year the list gets shorter and shorter. Sooner or later, the people in this country are gonna realize the government … doesn’t care about you, or your children, or your rights, or your welfare or your safety… It’s interested in its own power. That’s the only thing. Keeping it and expanding it wherever possible.” – George Carlin

    My friends, we’re being played for fools.

    On paper, we may be technically free.

    In reality, however, we are only as free as a government official may allow.

    We only think we live in a constitutional republic, governed by just laws created for our benefit.

    Truth be told, we live in a dictatorship disguised as a democracy where all that we own, all that we earn, all that we say and do—our very lives—depends on the benevolence of government agents and corporate shareholders for whom profit and power will always trump principle. And now the government is litigating and legislating its way into a new framework where the dictates of petty bureaucrats carry greater weight than the inalienable rights of the citizenry.

    We’re in trouble, folks.

    Freedom no longer means what it once did.

    This holds true whether you’re talking about the right to criticize the government in word or deed, the right to be free from government surveillance, the right to not have your person or your property subjected to warrantless searches by government agents, the right to due process, the right to be safe from soldiers invading your home, the right to be innocent until proven guilty and every other right that once reinforced the founders’ belief that this would be “a government of the people, by the people and for the people.”

    Not only do we no longer have dominion over our bodies, our families, our property and our lives, but the government continues to chip away at what few rights we still have to speak freely and think for ourselves.

    If the government can control speech, it can control thought and, in turn, it can control the minds of the citizenry.

    The unspoken freedom enshrined in the First Amendment is the right to think freely and openly debate issues without being muzzled or treated like a criminal.

    In other words, if we no longer have the right to tell a Census Worker to get off our property, if we no longer have the right to tell a police officer to get a search warrant before they dare to walk through our door, if we no longer have the right to stand in front of the Supreme Court wearing a protest sign or approach an elected representative to share our views, if we no longer have the right to protest unjust laws by voicing our opinions in public or on our clothing or before a legislative body—no matter how misogynistic, hateful, prejudiced, intolerant, misguided or politically incorrect they might be—then we do not have free speech.

    What we have instead is regulated, controlled speech, and that’s a whole other ballgame.

    Protest laws, free speech zones, bubble zones, trespass zones, anti-bullying legislation, zero tolerance policies, hate crime laws and a host of other legalistic maladies dreamed up by politicians and prosecutors are conspiring to corrode our core freedoms purportedly for our own good.

    For instance, the protest laws being introduced across the country—in 18 states so far—are supposedly in the name of “public safety and limiting economic damage.”

    Don’t fall for it.

    No matter how you package these laws, no matter how well-meaning they may sound, no matter how much you may disagree with the protesters or sympathize with the objects of the protest, these proposed laws are aimed at one thing only: discouraging dissent.

    In Arizona, police would be permitted to seize the assets of anyone involved in a protest that at some point becomes violent.

    In Minnesota, protesters would be forced to pay for the cost of having police on hand to “police” demonstrations.

    Oregon lawmakers want to “require public community colleges and universities to expel any student convicted of participating in a violent riot.”

    A proposed North Dakota law would give drivers the green light to “accidentally” run over protesters who are blocking a public roadway. Florida and Tennessee are entertaining similar laws.

    Pushing back against what it refers to as “economic terrorism,” Washington wants to increase penalties for protesters who block access to highways and railways.

    Anticipating protests over the Keystone Pipeline, South Dakota wants to apply the governor’s emergency response authority to potentially destructive protests, create new trespassing penalties and make it a crime to obstruct highways.

    In Iowa, protesters who block highways with speeds posted above 55 mph could spend five years in prison, plus a fine of up to $7,500. Obstruct traffic in Mississippi and you could be facing a $10,000 fine and a five-year prison sentence.

    A North Carolina law would make it a crime to heckle state officials. Under this law, shouting at a former governor would constitute a crime.

    Indiana lawmakers wanted to authorize police to use “any means necessary” to breakup mass gatherings that block traffic. That legislation has since been amended to merely empower police to issue fines for such behavior.

    Georgia is proposing harsh penalties and mandatory sentencing laws for those who obstruct public passages or throw bodily fluids on “public safety officers.”

    Virginia wants to subject protesters who engage in an “unlawful assembly” after “having been lawfully warned to disperse” with up to a year of jail time and a fine of up to $2,500.

    Missouri wants to make it illegal for anyone participating in an “unlawful assembly” to intentionally conceal “his or her identity by the means of a robe, mask, or other disguise.”

    Colorado wants to lock up protesters for up to 18 months who obstruct or tamper with oil and gas equipment and charge them with up to $100,000 in fines.

    Oklahoma wants to create a sliding scale for protesters whose actions impact or impede critical infrastructure. The penalties would range from $1,000 and six months in a county jail to $100,000 and up to 10 years in prison. And if you’re part of an organization, that fine goes as high as $1,000,000.

    Michigan hopes to make it easier for courts to shut down “mass picketing” demonstrations and fine protesters who block entrances to businesses, private residences or roadways up to $1,000 a day. That fine jumps to $10,000 a day for unions or other organizing groups.

    Ask yourself: if there are already laws on the books in all of the states that address criminal or illegal behavior such as blocking public roadways or trespassing on private property—because such laws are already on the books—then why does the government need to pass laws criminalizing activities that are already outlawed?

    What’s really going on here?

    No matter what the politicians might say, the government doesn’t care about our rights, our welfare or our safety.

    How many times will we keep falling for the same tricks?

    Every despotic measure used to control us and make us cower and fear and comply with the government’s dictates has been packaged as being for our benefit, while in truth benefiting only those who stand to profit, financially or otherwise, from the government’s transformation of the citizenry into a criminal class.

    Remember, the Patriot Act didn’t make us safer. It simply turned American citizens into suspects and, in the process, gave rise to an entire industry—private and governmental—whose profit depends on its ability to undermine our Fourth Amendment rights.

    Placing TSA agents in our nation’s airports didn’t make us safer. It simply subjected Americans to invasive groping, ogling and bodily searches by government agents. Now the TSA plans to subject travelers to even more “comprehensive” patdowns.

    So, too, these protest laws are not about protecting the economy or private property or public roads. Rather, they are intended to muzzle discontent and discourage anyone from challenging government authority.

    These laws are the shot across the bow.

    They’re intended to send a strong message that in the American police state, you’re either a patriot who marches in lockstep with the government’s dictates or you’re a pariah, a suspect, a criminal, a troublemaker, a terrorist, a radical, a revolutionary.

    Yet by muzzling the citizenry, by removing the constitutional steam valves that allow people to speak their minds, air their grievances and contribute to a larger dialogue that hopefully results in a more just world, the government is deliberately stirring the pot, creating a climate in which violence becomes inevitable.

    When there is no steam valve—when there is no one to hear what the people have to say, because government representatives have removed themselves so far from their constituents—then frustration builds, anger grows and people become more volatile and desperate to force a conversation.

    Then again, perhaps that was the government’s plan all along.

    As John F. Kennedy warned in March 1962, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”

    The government is making violent revolution inevitable.

    How do you lock down a nation?

    You sow discontent and fear among the populace. You terrorize the people into believing that radicalized foreigners are preparing to invade. You teach them to be non-thinkers who passively accept whatever is told them, whether it’s delivered by way of the corporate media or a government handler. You brainwash them into believing that everything the government does is for their good and anyone who opposes the government is an enemy. You acclimate them to a state of martial law, carried out by soldiers disguised as police officers but bearing the weapons of war. You polarize them so that they can never unite and stand united against the government. You create a climate in which silence is golden and those who speak up are shouted down. You spread propaganda and lies. You package the police state in the rhetoric of politicians.

    And then, when and if the people finally wake up to the fact that the government is not and has never been their friend, when it’s too late for peaceful protests and violence is all that remains to them as a recourse against tyranny, you use all of the tools you’ve been so carefully amassing—the criminal databases and surveillance and identification systems and private prisons and protest laws—and you shut them down for good.

    As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, once a government assumes power—unconstitutional or not—it does not relinquish it. The militarized police are not going to stand down. The NSA will continue to collect electronic files on everything we do. More and more Americans are going to face jail time for offenses that prior generations did not concern themselves with.

    The government—at all levels—could crack down on virtually anyone at any time.

    Martin Luther King saw it coming: both the “spontaneous explosion of anger by various citizen groups” and the ensuing crackdown by the government.

    “Police, national guard and other armed bodies are feverously preparing for repression,” King wrote shortly before he was assassinated. “They can be curbed not by unorganized resort to force…but only by a massive wave of militant nonviolence….It also may be the instrument of our national salvation.”

    Militant nonviolent resistance.

    “A nationwide nonviolent movement is very important,” King wrote. “We know from past experience that Congress and the President won’t do anything until you develop a movement around which people of goodwill can find a way to put pressure on them… This means making the movement powerful enough, dramatic enough, morally appealing enough, so that people of goodwill, the churches, laborers, liberals, intellectuals, students, poor people themselves begin to put pressure on congressmen to the point that they can no longer elude our demands.

    “It must be militant, massive nonviolence,” King emphasized.

    In other words, besides marches and protests, there would have to be civil disobedience. Civil disobedience forces the government to expend energy in many directions, especially if it is nonviolent, organized and is conducted on a massive scale. This is, as King knew, the only way to move the beast. It is the way to effect change without resorting to violence. And it is exactly what these protest laws are attempting to discourage

    We are coming to a crossroads. Either we gather together now and attempt to restore freedom or all will be lost. As King cautioned, “everywhere, ‘time is winding up,’ in the words of one of our spirituals, corruption in the land, people take your stand; time is winding up.”

  • Prisoners Explain Why A Pack Of Mackerel Is The Gold Standard Of Currencies In America's Prisons

    In 2004, the U.S. banned cigarettes in all federal prisons and it was pretty much the best thing that could have happened to the packaged mackerel industry (yes, you read that correctly…the packaged fish).

    So how did a smelly package of fish become the gold standard of America’s federal prisons?  Well, for a variety of reasons (we’ll let your imagination run wild) prisoners are not allowed to possess actual currency.  Up until 2004, they used cigarettes as their currency of choice to purchase anything from illicit goods such as stolen food and home-brewed “prison hooch,” as well as services, such as shoeshines and cell cleanings.  But once cigarettes were banned, prisoners needed a replacement currency and the ‘mack’ was deemed to be the best choice because it was worth roughly $1 at the commissary and pretty much no one wanted to eat it.

    As one prisoner notes in the Wall & Broadcast video below, the ‘mack’ was also “inherently inflationary” because its supply was limited to 14 macks per week per inmate….

    “Mackerel had utility because it was inherently inflationary.  A certain amount of macks came into circulation every day.  Every inmate can only buy 14 mackerels per week.  14 times 500 inmates time 52 weeks is the amount of mackerels that are coming into circulation every year and that’s why it was a pretty good stable value of currency.”

     

    “The reasons mackerel had value is because inmates believed it had value.  Perfect example of that was mackerels expire after three years. But, people didn’t jut throw them away, these became known as “money macks” and retained 75% of the value of “eating macks” because people believed that they still had value and they were still being used in transactions.”

    …that is at least until prison guards confiscated a massive supply of macks from one prisoner and essentially flooded the market creating a hyper-inflationary environment.

    “I’ll never forget the day where the macks lost all their value almost overnight.  Someone had a huge amount of money macks and they got confiscated and the administration left them sitting in a bucket.  They essentially introduced hyperinflation.  They flooded the market with money macks.”

    Perhaps Yellen & Co. could learn a thing or two from this lesson in prison economics.

  • US Begins Deployment Of Controversial THAAD Anti-Missile System To South Korea

    Well that escalated quickly. Just a day after North Korea's test firing of 4 missiles towards US bases in Japan, and hours after North Korea warned the world was "on the brink of nuclear war" due to US-South Korea "maneuvers," CNN reports the first pieces of the controversial US-built missile defense system (designed to mitigate the threat of North Korean missiles) arrived at the Osan Air Base in South Korea Monday night, according to the US military.

    The decision in January to deploy the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile system, had angered both Russian and Chinese officials:

    "We think the US-South Korean decision to deploy the THAAD missile defense system has seriously threatened China's security interest. For the region, it will also break the strategic balance. So it's completely understandable to see countries in the region firmly oppose this decision," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said. "China and other countries have to address our own legitimate security concerns and take necessary measures to safeguard our security interest."

     

    "Deployment of US missile defense systems in South Korea clearly goes beyond the tasks of deterring 'the North Korean threat,'" Russian Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov said in October, according to Russian state-run Tass news agency.

    And now – dramatically faster than expected – the deployment has begun.

    Some equipments including 2 launch pads for U.S. missile defense system known as Thaad arrived in South Korea on Monday and will continue to be brought in, Yonhap News says, citing unidentified South Korean military official.

    "Continued provocative actions by North Korea, to include yesterday's launch of multiple missiles, only confirm the prudence of our alliance decision last year to deploy THAAD to South Korea," Adm. Harry Harris, commander, US Pacific Command, said in a news release.

     

    US Secretary of Defense James Mattis and South Korean Defense Secretary Han Min-koo spoke over the phone last week and agreed that THAAD should be deployed "ASAP."

    White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer signaled the deployment Monday when he told reporters that the United States is "taking steps to enhance our ability to defend against North Korea's ballistic missiles, such as through the deployment of a THAAD battery to South Korea." U.S. defense officials confirmed to NBC News on Monday night that that meant delivery was already under way — not that the United States was simply restating its previous promises to send the system to South Korea sometime in the future.

    The US and its allies in the region, notably South Korea and Japan, tend to focus on THAAD's defensive nature. They tout its value as a system to prevent a missile from hitting a target and killing people.

    "This is purely a defensive measure that the alliance must take in light of the serious threat posed by North Korean missiles," Chris Bush, a spokesman for the US Forces in Korea said.

    But Beijing and Moscow don't see it that way.

    "We do not have any doubts that US, with support of their allies, will continue to build up the potential of the Asia Pacific segment of their global missile system, which will inevitably lead to disruption of established strategic balances both in the Asia Pacific and beyond."

    Interestingly, it's not just Russian and Chinese officials that are against the US deployment of THAAD; South Korean presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung and mayor of Seongnam City commented:

    "We have to realize clearly that THAAD cannot stop the nuclear missiles coming from the DPRK. How can the 48 missiles of THAAD stop the over 1,000 missiles from the DPRK? The north of Chungcheongbuk-do and the capital area jointly account for more than half of our population and most of our territory. THAAD cannot even cover these areas, but merely increases the regional military tensions. To be honest, deploying THAAD will hurt both us and China. No one will gain anything from it. The starting point of THAAD is wrong, so we have to reconsider it completely. Otherwise, our future will be gloomy, chaotic and insecure."

    Clearly the rush to get THAAD deployed counters any pre-emptive rejection by Lee. We are sure China's response will be swift at this apparent 'retaliation' by the US.

    As Strategic Culture's Nan Li previously noted, China is opposed to THAAD deployment for several reasons.

    First, Chinese analysts believe that THAAD in South Korea is intended to intercept missiles launched, not from North Korea, but from China and Russia. THAAD has an operational range of 200 kilometers (km) and is designed to intercept missiles at altitudes between 40 and 180 km. Such altitudes, according to analysts from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), match the “terminal phase” of the intermediate, long-range and even intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), or those with ranges exceeding 3,500 km. PLA analysts also claim that they match the “mid-course phase” of medium-range missiles, or those with ranges between 1,000 and 3,500 km, including China’s DF-21 and DF-26 missiles. Because the direct threats to South Korea — including the Seoul area, where 40 percent of the South Korean population resides — are North Korea’s long-range artilleries and short-range ballistic missiles, THAAD, they believe, is clearly a mismatch against such threats.

    Chinese analysts are particularly concerned about THAAD’s X-band radar. Even though it would be configured as a fire-control radar with a detection range of 600 km, it perhaps could be reconfigured as an early-warning radar, which allows a detection range exceeding 2,000 km. Such a range suggests that China’s missile activities on land and at sea in northern and eastern China may be mostly exposed. The radar allegedly can see the critical processes where warheads and decoys are released during China’s strategic missile tests. In times of war, it can undermine the reliability of China’s strategic deterrent because in comparison with Alaska-based radars, it is believed to be capable of acquiring more than ten minutes of early warning time against China’s strategic ballistic missiles. It can also differentiate real warheads from decoys. If integrated into the U.S. national missile defense network, this radar allegedly can increase the odds of success in intercepting Chinese missiles even at their “boost phase,” reducing further the reliability of China’s already small strategic deterrent and tilting the strategic balance in favor of the United States.

    Moreover, Chinese analysts believe that the Korean Peninsula has historically been a nearby sphere critical to China’s security. They worry that by deploying THAAD, South Korea could share data with the United States and Japan on air traffic control, air defense, and early warning. This may help to integrate South Korea-based systems with U.S. and Japanese sensors and sea-based Aegis systems, with the goal of forming a trilateral strategic alliance to contain China at China’s door steps. Chinese analysts believe that North Korean nuclear tests were only an excuse used by the United States to deploy THAAD, the real U.S. intention being to drive a wedge between South Korea and China at a time when China-South Korea relations were improving substantially, as reflected in the countries’ booming bilateral trade and Park Geun-hye’s attendance at the Victory Day Parade in Beijing in September 2015. THAAD deployment would bring the United States and South Korea closer at the expense of China’s security. This could help the United States to stabilize U.S.-South Korea relations and prevent the possible loss of the U.S. military foothold on the Korean Peninsula.

    Furthermore, Chinese analysts believe that THAAD deployment in South Korea may encourage Japan to import THAAD to compensate for the range deficiencies of its PAC-3 missile defense systems. They also believe that South Korea’s decision would not only harm South Korea-China relations, but also harm South Korea itself by removing its “strategic flexibility” in balancing among major powers and in handling North-South relations. By directly challenging China’s strategic security interests, some argue, South Korea has also set a bad example for China’s neighbors to follow if no substantial cost is incurred to South Korea. Finally, Chinese analysts claim that THAAD deployment would not deter North Korea from developing nuclear weapons, but instead may drive it to develop more and better nuclear weapons and missiles.

    Chinese analysts have proposed a wide range of countermeasures to retaliate against the THAAD deployment. They argue that to restore regional “strategic balance,” China should cooperate with Russia in developing strategic offensive weapons, particularly in developing “penetration” technologies that can defeat missile defense. Other proposed countermeasures include concealment and redeployment of China’s strategic capabilities to reduce their exposure to the THAAD radar, and accelerated development of China’s own missile defense systems. Other analysts argue for economic sanctions.

  • Schlichter Warns "Watch The Liberals – All They Have Left Is Lies"

    Via Kurt Schlichter of Townhall.com,

    Suddenly the Democrats are coming out against their classic moves like cavorting with Russians to hack American elections and perjury (like you need a link), so who knows which of their foundational principles they will pull a 180 on and betray next: Climate scams? Free money for deadbeats? Jane Fonda?

    But they don’t really mean it – hell, without perjury they could never testify to anything. If you want to know what the liberals are up to, just listen to the lies they are telling about conservatives. They used to be able to get away with it too, but thanks to the interwebs Al Gore invented between buffet deep dives and sweaty masseuse gropes, the political playing field for liberal liars is now covered in rakes.

    Lying is what they do because that’s all they have left on the left. They have no foundational principles except power. Their entire ideology is transactional – it’s not based on ideas but on payoffs to Democrat sub-sets. Here’s some dough for the baby crunching industry! We’ll hassle some Christian bakers for the SJWs! Let’s put a bunch of cis-het males of pallor who don’t even listen to NPR out of work in West Tennetucky, or wherever they grow coal, to delight our global warming cultist pals!

    But today the Democrats hold no levers of power, and they can’t dispense goodies anymore. All they can do now is howl, whine, and lie, and try to mobilize the parasites burrowed into the federal bureaucracy to undercut the will of normal Americans. They do this by falsely accusing us and those who represent us of doing exactly what they are doing and what they intend to do once Trump is ousted. Their goal is to seize power again and permanently disenfranchise us – and they are happy to take the risk of literally ripping the country apart.

    The media is, of course, a willing and eager accomplice in this coordinated campaign of deception and slander. Notice how no one in the mainstream media pointed out how the Sessions perjury lie conveniently appeared simultaneously across the entire media just when the Democrats desperately needed to shift the narrative from their utter humiliation by Trump’s terrific joint address? The media hacks never mentioned it because they were part of it, the beat-boy skeletons to the David S. Pumpkins of progressivism. The left and its media’s problem, however, is that the new information reality means that they can start a controversy, but they can’t control it.

    Here’s the utterly predictable pattern. Spazzy Dems freak out about some imagined atrocity by a conservative then, within a few hours, it becomes clear that the alleged offender did nothing wrong while conservatives scour the web and start showing how Democrat hacks are on record doing exactly the same thing times a zillion. That’s the key – the media can no longer guide the lie to destroy the target. The internet lets us have a say – and to grab the wheel.

    Oh no, Jeff Sessions talked to a Russian then didn’t bring it up when not asked about it! Oh, we Democrats would never do that … except, thanks to us conservatives (and a President who’s willing to punch back twice as hard), here come the photos of Schumer and Ivan sharing a cup of Joe Stalin and here’s Pelosi’s partying with some Russkies after denying it and then the State Department turns out to have arranged it and FOR THE LOVE OF GAIA SOMEBODY SHUT DOWN THAT INTERNET MACHINE BECAUSE IT NEVER FORGETS!

    Frankly, I don’t think Sessions should have dignified their nonsense by recusing himself. I think he should have strolled out before the cameras and said, “Hey Chuckie, I got a big, fat recusal for ya right here!”

    We all kind of knew how the “Trump inspires anti-Semitic threats” meme was going to end up. Swedenpalooza was just a couple fake controversies ago and we all know how that went. Trump observes “Look at Sweden’s immigrant problem,” then the liberal media comes back with “Lies! Sweden is a herring-infused paradise of love and sharing!” at which point Sweden promptly gets on lit fire by Muslim refugees. All that’s missing was a woke, gender-fluid Viking wearing a “Flyktingar Välkommen” t-shirt blowing on a sad trombone.

    Then Jewish Community Centers started getting threats and, of course, it had to be Trump supporters because fanatically pro-Israel people always threaten Jews or something. Facts, shmacts – the bogus narrative must be preserved! So Trump condemns this scummery, but also notes, “Sometimes it’s the reverse, to make people — or to make others — look bad.” Of course, the fake news media went nuts, because no hate crime has ever been a hoax except for almost all of them, so we conservatives settled down with our tea and waited for the ending we totally saw coming. And, of course – of course – as every non-Fredoriffic conservative predicted, the FBI busted the slug responsible for a bunch of the threats and it turned out to be …. wait for it!

    Let’s see. Was it the conservative Trump supporter? Did he have a MAGA hat? Just like the media and the liberals would have you believe? Oh come on, we all knew it. Say it with me: “Leftist member of the media.”

    Um, awkward! Hey, look on the bright side. At least this particular leftist member of the media didn’t murder anyone.

    And, of course, there is the Trump the Authoritarian/Trump the New Hitler meme. Except Trump’s apparently not very good at authoritarianism, since no one seems to be being oppressed. He has a lot of policy ideas, which he openly explained to the American people in his speech, and which he will submit to Congress to be debated and voted upon before being enacted. That seems to correspond pretty closely to how I learned a bill becomes a law on Schoolhouse Rock.

    Well, maybe his enforcing the duly enacted laws passed by Congress to deport illegal aliens counts as authoritarian Hitler stuff, except it seems odd that a leader who is doing what the people’s representatives passed into law instead of unilaterally deciding on his own not to do what the people’s representatives voted to do, and thereby effectively ruling by decree, is a hitlery authoritarian.

    Obama unilaterally changed the immigration law by simply not enforcing it. That seems pretty undemocratic. He also seems to have tapped the communications of his political opponents and left some sleepers in the government dedicated to bringing down the new administration. Maybe I’m being fussy, but those seem super-undemocratic. Naturally, the mainstream media finds this all less disturbing than Kellyanne Conway’s Oval Office footwear.

    Watch the liberals. Listen to what they say, because their lies and their slanders are a road map to their plans for the future. Straightforward from here, given the chance, they absolutely intend to impose the kind of quasi-fascist rule they falsely accuse Trump of contemplating. But their problem is that we now recognize their lies, and we see their endgame, and the collapse of the media gatekeepers means they can no longer keep us blind and isolated. So when they lie, we are going to throw their hypocrisy right back in their withered, pruny faces and there’s nothing they can do to shut us up. Sorry, you lying sacks of socialism, we’re not about to let you rip our country apart.

  • Shocking Video Footage Of Sprawling California Tent City

    California, 1 of only 6 states where Democrats control the governship, statehouse (with a super-majority nonetheless) and state supreme court, is perfectly setup to implement a Bernie Sanders-inspired socialist utopia where everyone makes the same amount of money, enjoys limitless social programs and is never exposed to the horrors of gender-based bathroom signs. 

    And while liberals would like for you to believe that their socialist agenda is the cure for poverty (in addition to pretty much every other problem plaguing the world), California’s reality paints a slightly different picture.  In fact, in just the latest example that all is not well in California’s socialist utopia, Dan Lyman recently exposed this shocking video footage of a sprawling tent city that is ‘home’ to an estimated 1,000 residents. 

    As Lyman points out, what was once a beautiful bike trail along the Pacific Ocean has now been transformed into a tent city, rife with crime, that reeks of garbage and human feces.

    Locals have become increasingly alarmed by the rapid spread of unregulated squatters and their belongings – and their waste.

     

    “As a cyclist who uses the trail to ride to the beach often, over this last year it has gotten substantially worse.  It is unsafe and unsanitary with loose dogs everywhere and human fecal matter scattered on the trail.”

     

    “The area is disgusting and reeks of trash and feces.”

     

    He reports that the bike trail, once popular with outdoors enthusiasts and families which runs for miles to beaches along the Pacific Ocean, has become unsafe as miscreants plot assaults and robberies on passing riders, even laying tripwires across the path.

     

    But California’s Democrats aren’t just failing the poor people that have been relegated to tent cities, as we pointed out last fall (see “Americans Fleeing Expensive, Over-Taxed Metro Areas In Pursuit Of Affordability“) people of all income brackets are fleeing the state in droves.  Not surprisingly, these domestic migrants are flocking to areas with a lower cost of living, lower/no state income taxes, less regulations and higher job growth (aka “Red” states). 

    Domestic Migration

     

    Ironically, the dark areas on the map above seem to match perfectly with the dark areas on this map which indicate those with the highest state income tax rates. 

    Taxes by State

     

    But, if Jerry Brown can just get his $100 billion bullet train finished then we’re sure all will be well.

  • CNN Does it Again: Network Suddenly Cuts Off Congressman After He Recited Refugee Crime Stats

    What is with you lunatics on the left and your obsession with refugees? You fucking idiots.

    CNN has a long rich history of suddenly losing connections to their guests, after said guests stumble on a series or words and phrases that goes against their talking points.

    Example 1

    Example 2

    Example 3

    And just now.

    Thank God for the ‘teevee gremlins.’

    Content originally generated at iBankCoin.com

     

  • How The Market Creates Jobs (And How Government Destroys Them)

    Via Walter Block of The Mises Institute,

    The Creation of Jobs

    If the media tell us that "the opening of XYZ mill has created 1,000 new jobs," we give a cheer. When the ABC company closes and 500 jobs are lost, we're sad. The politician who can provide a subsidy to save ABC is almost assured of wide spread public support for his work in preserving jobs.

    But jobs in and of themselves do not guarantee well-being. Suppose that the employment is to dig huge holes and fill them up again? What if the workers manufacture goods and services that no one wants to purchase? In the Soviet Union, which boasts of giving every worker a job, many jobs are just this unproductive. Production is everything, and jobs are nothing but a means toward that end.

    Imagine the Swiss Family Robinson marooned on a deserted South Sea island. Do they need jobs? No, they need food, clothing, shelter, and protection from wild animals. Every job created is a deduction from the limited, precious labor available. Work must be rationed, not created, so that the market can create the most product possible out of the limited supply of labor, capital goods, and natural resources.

    The same is true for our society. The supply of labor is limited. We must not allow government to create jobs or we lose the goods and services which otherwise would have come into being. We must reserve precious labor for the important tasks still left undone.

    Alternatively, imagine a world where radios, pizzas, jogging shoes, and everything else we might want continuously rained down like manna from heaven. Would we want jobs in such a utopia? No, we could devote ourselves to other tasks – studying, basking in the sun, etc. – that we would undertake for their intrinsic pleasure.

    Instead of praising jobs for their own sake, we should ask why employment is so important. The answer is, because we exist amidst economic scarcity and must work to live and prosper. That's why we should be of good cheer only when we learn that this employment will produce things people actually value, i.e., are willing to buy with their own hard,earned money. And this is something that can only be done in the free market, not by bureaucrats and politicians.

    The Destruction of Jobs

    But what about unemployment? What if people want to work, but can't get a job? In almost every case, government programs are the cause of joblessness.

    Minimum Wage. The minimum wage mandates that wages be set at a government-determined level. To explain why this is harmful, we can use an analogy from biology: there are certain animals that are weak compared to others. For example, the porcupine is defenseless except for its quills, the deer vulnerable except for its speed.

    In economics there are also people who are relatively weak. The disabled, the young, the untrained—all are weak economic actors. But like the weak animals in biology, they have a compensating advantage: the ability to work for lower wages. When the government takes this ability away from them by forcing up pay scales, it is as if the porcupine were shorn of its quills. The result is unemployment, which creates desperate loneliness, isolation, and dependency.

    Consider a young, uneducated, unskilled person, whose productivity is $2.50 an hour in the marketplace. What if the legislature passes a law requiring that he be paid $5 per hour? The employer hiring him would lose $2.50 an hour.

    Consider a man and a woman each with a productivity of $10 per hour, and suppose, because of discrimination or whatever, that the man is paid $ 10 per hour and the woman is paid $8 per hour. It is as if the woman had a little sign on her forehead saying, "Hire me and earn an extra $2 an hour."

    This makes her a desirable employee even for a sexist boss. But when an equal-pay law stipulates that she must be paid the same as the man, the employer can indulge his discriminatory tendencies and not hire her at all, at no cost to himself.

    Comparable Worth. What if government gets the bright idea that nurses and truck drivers ought to be paid the same wage because their occupations are of "intrinsically" equal value? It orders that nurses' wages be raised to the same level, which creates unemployment for women.

    Working Conditions. Laws which force employers to provide certain types of working conditions also create unemployment. For example, migrant fruit and vegetables pickers must have hot and cold running water and modern toilets in the temporary cabins provided for them. This is economically equivalent to wage laws because, from the point of view of the employer, working conditions are almost indistinguishable from money wages. And if the government forces him to pay more, he will have to hire fewer people.

    Unions. When the government forces businesses to hire only union workers, it discriminates against non-union workers, causing them to be at a severe disadvantage or permanently unemployed. Unions exist primarily to keep out competition. They are a state-protected cartel like any other.

    Employment Protection. Employment protection laws, which mandate that no one can be fired without due process, are supposed to protect employees. However, if the government tells the employer that he must keep the employee no matter what, he will tend not to hire him in the first place. This law, which appears to help workers, instead keeps them from employment. And so do employment taxes and payroll taxes, which increase costs to businesses and discourage them from hiring more workers.

    Payroll Taxes. Payroll taxes like Social Security impose heavy monetary and administrative costs on businesses, drastically increasing the marginal cost of hiring new employees.

    Unemployment Insurance. Government unemployment insurance and welfare cause unemployment by subsidizing idleness. When a certain behavior is subsidized—in this case not working—we get more of it.

    Licensing. Regulations and licensing also cause unemployment. Most people know that doctors and lawyers must have licenses. But few know that ferret breeders, falconers, and strawberry growers must also have them. In fact, government regulates over 1,000 occupations in all 50 states. A woman in Florida who ran a soup kitchen for the poor out of her home was recently shut down as an unlicensed restaurant, and many poor people now go hungry as a result.

    When the government passes a law saying certain jobs cannot be undertaken without a license, it erects a legal barrier to entry. Why should it be illegal for anyone to try their hand at haircutting? The market will supply all the information consumers need.

    When the government bestows legal status on a profession and passes a law against competitors, it creates unemployment. For example, who lobbies for the laws which prevent just anyone from giving a haircut? The haircutting industry—not to protect the consumer from bad haircuts, but to protect themselves against competition.

    Peddling. Laws against street peddlers prevent people from selling food and products to people who want them. In cities like New York and Washington, D.C., the most vociferous supporters of anti-peddling laws are established restaurants and department stores.

    Child Labor. There are many jobs that require little training—such as mowing lawns—which are perfect for young people who want to earn some money. In addition to the earnings, working also teaches young people what a job is, how to handle money, and how to save and maybe even invest. But in most places, the government discriminates against teenagers and prevents them from participating in the free enterprise system. Kids can't even have a street-corner lemonade stand.

    The Federal Reserve. By bringing about the business cycle, Federal Reserve money creation causes unemployment. Inflation not only raises prices, it also misallocates labor. During the boom phase of the trade cycle, businesses hire new workers, many of whom are pulled from other lines of work by the higher wages. The Fed subsidy to these capital industries lasts only until the bust. Workers are then laid off and displaced.

    The Free Market. The free market, of course, does not mean Utopia. We live in a world of differing intelligence and skills, of changing market preferences, and of imperfect information, which can lead to temporary, market-generated unemployment, which Mises called "catallactic." And some people choose unemployment by holding out for a higher paying job.

    But as a society, we can insure that everyone who wants to work has a chance to do so by repealing minimum wage law, comparable worth rules, working condition laws, compulsory union membership, employment protection, employment taxes, payroll taxes, government unemployment insurance, welfare, regulations, licensing, anti-peddling laws, child-labor laws, and government money creation.

    The path to jobs that matter is the free market.

  • "The Reality Is, Half Of Americans Can’t Afford To Write A $500 Check"

    The CEO of Assurant appeared on Bloomberg TV to explain why demand for his services is likely to increase: the chief executive of the mobile phone insurer said he expects a surge in demand as carriers charge customers more to replace their devices. “If you think back five years ago, you as a consumer didn’t know how much that phone cost, you thought it was free or close to free,” Assurant’s Alan Colberg said Monday. “Now you’re paying $600, that’s a lot. So we’ve actually seen the attachment rate, or the number of people buying the product, going up a little bit in the last couple of years.”

    He then proceeded to give Bloomberg his traditional sales pitch: Assurant is counting on growth at its business covering phones and appliances to help counter a decline in the segment that insures foreclosed homes for lenders. While improvement in the real estate market has limited the number of vacant homes, Colberg said there are still many cash-strapped consumers.

    It is what he said next that caught our attention: “The reality is, half of Americans can’t afford to write a $500 check,” Colberg said. He spun that stunning statistic by saying that when US customers sign up for a cellular plan, they’re willing to buy protection in case “they lose that phone or something happens to it.”

    In other words, there are millions of Americans who don’t have $500 in the bank but are willing to dish out more than that on a cell phone, and then are stupid enough to make monthly payments that ultimately end up being far higher than $500 to protect their purchase… which they clearly couldn’t afford in the first place.

    * * *

    That said, we decided to look into the CEO’s claim about the woeful state of US finances. What we found is that according to a recent Bankrate survey of 1,000 adults, 57% of Americans don’t have enough cash to cover a mere $500 unexpected expense. Turns out the CEO was right. And while that may appear dire, it is a slight improvement from 2016, when 63% of U.S. residents said they wouldn’t be able to handle such an expense.

    The survey’s findings have shed light on how the so-called recovery of the past 8 years has skipped about half of the US population, which literally live paycheck to paycheck, and reflects a country in which many households continue to struggle with their basic finances more than seven years after the official end to the recession.

    Putting the numbers in context: despite steady job growth during the Obama administration – which have been focused on minimum wage industries – wages have been predictably slow to recover, with the typical American household still earning 2.4% below what they brought home in 1999, when income peaked. Meanwhile, costs for essentials such as housing and child care have surged faster than the rate of inflation, placing stress on household budgets and making the accumulation of wealth, i.e., savings, impossible.

    The bottom line:  About four out of 10 Americans said they had enough in savings to cover a surprise $500 expense. Another 21% said they would rely on a credit card, while 20% said they’d cut back on other expenses. Another 11% said they’d turn to family or friends for the money.

    What is even more striking is that among Americans who earn more than $75,000 per year – a third more than the typical U.S. household earns – almost half also said they wouldn’t be able to cover a $500 surprise expense. Ironically, Millennials represent the generation most equipped to handle an emergency cost, with 47 percent saying they have enough in savings to cover one.

    The Bankrate survey findings echoed research published last year by the Federal Reserve, which found that 46% of respondents said they would be challenged to come up with even less, or $400, to cover an emergency expense, and would likely borrow or sell something to afford it. When the Fed asked what types of emergency expenses Americans had actually faced in the last year, more than one out of five cited a major unexpected medical expense. The average expense: $2,782, or almost seven times higher than the Fed’s hypothetical $400 surprise bill.

    How do cell phones fit in all of this? When it comes to reducing spending, dining out is the first place where consumers would cut back, with 6 out of 10 respondents saying they would eat out less. What is the “stickiest” expense? According to Bankrate, the least likely expense to face the chopping block are mobile phone plans, with the survey finding that only 35% said they would cut back on their wireless plans to save money.

    In other words, Americans would rather be hungry than cell phone free. In retrospect, it may turn out be that Assurant’s CEO, whose business model is a big bet on human stupidity, just may have a goldmine on his hands.

  • Wikileaks Releases Encrypted "Vault 7" Torrent, Will Unveil Password Tuesday 9am

    Last month, following a series of seemingly random tweets by Wikileaks, we reported that starting on February 4th, each day Wikileaks began sending out a series of cryptic question Tweets teasing the world about “Vault 7”. The questions were framed in Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How format (but not in that order). Each came with an image “clue”.

    Here they are in chronological order starting with the earliest.

    While it is possible that Vault 7 is directly related to one of these pictures, these pictures may just be representative images, part of some sort of pattern, or clues about the answers to the corresponding questions. As the pictures are images of entirely different things (and no longer just pictures of vaults), each individual picture being related to the answer of the question tweeted along with it seems quite plausible.

    Then, after a flurry of appearances over a month ago, the topic of “Vault 7” faded away from the Wikileaks twitter account, until Monday evening, when in a tweet around 7:30pm, Wikileaks announced that it had released an encrypted ‘torrent’ file, just over 500 MB in size and which can be downloaded now at the following URL, will be made accessible for everyone tomorrow at 9am ET when Wikileaks releases the passphrase.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    In subsequent tweets,  Wikileaks provides further information on how to unzip the encrypted file contained in the torrent.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Why unveil the contents of “Vault 7”, which some have speculated is a form of an insurance policy for Julian Assange? It may have something to do with Saturday’s report that Guillermo Lasso, the  frontrunner in Ecuador’s presidential election, whose runoff round will take place on April 2, has warned that he will ask “Assange to leave our [London] embassy.” Or it could be something totally different.

    For now, there is no indication what is contained on the released torrent, although we are confident that many will have it downloaded and looking forward to tomorrow’s 9am release of the password to unlock the contents of the mysterious file.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 6th March 2017

  • Top NSA Whistleblower: Intelligence Agencies DID Spy On Trump

    Trump claims that the Obama administration bugged Trump Tower before the election.

    Sound nutty?

    Perhaps … but former Attorney General Michael Mukasey said that Trump is probably right that Trump Tower was bugged (by the Justice Department, not Obama personally).

    And chief Fox News Washington correspondent James Rosen – who Obama's Attorney General Eric Holder ordered be bugged … like many other reporters for well over a decade – said he thought Trump might be right:

    Washington's Blog asked the highest-level NSA whistleblower in history – Bill Binney – whether he thought Trump had been bugged.

    Binney is the NSA executive who created the agency’s mass surveillance program for digital information, who served as the senior technical director within the agency, who managed six thousand NSA employees.

    He was a 36-year NSA veteran widely regarded as a “legend” within the agency and the NSA’s best-ever analyst and code-breaker.

    Binney also mapped out the Soviet command-and-control structure before anyone else knew how, and so predicted Soviet invasions before they happened (“in the 1970s, he decrypted the Soviet Union’s command system, which provided the US and its allies with real-time surveillance of all Soviet troop movements and Russian atomic weapons”).

    Binney told Washington's Blog:

    NSA has all the data through the Upstream programs (Fairview/Stormbrew/Blarney)  [background] and backed up by second and some third party country collection.

     

    Plus the FBI and CIA plus others, as of the last month of the Obama administration, have direct access to all the NSA collection (metadata and content on phones,email and banking/credit cards etc.) with no attempt at oversight by anybody [background]. This is all done under Executive Order 12333 [the order which allows unlimited spying no matter what intelligence officials claim] ….

     

    FBI would only ask for a warrant if they wanted to be able to take it into court at some point given they have something meaningful as evidence. This is clearly true given the fact the President Trump's phone conversations with other country leaders were leaked to the mainstream media.

    In other words, Binney is saying that Trumps phones were bugged by the NSA without a warrant – remember, top NSA whistleblowers have previously explained that the NSA is spying on virtually all of the digital communications of Americans. – and the NSA shared the raw data with the CIA, FBI and other agencies.

    If the FBI obtained a warrant to tap Trump's phone, it was a "parallel construction" to "launder" improperly-gained evidence through acceptable channels.

    As we've previously explained:

    The government is “laundering” information gained through mass surveillance through other agencies, with an agreement that the agencies will “recreate” the evidence in a “parallel construction” … so they don’t have to admit that the evidence came from unconstitutional spying. This data laundering is getting worse and worse.

    So does it mean that the NSA spying on Trump Tower actually turned up some dirt?

    Maybe …

    But history shows that mass surveillance has long been used to blackmail opponents … including high-level officials.  And see this.

    And the former NSA director admitted that the mass surveillance is a power grab.

    So we won't know until the intelligence agencies actually show their cards … and reveal what evidence they've gathered.

  • Worried You Might Buy Bitcoin or Gold, Report 5 Mar, 2017

    The price of gold has been rising, but perhaps not enough to suit the hot money. Meanwhile, the price of bitcoin has shot up even faster. From $412, one year ago, to $1290 on Friday, it has gained over 200% (and, unlike gold, we can say that bitcoin went up—it’s a speculative asset that goes up and down with no particular limit). Compared to the price action in bitcoin, gold seems boring. While this is a virtue for gold to be used as money (and a vice for bitcoin), it does tend to attract those who just want to get into the hottest casino du jure.

    Perhaps predictably, we saw an ad from a gold bullion dealer. This well-known dealer is comparing gold to bitcoin, and urging customers to stick with gold because of gold’s potential for price appreciation. We would not recommend this argument. Whatever the merits of gold may be, going up faster than bitcoin is not among them.

    We spotted an ad today from a mainstream financial adviser. The ad urged clients not to buy gold. This firm should have little need to worry. Stocks have been in a long, long, endless, forever, never-to-end bull market. Gold is not doing anything exciting now. $1234? “WhatEVAH (roll eyes)!” Stocks, well, the prices just keep on going up. Like we said, nothing whatsoever to worry about. Other than declining dividend yields. There’s more than enough irony to go around.

    Speaking of dividend yield, that leads us to an idea. Readers know that we like to compare the yield of one investment to another. This is why we quote the basis as an annualized percentage. You can compare basis to LIBOR easily. And also stocks. Or anything else.

    For example, the basis for December—a maturity of well under a year—is 1.2%. The dividend yield of the S&P stocks is just 1.9%. For that extra 70bps, you are taking a number of known risks, and some unknown risks too.

    It is worth noting that the yield on the 10-year Treasury is up to 2.5%. Yes, that’s right, you are paid less for the risk of investing in big corporations than you are for holding the risk free asset. Of course, the Treasury bond is not really risk free. But in any case, if the Treasury defaults then it’s safe to assume most corporations will be destroyed, if not our whole civilization.

    We have heard the mainstream theory so many times, our heads are hurting. Here are the myths: the Chinese are selling, inflation is coming, and the economy is picking up.

    China is selling. The Chinese people are selling the yuan to buy dollars. When they can get through the increasingly-strict capital controls. The People’s Bank of China takes the other side of the trade—selling dollars and buying yuan—to keep the yuan from collapsing. When a foreign central bank holds dollars, it does not hold paper notes. Nor does it deposit them in a commercial bank. It holds Treasury bonds. Its sales of Treasurys may look scary, but that is just the seen. The unseen is that the Chinese people are buying dollars. Those dollars come back to the Treasury market one way or the other.

    Inflation is coming. The Fed is printing, the quantity of money is going up, there will be demand-pull, etc. Well, if that were true then the last place you would want to be is in an asset whose price is set by the net present value of its future free cash flows. Or at least the price should be. If you think that stock prices have to rise in inflationary periods, look at what happened in the 1970’s.

    The economy is picking up. What can we say? There are two views on this. One has seen (or looked for) green shoots and nascent recoveries since the crisis. The other has seen rising asset prices, and with that a small wealth effect. We will not opine about Trump and the future of the economy here. We just wish to note that junk bonds have not sold off the way Treasurys have. Junk bonds have hardly sold off at all.

    Quite the opposite. They have been massively bid up (i.e. yield has been crushed). We submit for your consideration that if inflation was coming and/or the economy was picking up, you would do even worse in junk bonds than in S&P stocks.

    The 10-year Treasury hit its low yield (so far) of 1.3% in July. Since then, it has been a wild ride mostly up to 2.6% in December. Since then it’s been choppy but falling (i.e. prices rising a bit).

    July also happens to be when the yield on the Swiss 10-year government bond began rising. It made a low of -0.6% (yes, negative). Since then, the yield has gone up (i.e. bond price has gone down) to near zero in December. It is currently -0.1%.

    In Japan, the same occurred. Low yield on the 10-year government bond in July was -0.3%. High was hit in December. Still elevated now, but off the December high.

    It’s almost as if government bond yields around the world were moved by the same drivers, or even connected by some kind of arbitrage…

    Whatever the cause of this worldwide selloff of government bonds may be, it is not selling by China. It is not inflation. It is not expectations that the economy will take off under Trump.

    Maybe it’s just traders looking at price charts, buying because stocks are going up?

    This week, the prices of the metals dropped. As always, the question is what happened to the fundamentals?

    Below, we will show the only true picture of the gold and silver supply and demand. But first, the price and ratio charts.

    The Prices of Gold and Silver
    The Prices of Gold and Silver

    Next, this is a graph of the gold price measured in silver, otherwise known as the gold to silver ratio. It moved sideways again this week.

    The Ratio of the Gold Price to the Silver Price
    The Ratio of the Gold Price to the Silver Price

    For each metal, we will look at a graph of the basis and cobasis overlaid with the price of the dollar in terms of the respective metal. It will make it easier to provide brief commentary. The dollar will be represented in green, the basis in blue and cobasis in red.

    Here is the gold graph.

    The Gold Basis and Cobasis and the Dollar Price
    The Gold Basis and Cobasis and the Dollar Price

    This week, our old friend returned. He is the correlation between the price of the gold (i.e. inverse of the price of gold in dollar terms) and the cobasis (i.e. our scarcity indicator). They had been moving together.

    This week, they met up for old time’s sake. The dollar is up from 24.75mg gold to 25.20mg. And the cobasis is up from -0.41% to -0.16%. At least in the April contract which is rapidly approaching First Notice Day, and already under downward pressure. For farther contracts, the cobasis is up, but not that much.

    Our calculated fundamental price dipped twenty bucks. It’s still $150 over the market price.

    Now let’s look at silver.

    The Silver Basis and Cobasis and the Dollar Price
    The Silver Basis and Cobasis and the Dollar Price

    The cobasis in silver move up big-time as well.

    The silver fundamental price also fell, about fifteen cents.

    © 2017 Monetary Metals

  • A NEW SUPER HERO ON THE RIGHT ARISES: BEHOLD THE 'STICK MAN'

    It’s always darkest before the dawn. During Saturday’s pro-Trump rally in Berkley, CA, antifags attended and started to rabble rouse — spraying old men in the face with pepper spray, acting like reprobate vagabonds — deserving of the stick.

    Then out of nowhere, like the Phoenix rising out from the ash, a superhero appeared — smashing antifags in the heads for sport and pleasure — casting them back into their pits of hell.

    BEHOLD, the Stick Man.

    And here’s another video of his greatness — this time slowed down for dramatic effect.

    Heretofore, let this be a lesson to you leftarded anarchists out there trying to spoil all of the fun: stick man is out there, watching you, waiting to bash your brains in with his glorious stick.

    UPDATE: A REAL HERO

    Content originally generated at iBankCoin.com

     

  • "It's A Declaration Of War": South Africa's President Calls For Confiscation Of White Land

    After South Africa’s embattled president Jacob Zuma pledged, in a surprising address to parliament one month ago, to break up white ownership of business and land to reduce inequality (in a State of the Nation address which was disrupted by a fistfight), it now appears that Zuma’s intentions to convert what was until recently Africa’s most prosperous economy into a new Zimbabwe were all too real, and as the Telegraph reports, the South African president officially called on parliament to change South Africa’s constitution to allow the expropriation of white owned land without compensation.

    Zuma, 74, who made the remarks in a speech on Friday morning, said he wanted to establish a “pre-colonial land audit of land use and occupation patterns” before changing the law.

    We need to accept the reality that those who are in parliament where laws are made, particularly the black parties, should unite because we need a two-thirds majority to effect changes in the constitution,” he said.

    In recent months, Zuma, who has lurched from one scandal to another since being elected to office in 2009, has adopted a more populist tone since his ruling African National Congress (ANC) party suffered its worst election result last August since the end of apartheid in 1994. The party lost the economic hub of Johannesburg, the capital Pretoria and the coastal city of Port Elizabeth to the moderate Democratic Alliance party, which already held the city of Cape Town.

    The ANC is also under pressure from the radical Economic Freedom Fighters, led by Julius Malema. Malema has been travelling the country urging black South Africans to take back land from white invaders and “Dutch thugs”. He told parliament this week that his party wanted to “unite black people in South Africa” to expropriate land without compensation.

    “People of South Africa, where you see a beautiful land, take it, it belongs to you,” he said. Although progress has been made in transferring property to black South Africans, land ownership is believed to be skewed in favour of whites more than 20 years after the end of apartheid. The Institute of Race Relations, an independent research body, said that providing a racial breakdown of South Africa’s rural landowners was “almost impossible.”

     

    “In the first place the state owns some 22 per cent of the land in the country, including land in the former homelands, most of which is occupied by black subsistence farmers who have no title and seem unlikely to get it any time soon,” the group said. “This leaves around 78 per cent of land in private hands, but the race of these private owners is not known.”

    As the Telegraph adds, Zuma’s comments caused outrage among groups representing Afrikaans speaking farmers on Friday.

    The Boer Afrikaner Volksraad, which claims to have 40,000 members, said its members would take land expropriation without compensation as “a declaration of war”.

    “We are ready to fight back,” said Andries Breytenbach, the group’s chairman. “We need urgent mediation between us and the government. “If this starts, it will turn into a racial war which we want to prevent.” As noted above, Zuma first mentioned the expropriation of land in his opening of Parliament speech last month, but Friday was the first time he called for a change in the law.

    In his February speech, he controversially called in the military to maintain “law and order” on the streets of Cape Town ahead of expected protests calling for him to step down.

    It was the first time in South Africa’s history, including the heavily militarised apartheid era, that the president has ordered the military to provide security at parliament.

    Meanwhile, the populist wave is spreading and as discussed at the end of February, the local police had to fire rubber bullets into a crowd after anti-immigrant protests turned violent in the capital Pretoria.

    President Zuma’s aggressive move toward redistribution comes as his African National Congress party prepares to elect a new leader to succeed him in December and as he finds himself under growing pressure over corruption allegations. It is disturbing that in order to deflect from his own failings as president, Zuma is willing to risk an economic fate reminiscent that of its neighbor to the north, Zimbabwe, where shortly after a similar confiscation of what land, the economy disintegrated into a hyperinflationary supernova.

    It took Zimbabwe 15 years to admit its mistakes, and invite white farmers back. It now appears that South Africa will have to learn from the mistakes of its northern neighbor in due course.

  • Citi's Matt King: "We Think You Should Sell"

    With spreads at post-crisis tights, equities making new highs, and new issues oversubscribed, markets are clearly exuberant. But could it be rational this time? We’re not convinced.

          – Citi’s Matt King

    In a surprisingly bearish report, Citi’s Matt King has issued a new, long-awaited note in which he asks rhetorically “what’s a manager supposed to do when by early March your asset class has already exceeded your expectation for full-year returns? Take profit and take the rest of the year off, of course! And if it carries on rallying, go outright short!” And yet, he adds, “somehow nobody seems to want to.” The reason for that, according to King is that as we showed demonstrated last week using JPM and BofA data, “the rally owes more to inflows and short covering than to institutional investor exuberance. And part is that the economic data do seem genuinely to be improving.”

    Nonetheless, King’s assessment of the current environment is downbeat and to the point: “sell we think you should, not only in € credit (as we advised a couple of weeks ago) but also more broadly.

    He then lays out seven reasons “not to trust your inner Trump”, which are as follows:

    1. The Fed may stop the inflow party

    The Citi strategist begins by noting that “perhaps the best reason to remain long is that institutional investors seem not to be.” He adds that the vast majority of the FI investors we have seen in recent weeks still believe in secular stagnation, and further notes that “to judge from our survey, overall positions have been creeping longer, but this is due overwhelmingly to positions among $ investors: those in € and £ credit have actually been falling (Figure 1).”

    King joins the strategist bandwagon pointing out to the source of recent inflows and states that “the principal driver of investors’ buying seems to have been a response to mutual fund inflows. Not only equity funds but also bond (including both credit and EM) mutual funds have had their biggest 4-week run of inflows since 2013 (Figure 2). Numbers in Europe have been slightly weaker than the US-dominated  global totals, but the pattern is similar.”

    There is a problem with that: “But while this too might normally be a reason for bullishness, we doubt that the current pace is sustainable.

    Quite apart from the historical inability to maintain this flow rate for long, there is the small problem of the Fed. While at this point a hike on March 15 has been so well telegraphed that it ought not to cause a 2013-style tantrum, we do think much of investors’ willingness to pile into risky assets stems from the lack of return on cash. Each and every additional bp in risk-free yield is likely to make investors think twice about the risk they are running in order to generate return elsewhere.

    It is also worth noting that over the past two weeks, BofA has caveated that while retail inflows are seemingly relentless, institutions and hedge funds have recently turned sellers into the rally, and are aggressively offloading to retail, traditionally a market-top indicator. 

    2. A rise in real yields should weigh on risk assets

    King’s second reason why he thinks the rally has been so strong is that real yields have remained surprisingly low. Even as nominal yields have risen since the US election, almost all of the action has been in inflation (and growth) expectations (Figure 3). Traditionally this is positive for risk assets; in contrast, when real yields rise, it weighs on risk assets – albeit sometimes with a lag (Figure 4).

    Citi suspects that what has made this move possible is the market’s willingness to focus on all the potential growth positives and yet shrug off the increasing signs of hawkishness from the Fed. “Such a position seems increasingly untenable on two counts. First, rates markets have now finally adjusted to the new mood music from the Fed, and seem increasingly likely to be confronted with an actual hike; second, the rally in credit was starting to look out of whack even with today’s real yield levels, never mind following any proper adjustment to follow.”

    3. Central bank support is set to diminish

    While it is no secret that King has long been a closet adherent to Austrian Monetary Theory, in his latest piece King reminds regular readers that one of his favourite model for markets’ behaviour in recent years is their correlation with central bank liquidity. While the scale of their purchases over the past half-year or so has been close to record highs, it is already diminishing, and set to diminish further (Figure 5).

    He brings attention to BoJ purchases, which in recent months have almost halved since their shift to yield targeting; furthermore ECB purchases will be reduced by one quarter from this month on. In EM, FX reserves have held up well since February last year, and in recent months have been propped up as EM portfolio inflows have gone a long way towards offsetting a worrying trend towards net FDI outflows.

    But this too we suspect was aided by the Fed being on hold, and is liable to face renewed pressure as it returns to rate hikes. Besides, the extent of the rally once again seems excessive even for today’s level of CB purchases, never mind relative to its likely future trajectory (Figure 6).

    In short, absent a material shift in central bank posture, the traditional driver of risk asset upside will be gone for the foreseeable future.

    4. It’s the stimulus, stupid

    And then there is China. 

    As a recent NY Fed report pointed out, “China Accounts For Half Of All Global Debt Created Since 2005.” This echoes what we have been writing about for years, starting back in 2013 showing “How In Five Short Years, China Humiliated The World’s Central Banks“, when we showed that in just the brief period since the financial crisis “Chinese bank assets (and by implication liabilities) have grown by an astounding $15 trillion, bringing the total to over $24 trillion. In other words, China has expanded its financial balance sheet by 50% more than the assets of all global central banks combined.

    This, too, is a worry for the Citi strategist, who writes that “continuing with the idea that market strength owes more to a wave of technical support than to fundamentals, we remain convinced that the recent explosion of credit in China – visible in the monthly total social financing numbers – is of greater global significance than is widely recognized.

    King posits that while it is hard to prove empirically, at an anecdotal level almost every place you visit from San Francisco to Sydney seems to be awash with stories of Chinese investment propping up prices. While most of this is in real estate, King thinks the effects of credit creation spill over from one asset class to another, and increasingly from one region to another also.

    The punchline: “fully 80% of the world’s private sector credit creation at present is occurring in China. The evolution of this global total bears at least a passing resemblance to global asset prices (Figure 7).”

    Which leads us to the $64 trillion question: is this pace of credit expansion sustainable? Citi’s answer: “we rather doubt it.”

    Chinese numbers tend to reach a seasonal high in January as new lending quotas are granted but then to fall off sharply thereafter. And the positive impulse from the recent acceleration in credit creation in China will in any case be hard to sustain just because the absolute rate of growth is already so high. If anything, the recent tendency towards renewed FX outflows – even in the face of tightening capital controls – speaks to a reduction in demand for investment in China itself (Figure 8), itself encouraged by a series of measures designed to introduce brakes on lending, in the property sector in particular. To our minds the wave of recent strong data in China, and associated run-up in many commodity prices which has itself fuelled optimism about a global reflation trade, owes less to a durable upswing in growth – and more to an unsustainable temporary resurgence in credit – than has been reported.

    At this point it is worth reminding readers of a recent note from UBS which likewise looked at the global credit impulse and found that it had “suddenly collapse to negative”, primarily as a result of an annualized slowdown in Chinese credit creation.

    There is some hope that US or DM credit stimulus would be able to take over even if Chinese stimulus wanes – and indeed, exactly such a hope would seem to be one of the drivers of both the rally and the improvement in much DM survey data. The hope here is that abnormally high savings rates in various developing nations would propel a spending surge. However, King then quickly shoots down the suggestion saying that such an alternative source of credit creation “seems unlikely.” His skepticism is borne from a simple problem of scale: “Corporate balance sheets are already highly levered. Besides, the sheer scale of Chinese borrowing – $3tn/year relative to a mere $800bn in US and Europe combined – makes it difficult to see how these could substitute.

    5. Just how strong are growth prospects really?

    To provide a counterpoint to his bearish points, King then asks “what of the counterargument to all this, namely that markets are merely responding to a marked pick-up in global growth prospects, sending secular stagnationists like ourselves scurrying for cover and raising the prospect of a longawaited return to ‘normal’ growth?” He admits that there has been a pickup in both growth and inflation data, and indeed in corporate earnings. And we do buy the argument that, while corporate capex has been weak relative to profits and to GDP, in outright terms it is not perhaps as moribund as pessimists (ourselves included) sometimes make it sound.

    Alas, for the Citi strategist, this may be as good as it gets when it comes to global growth, which as DB warned several weeks ago has already started to revert lower, and furthermore as we have been pounding the table for weeks, the improvement has been mostly focused in “soft”, survey-based data:

    We are much more skeptical of the likelihood of a continued and self-reinforcing cycle of growth from here. Economic surprises have a natural tendency towards mean reversion and in the US are already starting to come down. A number of commentators are starting to point to the fact that the improvement in economic numbers is heavily skewed towards survey data as opposed to actual production and consumption numbers. US jobless claims at 40-year lows in any case suggests that further hiring may begin to contribute more to inflation than to real GDP

    Meanwhile, on the corporate side, while leverage has been declining, recent reports fail to show any evidence of significant revenue growth – one of the vital missing ingredients that could conceivably lead to an acceleration of capex (Figure 11). Perhaps revenues were crimped by $ strength, but overall this suggests that the EPS growth everyone is getting excited about owes more to further cost cutting and perhaps currency moves (helping explain why the pick-up is greater in Europe than in the US) than it does to anything that will sustainably buoy the economy.

    As King notes, the market internals already point to this:

    Sadly, there are even signs that the equity market itself recognizes this likelihood. While the S&P has continued to rally at a headline level, our equity strategists have pointed out that it is again being driven by defensive sectors, not cyclicals – something historically more consistent with a rally in Treasury yields and a global reach-for-yield than with a growth-led reflation

    And then there is the political front: Citi writes that its take on the Trump speech to Congress – with its repeated reference to infrastructure spend but general lack of detail – is that prospects for widespread fiscal reform remain so contentious, even among Republicans, that the likelihood that they drive a significant near-term boost to growth is actually dimming. “Once again, this suggests that markets may be getting ahead of themselves.”

    6. The beast that refuses to die – European political risk

    And then there is Europe, and especially France where over the past few days, the market promptly assumed that any Le Pen risk overhang has been eliminated. Not so fast, according to King:

    To judge from the recent rally in OATs, you could be forgiven for thinking that Macron had been elected already, and that euro break-up risk was once again off the table. Without wanting to get too involved in the labyrinthine twists and turns of what is already turning out to be a decidedly antagonistic campaign, we doubt very much that this risk is gone for good.

    Citi then highlights four factors which keep it convinced European periphery risk and French domestic-law bonds are still a ‘sell’ here – and that renewed periphery widening may yet upset markets more broadly.

    • First, we still think there is the potential for significant nervousness among real money investors in the run-up to, and immediately after, the likely first-round Le Pen victory. Notwithstanding demand from domestic institutions for bonds that others wish to sell, experience suggests that there is nevertheless a point where domestics become full.
    • Second, we still meet too many investors convinced that the ECB will somehow come to the rescue, or even that the market would shrug off a Le Pen victory in the same way as it did Brexit. We could not disagree more strongly.
    • Third, even a Macron or Fillon victory seems unlikely to us to consign European political risk to the dustbin of history in the way some have been arguing. Populists everywhere still feel as though they are in the ascendant – just look at the disarray among Democrats in the US, or the heated response to Sir John Major’s and Tony Blair’s stands on Brexit in the UK.
    • Fourth and most persuasively, almost regardless of what you think the actual probabilities of euro break-up are, we still see too little by way of premia across markets to compensate investors for the potential risks. Central banks appear to have succeeded in squashing the volatility and fear out of markets without removing the underlying risk factors themselves. The more markets rally, the greater is the potential vulnerability.

    7. Finally, Valuations

    Last but by no means least, King brings up the most sensitive topic for the market: massively stretched valuations. His rhetorical question is simple: “Do you really want to be buying credit at post-crisis tights, or the S&P at a cyclically-adjusted P/E which has been exceeded only in 1998-2000 and 1929?”

    He then notes that the “only metrics on which € credit does not look expensive in our regular Valuations Report are those that are survey-based” and cautions that to the extent that investors want such upside, “we think they would be better served targeting assets that rallied less hard in the first place – albeit in small doses. And yet there, too, our outright inclination is more towards reduction and waiting for a better entry point than towards adding at current levels.”

    King’s Conclusion

    Having taken a several month sabbatical, the bearish Matt King is officially back: “To sum up, markets seem increasingly to be pricing all of the upside and none of the downside. When there was a risk premium in spreads, and when a wave of central bank and private credit creation seemed likely to carry everything tighter regardless of underlying fundamentals, we were happy to run with that. But we think that risk premium has long gone, and that markets’ strength owes more to those technicals than is widely recognized.”

    And a farewell anecdote from the bank’s leading strategist:

    When in the days of the Roman Republic generals were awarded the highest honour the Senate could bestow – the right to lead a “triumph”, or parade of the spoils of war, into the city – it is said that a slave was required to stand at their side and whisper constantly into their ear that they too were merely mortal. With the Ides of March approaching – and, rather neatly, coinciding both with an FOMC meeting and with the Dutch elections – we think the timing would be good for investors too to remember to what they owe their improvement in fortunes. We don’t think it’s the arrival of a new emperor.

  • When Will The Left Come For You?

    Via JC Collins of Philosophy of Metrics.com,

    First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Socialist.
    Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Jew.
    Then they came for me—
    And there was no one left to speak for me.

     

    – From the Postwar War Anti-Nazi Lectures of Protestant Pastor Martin Niemöller.

    From a philosophical perspective I dislike breaking topics down into left and right ideologies. It minimizes and degenerates meaningful conversation into well rehearsed diametrical talking points which do little but entrench and promote ongoing political and social conflict. There have been some articles published which both use and explore these opposing positions, but the focus remains on the semi-engineered outcomes which are expected from such a left vs right political and socioeconomic paradigm.

    The term semi-engineered is used for the first time here and is reflective of an allowable and flexible margin related to an unpredictable human quality which exerts itself on all events and situations. The intent is to ensure that the actions and reactions of the electoral body remain predictable. The semi-engineered aspects take these human nature qualities into account and prepares strategies which flow to “natural” and “organic” outcomes. These join other terms such as “grassroots” to make up the talking points of the modern political lexicon.

    The Western systems of governance and education hammer the left and right ideologies through the use of mainstream media and alternative media, while using the bricks and mortar institutions of wisdom and learning as a degenerative weapon meant to promote and perpetuate the continued fragmentation and division of the electoral demographic composition.

    The argument can be made that this semi-engineering is a product of both extensive conspiratorial planning as well as the human predisposition to avoid change and stick with the known. Conspiratorial planning is not as difficult to define and accept as we have been conditioned to believe. The socioeconomic and geopolitical strategy of “divide and conquer” has been a part of the worlds history as much as anything else. It is more probable that conspiratorial groups of likeminded individuals have directed and shaped the course of human history than it is that all has simply been a result of chance or happenstance.

    In the book The Anglo-American Establishment by Georgetown University Professor Carrol Quigley we find that such groups have been defined and have in fact shaped the Western world through its use of the British Empire and subsequently the American hegemonic empire.

    Professor Quigley states the following in Chapter 9 titled The Creation of the Commonwealth:

    “The evolution of the British Empire into the Commonwealth of Nations is to a very great extent a result of the activities of the Milner Group. To be sure, the ultimate goal of the Group was quite different from the present system, since they wanted a federation of the Empire, but this was a long-run goal, and en route they accepted the present system as a temporary way station. However, the strength of colonial and Dominion feeling, which made the ideal of federation admittedly remote at all times, has succeeded in making this way-station a permanent terminal and thus had eliminated, apparently forever, the hope for federation. With the exception of a few diehards, the Group has accepted the solution of imperial cooperation and “parallelism” as an alternative to federation.”

    This paragraph defines for us the function of conspiratorial planning as well as its response to the unpredictable human quality, which in this case, supported Dominion over federation. The plan and strategy of the Group was adjusted and the engineering of the Western governance structures continued. These historical realities are indisputable and provide conclusive evidence of the existence of such conspiratorial groups and sub-groups.

    Subsequent groups from that defined above, which have continued the engineering of Western civilization and governance frameworks, have further developed the political left and political right ideologies as fine tuned “weapons of the weak”, which are meant to further erode civil liberties and consolidate power. This is the same objective and scope of work which the Milner Group was tasked with in its attempts to implement a federation but settled on the Dominion for the integration of sovereign regions under the Commonwealth of Nations.

    The left position has been established as existing in the progressive spectrum, while the right has been established as existing in the regressive spectrum. The natural and historical tendencies of the electoral population have been positioned on the traditional right. The political left has been attempting to push and pull the mass population and its demographic ideals towards the left spectrum. This is considered progressive and resistance to this program of engineering is labeled as regressive.

    From this basic setup the political tension we are experiencing today has developed. Those wanting to remain in the past, or the place from which we have been pushed and pulled, or any attempt to go back to that place, is regressive, while everything which is transforming the past and pulling our civilization further from that past is progressive.

    The consideration that everything progressive is not necessarily productive and aligned with the natural demands of homo-protoculture traditions is never considered. Everything left-progressive is positive and everything right-regressive is negative.

    The case is now being made by the disorganized mass of the electoral demographic that the left has become regressive while the right is now expressing the qualities of a progressive society. The core argument that the left is now regressive is best expressed in the spread and abuse of political correctness and social justice.

    The left-liberal ideology promotes so-called equality and human rights for all. On the face this would appear to be extremely reasonable and honourable. In the first years of this agenda no one could argue with its mandates and goals. It started with equal rights for women, which included voting and other legal alignments which had not before been in demand or expected.

    Those few who disagreed with these social objectives were rightly labeled as “chauvinist pigs” and promoters of misogyny. It was the first real movement from the traditional spectrum of the right. It is only in hindsight that we can see this, a rational social movement, as the first step towards a “progressive tyranny” and at the time it was only looked upon and considered a change for the betterment of Western civilization.

    The next phase of this progressive social justice built on the ending of slavery which re-manifested as the civil rights war. Like the origins of the feminist movement, the arguments were rational and no ethical and honourable citizen could disagree with equal rights for African-Americans.

    It was in the 1970’s that we first began to experience the open social expressions of the marginal segment of the population which represented homosexuality. Television programming such as Three’s Company began to condition and engineer the acceptance of the electoral demographic “right”majority.

    In the show Jack, played by the late John Ritter, pretended to be gay so he could live with two women in an apartment. The “homophobic” and “regressive” landlord Mr. Roper would only let Jack live there if he was gay and not straight, as his old school traditional ethics considered a man living in sin with two women as immoral. Hilarity ensued as Jack went through a series of challenges and obstacles to live a normal heterosexual life while maintaining the illusion of homosexuality to fool the simple and backwards Mr. Roper.

    Evenings as a child was spent watching Three’s Company and the humour of John Ritter with my family and laughing. It was considered good quality time and I remember laying on the carpet in front of the television with feelings of guilt as I knew late homework waited elsewhere.

    It is only now that I look back and see that the show was an early weapon used to marginalize a majority into accepting a social mandate which wasn’t very popular. Nobody wanted to be a fool like Mr. Roper, so we laughed and shut up about our own personal opinions and went about our business of school and work.

    The progression of the regressive-left continued through the decades with similar tactics and methods of social engineering. Everything from movies, music, and additional television programming pushed the mass population further away from the traditional roots where Western civilization began. The pendulum swing has gone so far to the left that equal rights for all has now morphed into anti-Christian, anti-white, anti-traditional, anti-male, and anti-Capitalism.

    For decades already movies have imagined every mastermind criminal as an evil Capitalist who wants to enslave and control the world. This social engineering is now so rampant that discussions supporting the Capitalist system turn into serious arguments with the liberal-left making accusations of identity politics for the purpose of demeaning and minimizing both the position and character of those promoting Capitalism.

    The same methods and techniques are now used on anyone who disagrees with the left ideology and its stated goals and mandates. The mass immigration which has been happening for decades already has taken on a new sense of urgency and panic as migrants and refugees from Islamic nations flood into the West. The differences in culture and beliefs between the West and Islamic cultures is obvious to most but open discussions and analysis are not permitted.

    It is beginning to appear that this so-called “Islamophobia”, which has built on the resentment surrounding the labels of Homophobia and Xenophobia, among others, is being established as a benchmark on hate and hate speech. Members of Academia, which have hijacked and used our Western educational institutions to promote the liberal-left agenda, are coming in force to condemn anyone who disagrees with mass Islamic migration and open borders.

    It was evenly recently stated that a database, or register, of those charged with hate crimes should be kept so the rights of those individuals can be restricted. The comparison is made to the databases which keep track of sexual offenders. The difference between hate crimes, which often, like Islamophobia, is not clearly defined and can be used to demonize unwanted behaviour from the right, and the actions of sexual offenders such as pedophiles and rapists , are massive. To marginalize a majority as Islamophobic and hateful because it does not want to lose its cultural identity to the onslaught of a culture who, by its very expressed purpose, wants to spread and take over the host culture, is one of the greatest travesties of our modern world.

    Creating and maintaining a database of such “offenders of the left” is a horrible suggestion and is reminiscent of the registries which Nazi Germany utilized to track and manage the “undesirables” such as Jews.

    There is a concerted effort to criminalize the behaviour and opinions which the liberal-left find undesirable. This is a serious threat to our civilization and the methods by which we ensure the continuation of freedom of speech, electoral voting, and the perpetuation of cultural segregation and division.

    A man who recently burned a copy of the Koran was charged with blasphemy. How is this even possible? Our governance system which has become dominated by the left, is using that very same system to restrict the rights of varying demographics. It is ironic that the liberal-left mandates, which were born in seeking equal rights for all, like women having the right to vote, is now attempting to restrict the rights of those who do not agree with its transformed goals and objectives.

    First they came for the traditionalists. Few said anything. Then they came for the Christians. Still, few said anything. Eventually they started coming for the males. Nothing. After males they started coming for the whites. Even this couldn’t get everyone to stand united against the tyranny. Now they are using a regressive ideology to take rights away from anyone who disagrees. Finally, some are speaking louder and beginning to be heard. But is it too late? When will the left come for you? Will you now speak out?

  • Visualizing The US Debt Ceiling (In $100 Bills)

    The United States owes a lot of money. For now, there is no debt ceiling – it has been suspended – but in 10 days that changes, and who knows what happens then.

    For some context as to just how much money the US owes – and what the debt ceiling looks like – Demonocracy is back

    One Hundred Dollars

    $100 – Most counterfeited money denomination in the world.
    Keeps the world moving.

    Ten Thousand Dollars

    $10,000 – Enough for a great vacation or to buy a used car.
    Approximately one year of work for the average human on earth.

    One Million Dollars

    $1,000,000 – Not as big of a pile as you thought, huh?
    Still, this is 92 years of work for the average human on earth.

    One Hundred Million Dollars

    $100,000,000 – Plenty to go around for everyone.
    Fits nicely on an ISO / Military standard sized pallet.

    The couch is made from $46.7 million of crispy $100 bills.

    $100 Million Dollars = 1 year of work for 3500 average Americans

    Here are 2000 people standing shoulder to shoulder, looking for a job.
    The Federal Reserve's mandate is to maintain price stability and low unemployment.
    The Federal Reserve prints money based on the assumption that increasing money supply will boost jobs.

    One Billion Dollars

    $1,000,000,000 – You will need some help when robbing the bank.
    Interesting fact: $1 million dollars weighs 10kg exactly.
    You are looking at 10 tons of money on those pallets.

    One Trillion Dollars

    $1,000,000,000,000
    The 2011 US federal deficit was $1.412 Trillion – 41% more than you see here.

    If you spent $1 million a day since Jesus was born, you would have not spent $1 trillion by now…
    but ~$700 billion- same amount the banks got during bailout.

    One Trillion Dollars

    Comparison of $1,000,000,000,000 dollars to a standard sized American Football field.

    Say hello to the Boeing 747-400 transcontinental airliner that's hiding in the back. This was until recently the biggest passenger plane in the world.

    You can see the White House with both wings to the right.

    "My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government." – Thomas Jefferson

    US Debt Ceiling – $20+ Trillion in 2017

    Statue of Liberty seems rather worried as United States national debt is soon to pass 20% of the entire world's combined economy (GDP / Gross Domestic Product).

    Here are some cool quotes from cool guys in the past saying the right things about the future and in a sense predicting today:

    “I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.” – Thomas Jefferson

    If the national debt would be laid in a single line of $1 bills, it would stretch from Earth, past Uranus.

    122.1 Trillion Dollars

    $122,100,000,000,000. – US unfunded liabilities by Dec 31, 2012. We have not upgraded the graphics for 2017 because it simply is pointless. The US government has no plan for fixing unfunded liabilites. This number is so far out there that it is uncomprehensible to most readers but a few mathematicians.

    Above you can see the pillar of cold hard $100 bills that dwarfs the WTC & Empire State Building – both at one point world's tallest buildings. If you look carefully you can see the Statue of Liberty.

    The 122.1 Trillion dollar super-skyscraper wall is the amount of money the U.S. Government knows it does not have to fully fund the Medicare, Medicare Prescription Drug Program, Social Security, Military and civil servant pensions. It is the money USA knows it will not have to pay all its bills. If you live in USA this is also your personal credit card bill; you are responsible along with everyone else to pay this back. The citizens of USA created the U.S. Government to serve them, this is what the U.S. Government has done while serving The People. The unfunded liability is calculated on current tax and funding inputs, and future demographic shifts in US Population.

    Note: On the above 122.1T image the size of the bases of the money stacks are $10 billion, and 400 stories @ $4 trillion.

    "It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world." – Thomas Jefferson

     

    "This is when you need to remember that when a nation's economy collapses, the wealth of the nation doesn't disappear, it only changes hands."

    Government Waste: Missing Money Infographic does a great job showcasing the Trillions lost through miss-management.

    Everyone needs to see this…

     

  • The Most (And Least) Worthwhile Degrees

    For many young people, the decision of whether to extend their education careers and attend university is a tough one to make. With soaring costs, Statista's Martin Armstrong notes, not all that choose to do a bachelor's degree graduate with the feeling that it was all worthwhile.

    Emolument surveyed 1,800 graduates to reveal that the most regretted major is psychology. Only 33 percent of bachelors of this particular science said their degree was worth it. On the other end of the scale, 87 percent of chemistry and natural sciences alumni said they felt their studies were worth it.

    Infographic: The Most (and Least) Worthwhile Degrees | Statista

    You will find more statistics at Statista

    We are reminded of The Mises Institute's Josh Grossman comments, that easy access to student loans has created demand for useless degrees.

    Last week, former Secretary of Education and US Senator Lamar Alexander wrote in the Wall Street Journal that a college degree is both affordable and an excellent investment. He repeated the usual talking point about how a college degree increases lifetime earnings by a million dollars, “on average.” That part about averages is perhaps the most important part, since all college degrees are certainly not created equal. In fact, once we start to look at the details, we find that a degree may not be the great deal many higher-education boosters seem to think it is.

    In my home state of Minnesota, for example, the cost of obtaining a four-year degree at the University of Minnesota for a resident of Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, Manitoba, or Wisconsin is $100,720 (including room and board and miscellaneous fees). For private schools in Minnesota such as St. Olaf, however, the situation is even worse. A four-year degree at this institution will cost $210,920.

    This cost compares to an average starting salary for 2014 college graduates of $48,707. However, like GDP numbers this number is misleading because it is an average of all individuals who obtained a four-year degree in any academic field. Regarding the average student loan debt of an individual who graduated in 2013, about 70 percent of these graduates left college with an average student loan debt of $28,400. This entails the average student starting to pay back these loans six months after graduation or upon leaving school without a degree. The reality of this situation is that assuming a student loan interest rate of 6.8 percent and a ten-year repayment period, the average student will be paying $326.83 every month for 120 months or a cumulative total re-payment of $39,219.28. Depending upon a student’s job, this amount can be a substantial monthly financial burden for the average graduate.

    All Degrees Are Not of Equal Value

    Unfortunately, there is no price incentive for students to choose degrees that are most likely to enable them to pay back loans quickly or easily. In other words, these federal student loans are subsidizing a lack of discrimination in students’ major choice. A person majoring in communications can access the same loans as a student majoring in engineering. Both of these students would also pay the same interest rate, which would not occur in a free market.

    In an unhampered market, majors that have a higher probability of default should be required to pay a higher interest rate on money borrowed than majors with a lower probability of default. In summary, it is not just the federal government’s subsidization of student loans that is increasing the cost of college, but the fact that demand for low-paying and high-default majors is increasing, because loans for these majors are supplied at the same price as a major providing high salaries to its possessor with a low probability of default.

    And which programs are the most likely to pay off for the student? The top five highest paying bachelor’s degrees include: petroleum engineering, actuarial mathematics, nuclear engineering, chemical engineering and electronics and communications engineering, while the top five lowest paying bachelor’s degrees are: animal science, social work, child development and psychology, theological and ministerial studies, and human development, family studies, and related services. Petroleum engineering has an average starting salary of $93,500 while animal science has an average starting salary of $32,700. This breaks down for a monthly salary for the petroleum engineer of $7,761.67 versus a person working in animal science with a monthly salary of $2,725. Based on the average monthly payment mentioned above, this would equate to a burden of 4.2 percent of monthly income (petroleum engineer) versus a burden of 12 percent of monthly income (animal science). This debt burden is exacerbated by the fact that it is now nearly impossible to have student loan debts wiped away even if one declares bankruptcy.

    Ignoring Careers That Don’t Require a Degree

    Meanwhile, there are few government loan programs geared toward funding an education in the trades. And yet, for many prospective college students, the trades might be a much more lucrative option. Using the example of plumbing, the average plumber earns $53,820 per year with the employer paying the apprentice a wage and training.

    Acknowledging the fact that this average salary is for master plumbers, it still equates to a $20,000 salary difference between it and someone with a four-year degree in animal science while having no student loans as a bonus. Outside of earning a four-year degree in science, technology, engineering, math or, accounting with an average starting salary of $53,300, nursing with an average starting salary of $53,624, or as a family practice doctor on the lower end of physician pay of $161,000, society might be better served if parents and educators would stop using the canard that a four-year degree is always worth the cost outside of a few majors mentioned above. Encouraging students to consider the trades and parents to give their children the money they would spend on a four-year college degree to put a down payment on a house might be a better use of finite economic resources. The alternative of forcing the proverbial square peg into a round hole will condemn another generation to student debt slavery forcing them to put off buying a home or getting married.

    Loans Drive Overall Demand

    The root of the problem is intervention by the federal government in providing student loans. Since 1965 when President Johnson signed the Higher Education Act tuition, room, and board has increased from $1,105 per year to $18,943 in 2014–2015. This is an increase of 1,714 percent in 50 years. In addition, the Higher Education Act of 1965 created loans which are made by private institutions yet guaranteed by the federal government and capped at 6.8 percent. In case of default on the loans, the federal government — that is, the taxpayers — pick up the tab in order for these lenders to recover 95 cents on every dollar lent. Loaning these funds at below market interest rates and with the federal government backing up these risky loans has led to massive malinvestment as the percentage of high-school graduates enrolled in some form of higher education has increased from 10 percent before World War II to 70 percent by the 1990s. Getting a four-year degree in nearly any academic field seemed to be the way in which to enter or remain in the middle class.

    But just as with the housing bubble, keeping interest below market levels while increasing the money supply in terms of loans — while having the taxpayer on the hook for a majority of these same loans — leads to an avalanche of defaults and is a recipe for disaster.

     

  • In WSJ Op-Ed, Peter Navarro Writes Deficits "Could Put US National Security In Jeopardy"

    At the end of January, the Euro soared following an FT piece in which Trump’s trade advisor and director of the White House National Trade Council, Peter Navarro, launched what was then seen as the first shot in the transatlantic trade wars, when he accused Germany of using a “grossly undervalued” euro to “exploit the US and its EU partners”, comments which triggered alarms in Europe’s largest economy.

    Navarro  told the Financial Times the euro was like an “implicit Deutsche Mark” whose low valuation gave Germany an advantage over its main partners. While not necessarily novel – Germany has often been accused of being the biggest winner from a weak euro at the expense of peripheral Europe – his views suggested the new administration is focusing on currency as part of its hard-charging approach on trade ties.

    Since then immediate worries about bilateral trade wars have taken a back seat after several paliative comments from Trump’s Treasury secretary, Steven Mnuchin as well as a de-escalation between Trump and Beijing after the president softened his rhetoric on the One China policy. However, worries about trade wars may reemerge following a Sunday evening op-ed in the WSJ by the same Peter Navarro in which he explains “why the White House worries about trade deficits” and highlights that “an imbalance imperils economic growth—and could put U.S. national security in jeopardy.”

    Needless to say, from that line alone it is safe to say that the op-ed is hardly USD-positive.

    Navarro asks “do trade deficits matter”, noting that the question is important because America’s trade deficit in goods (the Obama administration tends to ignore the trade surplus in services) is “large and persistent, about $2 billion every day.” His affirmative response boils down to the the observation that growth in real GDP depends on only four factors: consumption, government spending, business investment and net exports (the difference between exports and imports). “Reducing a trade deficit through tough, smart negotiations is a way to increase net exports—and boost the rate of economic growth” Navarro writes, by which he simply reflects that positive net trade translates into higher GDP, even if in practice it is never quite that simple as substantial shifts to global trade patterns usually result in subtantial changes in domestic consumption as a result of violent market rebalancing.

    Global trade nuances aside, Navarro uses the example of Carrier to demonstrate the “complex adjustments” resulting from changes to trade policy, and invokes the capital account to suggest that as a result of foreign investment in the US to plug the current account shortfall, foreigners may – to cite Warren Buffett – eventually own so much of the U.S. that Americans will wind up working longer hours just to eat and to service the debt.

    To better understand these complex adjustments, consider Carrier. Its management had announced the company would close its air-conditioner factory in Indianapolis and move to Mexico—and then sell products back into the U.S. tariff-free. But President-elect Trump and Vice President-elect Pence negotiated a deal to keep Carrier in the U.S. and expand its facilities. How will this show up in government statistics? Fixed nonresidential investment will increase rather than decrease. Imports from Mexico will be lower than they would be otherwise, and U.S. exports will be higher. In today’s parlance, that’s “all good.”

     

    The national-security argument that trade deficits matter begins with this accounting identity: Any deficit in the current account caused by imbalanced trade must be offset by a surplus in the capital account, meaning foreign investment in the U.S.

     

    In the short term, this balance-of-payments equilibrium may be benign, as foreigners return our trade-deficit dollars to American shores by investing in U.S. bonds and stocks and perhaps by building new production facilities. The extra capital keeps mortgage rates lower, the stock market abundantly capitalized, and Americans more fully employed.

     

    But running large and persistent trade deficits also facilitates a pattern of wealth transfers offshore. Warren Buffett refers to this as “conquest by purchase” and warns that foreigners will eventually own so much of the U.S. that Americans will wind up working longer hours just to eat and to service the debt.

    Navarro then interpolates his favorite topic, China, and what the consequences of this ascendant superpower’s trade relations with the US could mean for US national security in the long-term:

    Dark though it is, Mr. Buffett’s scenario may still be too rosy. Suppose the purchaser is a rapidly militarizing strategic rival intent on world hegemony. It buys up America’s companies, technologies, farmland, food-supply chain—and ultimately controls much of the U.S. defense-industrial base. How might that alternative version of conquest by purchase end for our sons and daughters? Might we lose a broader cold war for America’s freedom and prosperity, not by shots fired but by cash registers ringing? Might we lose a broader hot war because America has sent its defense-industrial base abroad on the wings of a persistent trade deficit?

    Supposedly, the theoretical answer to these questions is yes, although the practical response has yet to be written. Furthermore, all of the above is generic Econ 101 textbook stuff.

    So does Navarro make any practical trade policy recommendations besides his brief economics lesson?  For that we fast forward to the final two paragraphs which tie into Trump’s Feb. 28 Congressional address, in which he expounded on “FAIR” trade, as follows:

    Today, after decades of trade deficits and a mass migration of factories offshore, there is only one American company that can repair Navy submarine propellers—and not a single company that can make flat-panel displays for military aircraft or night-vision goggles. Meanwhile, America’s steel industry is on the ropes, its aluminum industry is flat on its back, and its shipbuilding industry is gathering barnacles. The U.S. has begun to lose control of its food-supply chain, and foreign firms are eager to purchase large swaths of Silicon Valley’s treasures.

     

    Much of Wall Street and most economists simply don’t care. But to paraphrase Mike Pence on the 2016 campaign trail, the people of Fort Wayne know better. The analysts at the Pentagon know better, too. That’s why, for both economic and national-security reasons, it is important to bring America’s trade back into balance—through free, fair and reciprocal trade.

    In retrospect, Navarro’s op-ed is less fiery than his initial “trade war” statement to the FT, even if it ultimately reverts to a core Trump theme, namely boosting exports to stimulate growth. Perhaps a better question than what is Navarro’s purpose by writing it, is why he is writing it, and does his use of a public forum like the WSJ mean that there is friction between him and Trump camp, especially since in recent weeks it appears that a core pillar of Trump’s trade policies, namely the border adjustability, appear to no longer be on the docket of actionable items. If BAT goes, what else will follow, and will any of Navarro’s trade deficit-cutting plans ever materialize?

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 5th March 2017

  • America's Miserable 21st Century

    Via Nicholas Eberstadt of CommentaryMagazine.com,

    On the morning of November 9, 2016, America’s elite—its talking and deciding classes—woke up to a country they did not know. To most privileged and well-educated Americans, especially those living in its bicoastal bastions, the election of Donald Trump had been a thing almost impossible even to imagine. What sort of country would go and elect someone like Trump as president? Certainly not one they were familiar with, or understood anything about.

    I

    Whatever else it may or may not have accomplished, the 2016 election was a sort of shock therapy for Americans living within what Charles Murray famously termed “the bubble” (the protective barrier of prosperity and self-selected associations that increasingly shield our best and brightest from contact with the rest of their society). The very fact of Trump’s election served as a truth broadcast about a reality that could no longer be denied: Things out there in America are a whole lot different from what you thought. 

    Yes, things are very different indeed these days in the “real America” outside the bubble. In fact, things have been going badly wrong in America since the beginning of the 21st century.

    It turns out that the year 2000 marks a grim historical milestone of sorts for our nation. For whatever reasons, the Great American Escalator, which had lifted successive generations of Americans to ever higher standards of living and levels of social well-being, broke down around then—and broke down very badly.

    The warning lights have been flashing, and the klaxons sounding, for more than a decade and a half. But our pundits and prognosticators and professors and policymakers, ensconced as they generally are deep within the bubble, were for the most part too distant from the distress of the general population to see or hear it. (So much for the vaunted “information era” and “big-data revolution.”) Now that those signals are no longer possible to ignore, it is high time for experts and intellectuals to reacquaint themselves with the country in which they live and to begin the task of describing what has befallen the country in which we have lived since the dawn of the new century.

    II

    Consider the condition of the American economy. In some circles people still widely believe, as one recent New York Times business-section article cluelessly insisted before the inauguration, that “Mr. Trump will inherit an economy that is fundamentally solid.” But this is patent nonsense. By now it should be painfully obvious that the U.S. economy has been in the grip of deep dysfunction since the dawn of the new century. And in retrospect, it should also be apparent that America’s strange new economic maladies were almost perfectly designed to set the stage for a populist storm.

    Ever since 2000, basic indicators have offered oddly inconsistent readings on America’s economic performance and prospects. It is curious and highly uncharacteristic to find such measures so very far out of alignment with one another. We are witnessing an ominous and growing divergence between three trends that should ordinarily move in tandem: wealth, output, and employment. Depending upon which of these three indicators you choose, America looks to be heading up, down, or more or less nowhere.

    From the standpoint of wealth creation, the 21st century is off to a roaring start. By this yardstick, it looks as if Americans have never had it so good and as if the future is full of promise. Between early 2000 and late 2016, the estimated net worth of American households and nonprofit institutions more than doubled, from $44 trillion to $90 trillion. (SEE FIGURE 1.)

    Although that wealth is not evenly distributed, it is still a fantastic sum of money—an average of over a million dollars for every notional family of four. This upsurge of wealth took place despite the crash of 2008—indeed, private wealth holdings are over $20 trillion higher now than they were at their pre-crash apogee. The value of American real-estate assets is near or at all-time highs, and America’s businesses appear to be thriving. Even before the “Trump rally” of late 2016 and early 2017, U.S. equities markets were hitting new highs—and since stock prices are strongly shaped by expectations of future profits, investors evidently are counting on the continuation of the current happy days for U.S. asset holders for some time to come.

    A rather less cheering picture, though, emerges if we look instead at real trends for the macro-economy. Here, performance since the start of the century might charitably be described as mediocre, and prospects today are no better than guarded.

    The recovery from the crash of 2008—which unleashed the worst recession since the Great Depression—has been singularly slow and weak. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), it took nearly four years for America’s gross domestic product (GDP) to re-attain its late 2007 level. As of late 2016, total value added to the U.S. economy was just 12 percent higher than in 2007. (SEE FIGURE 2.) The situation is even more sobering if we consider per capita growth. It took America six and a half years—until mid-2014—to get back to its late 2007 per capita production levels. And in late 2016, per capita output was just 4 percent higher than in late 2007—nine years earlier. By this reckoning, the American economy looks to have suffered something close to a lost decade.

    But there was clearly trouble brewing in America’s macro-economy well before the 2008 crash, too. Between late 2000 and late 2007, per capita GDP growth averaged less than 1.5 percent per annum. That compares with the nation’s long-term postwar 1948–2000 per capita growth rate of almost 2.3 percent, which in turn can be compared to the “snap back” tempo of 1.1 percent per annum since per capita GDP bottomed out in 2009. Between 2000 and 2016, per capita growth in America has averaged less than 1 percent a year. To state it plainly: With postwar, pre-21st-century rates for the years 20002016, per capita GDP in America would be more than 20 percent higher than it is today.

    The reasons for America’s newly fitful and halting macroeconomic performance are still a puzzlement to economists and a subject of considerable contention and debate. Economists are generally in consensus, however, in one area: They have begun redefining the growth potential of the U.S. economy downwards. The U.S. Congressional Budget Office (CBO), for example, suggests that the “potential growth” rate for the U.S. economy at full employment of factors of production has now dropped below 1.7 percent a year, implying a sustainable long-term annual per capita economic growth rate for America today of well under 1 percent.

    Then there is the employment situation. If 21st-century America’s GDP trends have been disappointing, labor-force trends have been utterly dismal. Work rates have fallen off a cliff since the year 2000 and are at their lowest levels in decades. We can see this by looking at the estimates by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) for the civilian employment rate, the jobs-to-population ratio for adult civilian men and women. (SEE FIGURE 3.) Between early 2000 and late 2016, America’s overall work rate for Americans age 20 and older underwent a drastic decline. It plunged by almost 5 percentage points (from 64.6 to 59.7). Unless you are a labor economist, you may not appreciate just how severe a falloff in employment such numbers attest to. Postwar America never experienced anything comparable.

    From peak to trough, the collapse in work rates for U.S. adults between 2008 and 2010 was roughly twice the amplitude of what had previously been the country’s worst postwar recession, back in the early 1980s. In that previous steep recession, it took America five years to re-attain the adult work rates recorded at the start of 1980. This time, the U.S. job market has as yet, in early 2017, scarcely begun to claw its way back up to the work rates of 2007—much less back to the work rates from early 2000.

    As may be seen in Figure 3, U.S. adult work rates never recovered entirely from the recession of 2001—much less the crash of ’08. And the work rates being measured here include people who are engaged in any paid employment—any job, at any wage, for any number of hours of work at all.

    On Wall Street and in some parts of Washington these days, one hears that America has gotten back to “near full employment.” For Americans outside the bubble, such talk must seem nonsensical. It is true that the oft-cited “civilian unemployment rate” looked pretty good by the end of the Obama era—in December 2016, it was down to 4.7 percent, about the same as it had been back in 1965, at a time of genuine full employment. The problem here is that the unemployment rate only tracks joblessness for those still in the labor force; it takes no account of workforce dropouts. Alas, the exodus out of the workforce has been the big labor-market story for America’s new century. (At this writing, for every unemployed American man between 25 and 55 years of age, there are another three who are neither working nor looking for work.) Thus the “unemployment rate” increasingly looks like an antique index devised for some earlier and increasingly distant war: the economic equivalent of a musket inventory or a cavalry count.

    By the criterion of adult work rates, by contrast, employment conditions in America remain remarkably bleak. From late 2009 through early 2014, the country’s work rates more or less flatlined. So far as can be told, this is the only “recovery” in U.S. economic history in which that basic labor-market indicator almost completely failed to respond.

    Since 2014, there has finally been a measure of improvement in the work rate—but it would be unwise to exaggerate the dimensions of that turnaround. As of late 2016, the adult work rate in America was still at its lowest level in more than 30 years. To put things another way: If our nation’s work rate today were back up to its start-of-the-century highs, well over 10 million more Americans would currently have paying jobs.

    There is no way to sugarcoat these awful numbers. They are not a statistical artifact that can be explained away by population aging, or by increased educational enrollment for adult students, or by any other genuine change in contemporary American society. The plain fact is that 21st-century America has witnessed a dreadful collapse of work.

    For an apples-to-apples look at America’s 21st-century jobs problem, we can focus on the 25–54 population—known to labor economists for self-evident reasons as the “prime working age” group. For this key labor-force cohort, work rates in late 2016 were down almost 4 percentage points from their year-2000 highs. That is a jobs gap approaching 5 million for this group alone.

    It is not only that work rates for prime-age males have fallen since the year 2000—they have, but the collapse of work for American men is a tale that goes back at least half a century. (I wrote a short book last year about this sad saga.2) What is perhaps more startling is the unexpected and largely unnoticed fall-off in work rates for prime-age women. In the U.S. and all other Western societies, postwar labor markets underwent an epochal transformation. After World War II, work rates for prime women surged, and continued to rise—until the year 2000. Since then, they too have declined. Current work rates for prime-age women are back to where they were a generation ago, in the late 1980s. The 21st-century U.S. economy has been brutal for male and female laborers alike—and the wreckage in the labor market has been sufficiently powerful to cancel, and even reverse, one of our society’s most distinctive postwar trends: the rise of paid work for women outside the household.

    In our era of no more than indifferent economic growth, 21st–century America has somehow managed to produce markedly more wealth for its wealthholders even as it provided markedly less work for its workers. And trends for paid hours of work look even worse than the work rates themselves. Between 2000 and 2015, according to the BEA, total paid hours of work in America increased by just 4 percent (as against a 35 percent increase for 1985–2000, the 15-year period immediately preceding this one). Over the 2000–2015 period, however, the adult civilian population rose by almost 18 percent—meaning that paid hours of work per adult civilian have plummeted by a shocking 12 percent thus far in our new American century.

    This is the terrible contradiction of economic life in what we might call America’s Second Gilded Age (2000—). It is a paradox that may help us understand a number of overarching features of our new century. These include the consistent findings that public trust in almost all U.S. institutions has sharply declined since 2000, even as growing majorities hold that America is “heading in the wrong direction.” It provides an immediate answer to why overwhelming majorities of respondents in public-opinion surveys continue to tell pollsters, year after year, that our ever-richer America is still stuck in the middle of a recession. The mounting economic woes of the “little people” may not have been generally recognized by those inside the bubble, or even by many bubble inhabitants who claimed to be economic specialists—but they proved to be potent fuel for the populist fire that raged through American politics in 2016.

    III

    So general economic conditions for many ordinary Americans—not least of these, Americans who did not fit within the academy’s designated victim classes—have been rather more insecure than those within the comfort of the bubble understood. But the anxiety, dissatisfaction, anger, and despair that range within our borders today are not wholly a reaction to the way our economy is misfiring. On the nonmaterial front, it is likewise clear that many things in our society are going wrong and yet seem beyond our powers to correct.

    Some of these gnawing problems are by no means new: A number of them (such as family breakdown) can be traced back at least to the 1960s, while others are arguably as old as modernity itself (anomie and isolation in big anonymous communities, secularization and the decline of faith). But a number have roared down upon us by surprise since the turn of the century—and others have redoubled with fearsome new intensity since roughly the year 2000.

    American health conditions seem to have taken a seriously wrong turn in the new century. It is not just that overall health progress has been shockingly slow, despite the trillions we devote to medical services each year. (Which “Cold War babies” among us would have predicted we’d live to see the day when life expectancy in East Germany was higher than in the United States, as is the case today?)

    Alas, the problem is not just slowdowns in health progress—there also appears to have been positive retrogression for broad and heretofore seemingly untroubled segments of the national population. A short but electrifying 2015 paper by Anne Case and Nobel Economics Laureate Angus Deaton talked about a mortality trend that had gone almost unnoticed until then: rising death rates for middle-aged U.S. whites. By Case and Deaton’s reckoning, death rates rose somewhat slightly over the 1999–2013 period for all non-Hispanic white men and women 45–54 years of age—but they rose sharply for those with high-school degrees or less, and for this less-educated grouping most of the rise in death rates was accounted for by suicides, chronic liver cirrhosis, and poisonings (including drug overdoses).

    Though some researchers, for highly technical reasons, suggested that the mortality spike might not have been quite as sharp as Case and Deaton reckoned, there is little doubt that the spike itself has taken place. Health has been deteriorating for a significant swath of white America in our new century, thanks in large part to drug and alcohol abuse. All this sounds a little too close for comfort to the story of modern Russia, with its devastating vodka- and drug-binging health setbacks. Yes: It can happen here, and it has. Welcome to our new America.

    In December 2016, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that for the first time in decades, life expectancy at birth in the United States had dropped very slightly (to 78.8 years in 2015, from 78.9 years in 2014). Though the decline was small, it was statistically meaningful—rising death rates were characteristic of males and females alike; of blacks and whites and Latinos together. (Only black women avoided mortality increases—their death levels were stagnant.) A jump in “unintentional injuries” accounted for much of the overall uptick.

    It would be unwarranted to place too much portent in a single year’s mortality changes; slight annual drops in U.S. life expectancy have occasionally been registered in the past, too, followed by continued improvements. But given other developments we are witnessing in our new America, we must wonder whether the 2015 decline in life expectancy is just a blip, or the start of a new trend. We will find out soon enough. It cannot be encouraging, though, that the Human Mortality Database, an international consortium of demographers who vet national data to improve comparability between countries, has suggested that health progress in America essentially ceased in 2012—that the U.S. gained on average only about a single day of life expectancy at birth between 2012 and 2014, before the 2015 turndown.

    The opioid epidemic of pain pills and heroin that has been ravaging and shortening lives from coast to coast is a new plague for our new century. The terrifying novelty of this particular drug epidemic, of course, is that it has gone (so to speak) “mainstream” this time, effecting breakout from disadvantaged minority communities to Main Street White America. By 2013, according to a 2015 report by the Drug Enforcement Administration, more Americans died from drug overdoses (largely but not wholly opioid abuse) than from either traffic fatalities or guns. The dimensions of the opioid epidemic in the real America are still not fully appreciated within the bubble, where drug use tends to be more carefully limited and recreational. In Dreamland, his harrowing and magisterial account of modern America’s opioid explosion, the journalist Sam Quinones notes in passing that “in one three-month period” just a few years ago, according to the Ohio Department of Health, “fully 11 percent of all Ohioans were prescribed opiates.” And of course many Americans self-medicate with licit or illicit painkillers without doctors’ orders.

    In the fall of 2016, Alan Krueger, former chairman of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers, released a study that further refined the picture of the real existing opioid epidemic in America: According to his work, nearly half of all prime working-age male labor-force dropouts—an army now totaling roughly 7 million men—currently take pain medication on a daily basis.

    We already knew from other sources (such as BLS “time use” surveys) that the overwhelming majority of the prime-age men in this un-working army generally don’t “do civil society” (charitable work, religious activities, volunteering), or for that matter much in the way of child care or help for others in the home either, despite the abundance of time on their hands. Their routine, instead, typically centers on watching—watching TV, DVDs, Internet, hand-held devices, etc.—and indeed watching for an average of 2,000 hours a year, as if it were a full-time job. But Krueger’s study adds a poignant and immensely sad detail to this portrait of daily life in 21st-century America: In our mind’s eye we can now picture many millions of un-working men in the prime of life, out of work and not looking for jobs, sitting in front of screens—stoned.

    But how did so many millions of un-working men, whose incomes are limited, manage en masse to afford a constant supply of pain medication? Oxycontin is not cheap. As Dreamland carefully explains, one main mechanism today has been the welfare state: more specifically, Medicaid, Uncle Sam’s means-tested health-benefits program. Here is how it works (we are with Quinones in Portsmouth, Ohio):

    [The Medicaid card] pays for medicine—whatever pills a doctor deems that the insured patient needs. Among those who receive Medicaid cards are people on state welfare or on a federal disability program known as SSI. . . . If you could get a prescription from a willing doctor—and Portsmouth had plenty of them—Medicaid health-insurance cards paid for that prescription every month. For a three-dollar Medicaid co-pay, therefore, addicts got pills priced at thousands of dollars, with the difference paid for by U.S. and state taxpayers. A user could turn around and sell those pills, obtained for that three-dollar co-pay, for as much as ten thousand dollars on the street.

    In 21st-century America, “dependence on government” has thus come to take on an entirely new meaning.

    You may now wish to ask: What share of prime-working-age men these days are enrolled in Medicaid? According to the Census Bureau’s SIPP survey (Survey of Income and Program Participation), as of 2013, over one-fifth (21 percent) of all civilian men between 25 and 55 years of age were Medicaid beneficiaries. For prime-age people not in the labor force, the share was over half (53 percent). And for un-working Anglos (non-Hispanic white men not in the labor force) of prime working age, the share enrolled in Medicaid was 48 percent.

    By the way: Of the entire un-working prime-age male Anglo population in 2013, nearly three-fifths (57 percent) were reportedly collecting disability benefits from one or more government disability program in 2013. Disability checks and means-tested benefits cannot support a lavish lifestyle. But they can offer a permanent alternative to paid employment, and for growing numbers of American men, they do. The rise of these programs has coincided with the death of work for larger and larger numbers of American men not yet of retirement age. We cannot say that these programs caused the death of work for millions upon millions of younger men: What is incontrovertible, however, is that they have financed it—just as Medicaid inadvertently helped finance America’s immense and increasing appetite for opioids in our new century.

    It is intriguing to note that America’s nationwide opioid epidemic has not been accompanied by a nationwide crime wave (excepting of course the apparent explosion of illicit heroin use). Just the opposite: As best can be told, national victimization rates for violent crimes and property crimes have both reportedly dropped by about two-thirds over the past two decades.3 The drop in crime over the past generation has done great things for the general quality of life in much of America. There is one complication from this drama, however, that inhabitants of the bubble may not be aware of, even though it is all too well known to a great many residents of the real America. This is the extraordinary expansion of what some have termed America’s “criminal class”—the population sentenced to prison or convicted of felony offenses—in recent decades. This trend did not begin in our century, but it has taken on breathtaking enormity since the year 2000.

    Most well-informed readers know that the U.S. currently has a higher share of its populace in jail or prison than almost any other country on earth, that Barack Obama and others talk of our criminal-justice process as “mass incarceration,” and know that well over 2 million men were in prison or jail in recent years.4 But only a tiny fraction of all living Americans ever convicted of a felony is actually incarcerated at this very moment. Quite the contrary: Maybe 90 percent of all sentenced felons today are out of confinement and living more or less among us. The reason: the basic arithmetic of sentencing and incarceration in America today. Correctional release and sentenced community supervision (probation and parole) guarantee a steady annual “flow” of convicted felons back into society to augment the very considerable “stock” of felons and ex-felons already there. And this “stock” is by now truly enormous.

    One forthcoming demographic study by Sarah Shannon and five other researchers estimates that the cohort of current and former felons in America very nearly reached 20 million by the year 2010. If its estimates are roughly accurate, and if America’s felon population has continued to grow at more or less the same tempo traced out for the years leading up to 2010, we would expect it to surpass 23 million persons by the end of 2016 at the latest. Very rough calculations might therefore suggest that at this writing, America’s population of non-institutionalized adults with a felony conviction somewhere in their past has almost certainly broken the 20 million mark by the end of 2016. A little more rough arithmetic suggests that about 17 million men in our general population have a felony conviction somewhere in their CV. That works out to one of every eight adult males in America today.

    We have to use rough estimates here, rather than precise official numbers, because the government does not collect any data at all on the size or socioeconomic circumstances of this population of 20 million, and never has. Amazing as this may sound and scandalous though it may be, America has, at least to date, effectively banished this huge group—a group roughly twice the total size of our illegal-immigrant population and an adult population larger than that in any state but California—to a near-total and seemingly unending statistical invisibility. Our ex-cons are, so to speak, statistical outcasts who live in a darkness our polity does not care enough to illuminate—beyond the scope or interest of public policy, unless and until they next run afoul of the law.

    Thus we cannot describe with any precision or certainty what has become of those who make up our “criminal class” after their (latest) sentencing or release. In the most stylized terms, however, we might guess that their odds in the real America are not all that favorable. And when we consider some of the other trends we have already mentioned—employment, health, addiction, welfare dependence—we can see the emergence of a malign new nationwide undertow, pulling downward against social mobility.

    Social mobility has always been the jewel in the crown of the American mythos and ethos. The idea (not without a measure of truth to back it up) was that people in America are free to achieve according to their merit and their grit—unlike in other places, where they are trapped by barriers of class or the misfortune of misrule. Nearly two decades into our new century, there are unmistakable signs that America’s fabled social mobility is in trouble—perhaps even in serious trouble.

    Consider the following facts. First, according to the Census Bureau, geographical mobility in America has been on the decline for three decades, and in 2016 the annual movement of households from one location to the next was reportedly at an all-time (postwar) low. Second, as a study by three Federal Reserve economists and a Notre Dame colleague demonstrated last year, “labor market fluidity”—the churning between jobs that among other things allows people to get ahead—has been on the decline in the American labor market for decades, with no sign as yet of a turnaround. Finally, and not least important, a December 2016 report by the “Equal Opportunity Project,” a team led by the formidable Stanford economist Raj Chetty, calculated that the odds of a 30-year-old’s earning more than his parents at the same age was now just 51 percent: down from 86 percent 40 years ago. Other researchers who have examined the same data argue that the odds may not be quite as low as the Chetty team concludes, but agree that the chances of surpassing one’s parents’ real income have been on the downswing and are probably lower now than ever before in postwar America.

    Thus the bittersweet reality of life for real Americans in the early 21st century: Even though the American economy still remains the world’s unrivaled engine of wealth generation, those outside the bubble may have less of a shot at the American Dream than has been the case for decades, maybe generations—possibly even since the Great Depression.

    IV

    The funny thing is, people inside the bubble are forever talking about “economic inequality,” that wonderful seminar construct, and forever virtue-signaling about how personally opposed they are to it. By contrast, “economic insecurity” is akin to a phrase from an unknown language. But if we were somehow to find a “Google Translate” function for communicating from real America into the bubble, an important message might be conveyed:

    The abstraction of “inequality” doesn’t matter a lot to ordinary Americans. The reality of economic insecurity does. The Great American Escalator is broken—and it badly needs to be fixed.

    With the election of 2016, Americans within the bubble finally learned that the 21st century has gotten off to a very bad start in America. Welcome to the reality. We have a lot of work to do together to turn this around.

  • Visualizing The Worrying Decline Of Freedom Around The World

    The 20th century was a bull market for literacy, freedom, prosperity, health, and technology.

    As a result of these gains, wealth has increased exponentially, and world poverty is now at all-time lows. Life expectancy continues to improve in most countries, global literacy is near 90%, and there are well over 100 democracies throughout the planet.

    But, as VisualCapitalist's Jeff Desjardins notes, not every positive trend can keep going forever. Sometimes things regress temporarily, only to be corrected later on. Other times things change more fundamentally – and that regression can be the beginning of a newer, long-term reality.

    The Decline of Freedom: An 11-Year Trend

    According to the Freedom in the World 2017 Report, which scores countries annually on various levels of freedom, there have been recent setbacks in political rights and civil liberties in a number of “Free” countries. These newest declines are partially the result of populist and nationalist forces making significant gains in democratic states.

    But Freedom House, the international watchdog organization that produces the annual report, says that this is not an isolated occurrence. In fact, based on their data and methodology, freedom has actually declined on a global basis for the last 11 years.

    Here are the aggregate gains and declines in freedom for each year – you can see that declines have been outweighing gains since 2006.

    11 Years of Decline

    While the trend is clear, the most worrying part is that the biggest aggregate declines happened in the two most recent years. Is that a coincidence, or is the decline of freedom accelerating?

    Here are the specific countries that have had the biggest declines in freedom over the last decade:

    Largest Aggregate Declines Over the Last Decade

    Countries like Yemen and Ethiopia, which are classified as “Not Free”, have lost further freedom. However, “Free” countries like Hungary or Nauru also lost 10 or more points in the index.

    2016: Another Year of Setbacks

    The biggest mover in 2016 was Turkey, a country that the Washington Post says is in a “permanent state of crisis”.

    A failed coup attempt, the assassination of a Russian ambassador, trouble in bordering Syria, and economic crises have accelerated the march to authoritarianism in the country – and it’s had a 15-point decline of freedom as a result, according to Freedom House.

    Biggest Movers in 2016

    Hungary and Poland are among the Western democracies that lost significant points in 2016, but the report also has its crosshairs on the United States for 2017. It notes the U.S. as a “country to watch” this year because of the Trump administration’s approach to civil liberties, as well as a potential redefinition of the United States’ role in the world.

    Here are where things stand as of now:

    Map: World Freedom in 2017

    For the whole report, which is a highly-recommended read, go here.

  • Tolerant Left: Berkeley Antifa Cowards Pepper Spray Elderly Trump Supporter And Egg Homeless Advocate

    Angry unemployed children, AKA Antifa, held another Trump protest today in Berkeley, CA. It’s Trump’s fault of course that they took out 6 figure student loans and haven’t been approached by numerous employers to put those English majors to work.

    Unlike the UC Berkeley riots which shut down a Milo Yiannopoulos speech, several Trump supporters showed up today to counter-protest the Antifa idiots – resulting in civil discourse.

    Just kidding, an elderly Trump supporter and a homeless advocate were attacked:

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Note the same guy in a green hat in both videos. Some have suggested he may be a paid agitator… 

    Who are the Nazis?

    Content originally generated at iBankCoin.com * Follow on Twitter @ZeroPointNow

  • The Robots Sent Into Fukushima Just Keep Dying

    Via Yvette Tan of Mashable.com,

    The robots sent in to investigate the nuclear fallout at Fukushima just aren't good enough.

     

    Tokyo Electric Power Company's (TEPCO) head of decommissioning admitted on Thursday that more creativity was needed in developing its robots sent to the reactive zone.

    The Fukushima nuclear power plant was massively damaged in 2011, when three of the six nuclear reactors suffered meltdown after being struck by a 9.0-magnitude earthquake and associated tsunami waves.

    More than 100,000 residents of the nearby Fukushima Prefecture had to be relocated, and the government has spent the last five years struggling with the aftermath. The incident is regarded as the world's largest nuclear disaster since Chernobyl.

    http://mashable.com/videos/embed?video=5iH8SPQw&player=offsite

    Part of the clean-up includes robots, sent in to probe the site, because radiation levels are too high for humans.

    But earlier last month, a robot sent into Fukushima's No. 2 reactor was forced to abort its mission after it was blocked by deposits — believed to be a mixture of melted fuel and broken pieces of structure.

    Two previous robots had also failed in its missions after one was stuck in a gap and another was abandoned after being unable to find fuel during six days of searching.

    This is an example of one of the robots TEPCO had sent to probe the area in the past.

    https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FOfficialTEPCOen%2Fvideos%2F1348040575255238%2F&show_text=0&width=560

    "We should think out of the box so we can examine the bottom of the core and how melted fuel debris spread out," TEPCO Head of Decommissioning Naohiro Masuda said.

    Mr Masuda also added that he wants another robot sent in before deciding on methods to remove the reactor's debris.

    Despite the failed probe missions, officials have added that they want to stick to their schedule of starting the site clean up in 2021. 

    Decommissioning the site is expected to cost tens of billions of dollars and last around 40 years.

    Fukushima's No. 2 reactor was found in February to have a radiation level of 530 sieverts.

    Exposure to four sieverts is enough to be lethal, according to the National Institute of Radiological Sciences.

    South Korea's low-cost carrier Jeju Air also announced on Tuesday that it would not use Fukushima Airport due to fears of radiation.

    Some of its customers had reportedly posted online that they would not use the airline because they didn't want to "board airplanes that flew over Fukushima."

  • This House Was 3D-Printed In Under 24 Hours At A Cost Of Just $10,000

    While 3D-printing may have been faded away in recent years from the spotlight of core “disruptive” technologies, that may soon change again after a company managed to 3D-print an entire house in just 24 hours. Located in Russia, the following 400-square-foot home, or 37 square meters, was built in just a day, at a cost of slightly over $10,000.

    As profiled in the Telegraph, the company Apis Cor, 3D-printing specialists based in Russia and San Francisco, built the house using a mobile printer on-site. According to the company, the walls of the building were printed and painted in just 24 hours.

    What makes Apis’ process unique is that while 3D-printing a home usually involves creating the parts off-site and constructing the building later, Apis Cor uses a mobile printer to print their apartments on-site. As profiled here, in 2015 the world’s first 3D-printed apartment building was constructed in China, with the structures printed off-site.

    However, the Apis process is unique in that it eliminates the need to transfer the printed blocks to the contstruction site.

    “Printing of self-bearing walls, partitions and building envelope were done in less than a day: pure machine time of printing amounted to 24 hours,” the company said.

    The main components of the house, including the walls, partitions and building envelope are printed solely with a concrete mixture. Once the house has been completed, the printer is removed with a crane-manipulator and the roof is then added, followed by the interior fixtures and furnishings, as is a layer of paint to the exterior of the house.

    The total construction cost of the house: $10,134.

    The initial house consists of a hallway, bathroom, living room and kitchen and is located in one of Apis Cor’s facilities in Russia. The company has claimed that the house can last up to 175 years.

     

    Nikita Chen-yun-tai, the inventor of the mobile printer and founder of Apis Cor, explained his desire is “to automate everything”.

    “When I first thought about creating my machine the world has already knew about the construction 3D printing,” he explained. “But all printers created before shared one thing in common – they were portal type. I am sure that such a design doesn’t have a future due to its bulkiness. So I took care of this limitation and decided to upgrade a construction crane design.”

    He adds: “We want to help people around the world to improve their living conditions. That’s why the construction process needs to become fast, efficient and high-quality as well. For this to happen we need to delegate all the hard work to smart machines.”

    Apis Cor has claimed to be the first company to have developed a 3D printer than can print whole buildings on-site.

    For now the technology is in its infancy, however in a few years, the deflationary pressures unleashed by Apis-Cor and its competitors could results in a huge deflationary wave across the construction space, and would mean that a house that recently cost in the hundreds of thousands, or millions, could be built for a fraction of the cost, providing cheap, accessible housing to millions, perhaps in the process revolutionizing and upending the multi trillion-dollar mortgage business that is the bedrock of the US banking industry.

    http://mashable.com/videos/embed?video=Celty0cj&player=offsite

  • Trump Asks If It's Legal For Obama To Wiretap Him… Here's The Answer

    Via Rachel Stockman of LawNewz.com,

    If you woke up Saturday morning scratching your head as to what the heck President Donald Trump was talking about when he tweeted that Obama had his “wires tapped” in Trump Tower just before his victory, you are not alone.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

     So what happened? 

    The best that we can tell, Trump is referring to a Breitbart article which was published Friday night that makes reference to attempts by U.S. intelligence agencies to obtain a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) to monitor communications involving Donald Trump and several advisers. The interesting thing is that this isn’t a new development. In fact, several outlets including Mother JonesThe Guardian, The National Review, and Heat Street have been reporting on this alleged activity over the last couple of months.

    Here is the best summary we could find of the Obama administration’s efforts to wiretap Trump associates. From a January 11, 2017 Guardian article:

    The Guardian has learned that the FBI applied for a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court over the summer in order to monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials. The Fisa court turned down the application asking FBI counter-intelligence investigators to narrow its focus. According to one report, the FBI was finally granted a warrant in October, but that has not been confirmed, and it is not clear whether any warrant led to a full investigation

    Trump then questions in a Tweet on Saturday morning if this is legal and even makes analogies to Nixon/Watergate.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

     

    So is it legal?

    While the analogies to Watergate are totally misplaced (as that involved an illegal break-in), the underlying questions about the legality of these wiretaps are indeed important ones. So far, there is no indication that the Obama administration acted “illegally” if they did indeed intercept communications from Trump Tower.

    “The problem with the President’s question is that the standards for FISA are so low and easily satisfied (with little judicial review) that it is difficult to establish any illegality under the law,” wrote George Washington Law Professor Jonathan Turley.

    The FISA procedures were put in place in the aftermath of the Nixon-era scandals. To obtain a FISA warrant, the government needs to demonstrate probable cause that the “target of the surveillance is a foreign power or agent of a foreign power.” On top of that, the agents must prove that the main purpose of the surveillance is to obtain “foreign intelligence information.”

    “It is true that, if the target is a ‘U.S. person’ there must be probable cause to believe that the U.S. person’s activities may involve espionage or other similar conduct in violation of the criminal statutes of the United States. However, citizens can be collateral to the primary target under FISA,” Turley explained.

    So bottom line: if the Obama administration intelligence agents followed the proper protocols, had evidence, got approved by Main Justice, and presented their application to a FISA judge, and were approved, it is likely that any wiretapping was legal under U.S. law.

    “Well, putting aside there is no indication Trump himself was the target of the FISA warrant (it appears to have been aimed at four of his associates), yes, it CAN be legally done,” Bradley Moss, an attorney and national security expert explained to LawNewz.com.

    Would President Obama have to sign off on this FISA warrant as Trump implies?

    No, not necessarily. Under the law, the warrant application needs to be signed off by the Attorney General. So based on the timing of these applications if the reports are true, it is likely that Loretta Lynch knew about them and approved them.

    “The President can technically request the warrant but it still has to go through the process. Obama couldn’t authorize it on his own. The AG still has to sign off and the FISA judge still has to authorize the warrant,” Moss explained.

    Trump is right that if the warrant involved four of his aides, some of his communications may have been intercepted too, and perhaps what happened warrants further investigation.

    “If somehow several people in DOJ all got together and were asked to fabricate evidence to present to the FISA judge that would be illegal,” Moss explained. “But so far that is not what we are hearing happened.”

    Turley further adds, “There is provisions stating that a U.S. person cannot be surveilled ‘solely upon the basis of activities protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.’ Thus, if Trump aides were targeted for political reasons, the surveillance would be unlawful even under the dubious protections of FISA.”

    This matter is probably deserving of further investigation, but so far, there is no indication of anything illegal.

  • Obama Slams "False" Trump Accusation, Says "Never Ordered" Wiretapping

    Moments ago, Barack Obama through his spokesman Kevin Lewis denied Trump’s accusation that he had ordered the Trump Tower wiretapped, saying neither he nor any member of the Obama White House, “ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false.”

    Follows the statement from Kevin Lewis, spokesman to former president Barack Obama

    “A cardinal rule of the Obama Administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice. As part of that practice, neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false.”

     

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Yet while the carefully-worded statement, an exercise in semantics, claims Obama did not himself, or through members of his White House team, order a potential wiretapping, it does not deny an actual wiretapping of Trump (or Trump Tower), which as some have speculated in the past, did in fact take place after a FISA Court granted surveillance of Trump over accusations of Russian interference. It also does not preclude the FBI – which is the entity that would most likely have implemented such a wiretap – from having given the order.

    As a reminder, here is what the Guardian reported in early January:

    The Guardian has learned that the FBI applied for a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court over the summer in order to monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials. The Fisa court turned down the application asking FBI counter-intelligence investigators to narrow its focus. According to one report, the FBI was finally granted a warrant in October, but that has not been confirmed, and it is not clear whether any warrant led to a full investigation.

    For the definitive answer, we suggest Trump ask Comey whether or not his building was being tapped in the days prior to the election.

  • China Vows To Refrain From "Mega Economic Stimulus" As 'Two Sessions' Begins

    The US has Jeff Sessions, but China is about to have “two sessions”.

    Starting Sunday is a two-week period of heightened political discourse, if not exactly debate, among the top echelons of China’s Politburo, also known as China’s “two sessions.”

    The China People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) starts on March 3 and will conclude on the 13th. The National People’s Congress (NPC) will start on March 5 and last until the 16th. On March 5, Premier Li Keqiang will announce 2017 economic targets (e.g., GDP growth and CPI) and policy measures including fiscal and monetary policy (e.g., on-budget deficit, M2 and TSF) in the morning session of NPC. A number of senior economic officials, including Premier Li, will also hold press conferences during the meetings to provide further details/clarifications on policies in major economic fronts.

    In previewing what to expect from the “two sessions”, this week Xinhua reported that China will “not flood the economy with government investment as it pursues more stable, healthy economic growth,” an official with the top economic planner said Wednesday. “Instead, it will focus on supply-side reform for a modest expansion of aggregate demand,” said Li Pumin, secretary general of the National Development and Reform Commission, at a news conference.

    Li made the remarks when answering a question on whether China would roll out a major stimulus plan like in 2008.

    “Stimulus plans are used to prop up weak demand with government investment under special circumstances,” he said, adding it was different from the scale of fixed-asset investment (FAI). It was recently reported that 23 provincial-level regions had announced FAI volume totaling some 45 trillion yuan (about 6.54 trillion U.S. dollars) for 2017, stoking concern of a gigantic stimulus plan.

    Li dismissed the worries by saying FAI volume is the aggregate rather than newly-added investment and includes investment from the public and private sector. The FAI volume of 32 provincial-level regions rose 7.9 percent year on year to 60.65 trillion yuan in 2016 and is likely to hit 65 trillion yuan, Li said.

    After China’s economy entered a “new normal” stage, the major difficulties were a by-product of supply rather than demand, he said. The addition of excessive production capacity and redundant projects will be forestalled, and more efforts will be made to meet demand with effective supply, he added.

    The overarching theme over the past few years has been China’s attempt to transition its export- and investment-driven growth model into one that draws strength from consumption, innovation and the service sector. Consumption contributed 64.6 percent to China’s GDP growth in 2016, up 4.9 percentage points from 2015, official data showed.

    In the process, however, China has also been quietly fading out some of its legacy industries, such as coal, where as reported on Wednesday, Beijing warned it would have to “reallocate” some 500,000 mostly coal and steel workers (to start) into growth industries, such as ridesharing and taxicabs.

    “This year we will continue to cut capacity in coal and steel,” Yin Weimin, the head of China’s Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security, told reporters. “We will need to reallocate jobs to 500,000 workers,” he said, including assigning workers different jobs within the same or a different company, early retirement or encouraging them to become entrepreneurs.

     

    Weimin added that China will introduce a policy this year to encourage the development of new industries, for example internet-related industries, that will create new jobs, he said. In 2016, he said that China reallocated jobs to 726,000 coal and steel workers “without any major problems”, adding that China’s overall employment outlook in 2017 is expected to remain relatively stable, despite the government facing immense pressure to create jobs.

    Meanwhile, China has decided to adopt a “prudent and neutral” monetary policy this year to keep liquidity at an appropriate level and avoid large injections. Official data released Wednesday showed that China’s manufacturing purchasing managers’ index expanded for the seventh month in a row to hit 51.6 percent in February, further evidence that the world’s second largest economy is stabilizing amid the uncertain global outlook.

    In this context, the following Goldlman analysis puts in context the past two years of Chinese economic growth and momentum  and what has driven them. The chart below plots the decomposition of moves in China’s 5-year swap rates into the two market-implied macro drivers. The results provide an intuitive qualitative assessment of market moves since mid-2015.

    August 2015 to January 2016 – deteriorating growth expectations: From mid-2015 through the beginning of 2016, as policymakers began another round of RMB reform, growth expectations deteriorated sharply. Falling growth expectations weighed on interest rates, although the downward pressures were partially offset by an incremental hawkish shift in the markets’ expectation for monetary policy, perhaps given the backdrop of the substantial capital outflows that followed the RMB depreciation episodes in August 2015 and early January 2016.

    February to Oct 2016 – improving growth expectations, easier policy: From late January 2016, a broad improvement in growth expectations on the back of a meaningful quasi-fiscal credit impulse pushed towards higher swap rates. However, from the perspective of the interest rate markets, the improving growth expectations were more or less offset by expectations for easier policy, leaving swap rates broadly unchanged.

    Since Oct 2016 – tighter policy expectations, continuing improvement in growth expectations: Since October 2016 swap rates have moved higher by over 100bp. Our decomposition suggests that over two-thirds of the increase in swap rates through mid-December 2016 was related to a more hawkish shift in markets’ perception of monetary policy. The more hawkish shift in policy expectations also weighed on equities through the end of the year, although this has reversed recently as market growth expectations have continued to improve steadily.

    Hawkish shift in PBoC policy perceptions key driver of higher swap rates since October
    Contribution of growth and policy shocks to move in China 5-year swap rates

    Perhaps more than anything, the above implies that, as Deutsche and UBS both warned recently, the period of Chinese upside momentum and credit-impulse contribution to global growth is about to end. For those who missed it, here is what UBS said:

    “Our global credit impulse (covering 77% of global GDP) has suddenly collapsed” and explains that “as the chart below shows the ‘global’ credit impulse over the last 18 months is essentially mainly China (the green shaded bit), which even now is still creating new credit at an annualized rate of around 30pp of (Chinese) GDP. But the credit impulse is the ‘change in the change’ in credit and even the Chinese banks could not sustain the recent extraordinary pace of credit acceleration. As a result: whereas back in Jan ’16 the global credit impulse was positive to the tune of 3.8% of global GDP (of which China comprised 3.5% of global GDP) it has now fallen back to -0.1% of global GDP (China’s contribution is -0.3% of global GDP).

     

    So while it may seem rather distant and boring compared to the daily scandals emerging daily from the realm of US politics, the fate of global economic growth in the near-term will be determined in Beijing over the next 2 weeks. Our advice is to drown out the noise as much as possible, and follow developments in China closely. 

  • A Lawmaker Is Trying To Ban Howard Zinn Literature From Public Schools

    Via Nick Bernabe of TheAntiMedia.org,

    A Republican Arkansas lawmaker has introduced legislation to ban the works of the late historian, activist, and writer Howard Zinn from publicly funded schools.

    The bill from Rep. Kim Hendren, just noted by the Arkansas Times, was introduced on Thursday and referred to the House Committee on Education.

    It states (pdf) that any “public school district or an open-enrollment public charter school shall not include in its curriculum or course materials for a class or program of study any book or other material” authored by Zinn from 1959 until 2010, the year in which he died.

    Here is the summary bill..

    And it may interest some that Hendren's other Bills include:

    HB1036 – TO PROHIBIT THE USE BY A STUDENT OF A PORTABLE ELECTRONIC DEVICE IN A PUBLIC SCHOOL; AND TO ESTABLISH A SECURE, DESIGNATED AREA WITHIN A SCHOOL WHERE A STUDENT WILL DEPOSIT HIS OR HER PERSONAL ELECTRONIC DEVICE DURING THE SCHOOL DAY.

    HB1364 – TO ESTABLISH THE PUBLIC POLICY OF THE STATE OF ARKANSAS ON THE USE OF ELECTRONIC DEVICES.

    The Zinn Education Project, which aims to “to introduce students to a more accurate, complex, and engaging understanding of United States history than is found in traditional textbooks and curricula,” noted Thursday that educators in the state may have a very different take from Hendren: “To date, there are more than 250 teachers in Arkansas who have signed up to access people’s history lessons from the Zinn Education Project website.”

    The project is also offering a free copy of Zinn’s seminal A People’s History of the United States to any Arkansas teacher who requests it:

    At least one high school class in northern Arkansas is making its opposition to the legislation clear already:

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Publisher Haymarket Books, meanwhile, tweeted in response to the news that people should read more of Zinn’s works.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    It’s not first time in recent history the works of the legendary Zinn have been the target of suppression.

    Emails unearthed by the Associated Press in 2013, for example, revealed that former Governor of Indiana Mitch Daniels sought to ban Zinn’s works from that state’s classrooms, and the Tucson, Arizona school district in 2012 banned  A People’s History from all classrooms.

    Given the response in Indiana to the revelations of Daniel’s censorship attempt, however, Hendren may also find his own Zinn-banning efforts backfire.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 4th March 2017

  • The Mainstream Is Circling The Wagons: "They're Coming For All Of Us…It's An Orchestrated Attack Against Truth"

    Via Mac Slavo of SHTFPlan.com,

    Within hours of the election of Donald Trump the mainstream media, their politico counterparts and social media operatives began spreading the narrative that the President was only elected as a result of the dissemination of fake news. The term itself became a rallying cry for everyone from major search engines to massive social media websites who said they would create fact checking teams within their organizations to ensure only legitimate news and information would be listed on their respective platforms. Soon, the leftist media began spreading lists, none of which were backed with any actual evidence, of supposed “fake news” purveyors and Russian propaganda websites. The lists included some of the most highly trafficked non-mainstream websites and aggregators around the world. As these Silicon Valley behemoths and popular news organizations mobilized, so too did mainstream advertising agencies, one of which quickly pulled advertising from the purported king of fake news, conservative leaning news organization Breitbart.com.

    The battle was clearly on. And to this day, it continues in earnest. Legitimate news is being buried in feeds and search engine pages, while the effort to directly attack the revenue of alternative media websites continues to expand.

    Several weeks ago Mike Adams of NaturalNews.com penned an alert in which he reported that a shadow organization had contacted him with an offer to either help them take down Infowars founder Alex Jones, or be destroyed. Adams, being a long-time proponent of free speech and liberty, took to the internet to expose them instead. Naturally, the skeptics laughed it all off as another conspiracy theory.

    Except just days after Natural News posted the warning, Infowars was suddenly dropped by one of the world’s largest online advertising agencies, reportedly costing the network some $3 million in revenue. And within a week of that attack, the largest search engine in the world delisted some 140,000 NaturalNews.com pages from their search results.

    While this may seem like no big deal for the average reader today, what these recent actions demonstrate is that a conglomerate of traditional news media, big business and political operatives are actively working to suppress the reporting of information that runs counter to the mainstream agenda.

    First they come for the purveyors of truth and information that has remained hidden from the masses for decades. Next they will come for those who publicly discuss their views and and ideas on social media and other forums. And while you may not fall into any of these two categories, make no mistake, as SGT Report warns in the following must-watch report, one day they will come for you, too. 

    They’ll be coming for all of us… Because this is an orchestrated attack against truth… I cannot imagine living in a time in the United States of America where this is allowed to stand…

    As of this morning Google has reinstated NaturalNews.com, though the original reasons provided by Google, which claimed this was a technical issue involving a small number of outdated pages on the website, were unable to be duplicated by numerous well known SEO websites and cyber sleuths. Curiously, as Health Ranger Mike Adams notes in his statement on the censroship, the very same technical issues actively exist on mainstream websites like CNN and Huffington Post, though their pages have yet to be delisted in the same manner as Natural News.

    Based on the evidence, we are hard pressed to find any legitimate reason for why Mike Adams’ 140,000 pages would have been delisted, save for the fact that this was a direct attack against his alternative viewpoints on health, politics and a number of other issues. And though Google as an organization may not have been fully aware of the reasons behind the delisting, someone had to push the button. That the button push came just days after the aforementioned warning Mike received to either play ball or be destroyed is highly suspicious.

    There is a concerted effort to shut down views and ideas that run counter to the status quo. Today it has come in the form of silencing the most vocal critics. Tomorrow, they may try to silence you.

    Mike Adams discusses the delisting and reinstatement of his website on The Common Sense Show:

  • NEW UNCOVERED INFORMATION: Why Central Banks Were Forced To Rig The Gold Market

    SRSrocco

    By the SRSrocco Report,

    According to newly uncovered information in the gold market, it provides additional evidence of why the Fed, Central Banks and the IMF were forced to RIG the gold market.  Not only was the dropping of the Gold-Dollar peg going to release a great deal of pressure on the manipulated gold price, but forecasts of a massive increase in gold demand was going to totally overwhelm supply.

    Thus, this new information provides clear evidence that the gold market was being assaulted on “two fronts.”  Not only was the gold market suffering from a decades of price suppression schemes via the Fed and Central Banks, but also that surging gold demand in the jewelry and industrial sectors was going to lead to severe shortages in the gold market.

    Which means, the gold market was experiencing a great deal more stress than complications stemming from the debasement of the U.S. Dollar due to massive money printing.  Actually, looking at this new information, I had no idea of the amount of Fed, Central Bank and IMF gold market intervention until I put all the pieces together.

    Now, when I say “new information”, it pertains to new information and data that I dug up from older official documents.  While most of the folks in the precious metals community realize that the Fed and Central Banks have sold gold into the market to depress the price, this new evidence puts the gold market it in an entirely DIFFERENT LIGHT.

     —————————————————————-

    PRECIOUS METALS INVESTORS…. if you think your getting the “BEST PRICE” for purchasing gold and silver, or you are receiving the best “FEE” for storing your metals, than you need not look any further.  However, if you haven’t checked out our new PRECIOUS METALS INVESTING section or our new LOWEST COST PRECIOUS METALS STORAGE page, I highly recommend you do.

    —————————————————————-

    Furthermore, additional data points to a “Gold Supply & Demand” situation that would have gone completely out of control, if the Fed, Central Banks and IMF did not step in.

    To preface this subject matter, the Central Banks dumped a lot of gold into the market during the 1960’s to maintain (suppress) the official gold price.  This was known as the “London Gold Pool” where an estimated 78 million oz (Moz) of gold were dumped into the market between 1961 and 1968.  I explained this in my THE GOLD REPORT- Investment Flows.

    However, when Nixon dropped the Dollar-Gold Peg on August 15, 1971, the problems with the global monetary system were just beginning.  In a report published in November, 1972, by the U.S. Congress and Subcommittee on International Payments of the Joint Economic Committee for the purpose of “De-emphasizing gold as a reserve asset”,it stated the following:

    1972 Two Teir

     

    Not only did the committee suggest and permit the “voluntary” sale of official gold into the market, but also to “prohibit” against Central bank purchases.  Which meant the committee was proposing a plan to only allow the DUMPING of gold into the market, but forbid any OFFICIAL BUYING.  This of course was supporting the “FREE MARKET” fundamentals for proper gold price discovery…. LOL.

    At the bottom of that quote, the committee went on to state that when the international monetary reform had been achieved (to an IMF SDR basket), all prohibitions of gold (investment) purchases by American citizens would be promptly abolished.

    So, the wonderful folks up in government had an ingenious method to their madness.  According to their assessment, it would have not been prudent to allow Americans to start purchasing and hoarding gold until the completion of the new fiat monetary system was achieved.

    Again, most of us in the precious metals community understand that the Central banks dumped a lot of gold into the market during the 1960’s London Gold Pool to maintain the official gold price.  However, new uncovered gold supply and demand data suggests there was another FACTOR that forced even more dumping of official gold during the 1970’s.

    Forecast Of Massive Gold Supply & Demand Imbalance

    The reason that Nixon dropped the Gold-Dollar Peg in August 1971 was to keep U.S. gold from flowing overseas as the U.S. Government had been printing a great deal of paper money.  Thus, countries such as France were exchanging Dollars for real gold.  This forced Nixon to drop the convertibility of Dollars into gold so the United States could hold onto its remaining gold reserves.

    But, and here is a BIG BUT… converting Dollars into physical gold was only one part of the monumental problem facing the gold market and industry.  Up until now, this was the only real problem that I was aware of as it pertained to the gold market in the 1970’s.  However, forecasts of future Gold Supply & Demand factors were going to totally disrupt the market unless the Fed and Central banks stepped in.

    This next quote comes from the USGS 1971 Gold Yearbook.  The highlighted area shows just how bad the gold supply and demand situation was going to be at the end of the decade:

    According to a gold expert at Consolidated Gold Fields Ltd., global gold demand was forecasted to reach 63 million oz (Moz) by 1980, up from 42.5-45 Moz in 1972.  You see… this was a BIG PROBLEM.  Why?  Because gold mine supply was also forecasted to decline to 38-41 Moz in 1980.  This would have resulted in a huge net deficit.

    So, how well did the Consolidated Gold Fields Ltd., forecast turn out?  Let’s look at the chart below:

    1971 Gold Demand 63 Moz 1980

    Actually, it turned out pretty darn accurate.  Global gold production declined from its peak of 46.5 Moz in 1970, to 38.8 Moz in 1980.  This was mainly due to the peak and decline of South African gold production.  I would imagine very few individuals in the precious metals community realize just how much gold South Africa produced.

    No other country has come anywhere near the record annual gold production achieved by South Africa at its peak in 1970:

    World Gold Production

    South Africa produced an amazing 1,000 metric tons of gold in 1970… 32 Moz.  Here are the annual peak production figures from three leading gold producing countries:

    1) China = 478 mt (15.4 Moz) 2014

    2) USA = 366 mt (11.8 Moz) 1998

    3) Australia = 276 mt (8.9 Moz) 2015

    China holds the second highest annual gold production record at 478 mt (15.4 Moz) set in 2014.  However, this is still less than half of the 1,000 mt that South Africa produced in 1970.  According to GFMS 2016 Gold Survey, South Africa’s gold production was 151 mt (4.8 Moz) in 2015.   The once mighty South African gold production has declined 85% from its peak in 1970.

    Now, taking the 1980 forecasted supply and demand data by Consolidated Gold Fields Ltd. above, here is the result:

    Gold Production vs consumption

    If the forecast of a 63 Moz gold demand figure was true, then the market would have suffered a 25 Moz deficit in 1980.  So, not only did U.S. President Nixon stop the bleeding of gold flows out of the U.S. Treasury, but in addition, public demand for gold that decade was going to explode.

    This just could not fly.  Which is why the Congress and the Subcommittee on International Exchange and Payments (listed above) were highly motivated to promote “Official Gold Sales” while prohibiting “Official Gold Buying.”  This was a “ONE-WAY PLAN” for gold… and that was the dumping of a massive amount of the yellow metal into the market.

    The Fed, IMF and Official Government Gold Sales During the 1970’s

    It’s hard to tell how much gold was dumped into the gold market during the 1970’s decade.  I have plans on putting together a more comprehensive report on the details of what took place in the gold market from the 1960’s to present.  This will include more detailed data on Official gold sales.

    However, we have some clues in the text from different USGS Gold Yearbooks.  First, we have foreign gold at the Federal Reserve sold into the market in 1973 and 1974:

    1974 Fed Gold Sales

    As we can see, 2.14 Moz of foreign held gold at the Fed were dumped into the market in 1974 and 1.69 Moz in 1973.  Unfortunately, official sales of gold into the market did not deter the rising gold price.  The gold price jumped from an average $65 in January 1973 to a high of $200 at the end of 1974.

    Well, the Central banks could not let this exploding gold price to continue.  Which is why the IMF made this official statement in August, 1975:

    1975 IMF Gold sales

    The IMF – International Monetary Fund, announced in August, 1975 to sell one-sixth of its gold stocks.  At the time, the IMF held 153.4 Moz of gold.  Thus, it planned to sell 25.5 Moz over the next several years to supposedly provide capital for low-interest loans to developing countries.  I wonder why the IMF did not make this statement back in 1973 or 1974?  And why would the IMF have to sell gold to provide capital for developing countries??  Wasn’t there a new FIAT MONETARY REGIME??

    Wasn’t gold now a “Barbarous Relic?”

    With the IMF “strategic”announcement that it would sell 25.5 Moz of gold into the market, it had a profound impact on the gold price in 1975:

    1975 Gold Price Chart

    After the IMF gold sale announcement, the gold price plummeted 21% in just one month from $165, down to a low of $130.  Before I came across this information, I just believed that the gold price was due for a correction…. stated by several websites, such as by analysts on King World News.  However, this wasn’t a typical market correction.  Rather… this was a MARKET INTERVENTION FORCED CORRECTION.  Big difference.

    So, why the IMF gold sale announcement?  Was it due to a response to the rapidly rising price.. or did rising demand play a part.  If we look at this next quote taken from the USGS 1974 Gold Yearbook, we find our answer:

    1974 Private Gold Investment

    According to the data, private gold holdings and investment surged 5-fold in 1974 to 27.3 Moz.  The report also stated that total gold jewelry and industrial demand was 23 Moz in 1974.  Thus, total gold demand exceeded 50 Moz in 1974.

    I would imagine if private gold investment didn’t jump 5-fold from the previous year, the IMF would have not considered it necessary to announce the sale of 25.5 Moz of its gold reserves in 1975.

    In order to make good on its promise, the IMF did sell 3.9 Moz of gold in 1976 and another 6 Moz in 1977 into the market:

    1976 IMF gold sales

    1977 IMF gold sales

    In just the first two years after its proposed 25.5 Moz gold sale in August 1975, the IMF sold 9.9 Moz, or nearly 40% of its planned amount.  If we read the first quoted text above (1976), the gold price reached a low in August 1976 after the second IMF gold sale.

    Oh, did I forget to mention that another 2.14 Moz of foreign held gold at the Federal Reserve was dumped into the market in 1976??  So, between these two official institutions, over 6 Moz of gold were sold into the market in 1976 alone to guarantee there was a FREE MARKET PRICING mechanism for gold.

    I have to make a comment here.  I spend a lot of time at energy and precious metals blogs.  I am completely surprised at the lack of intelligence by individuals who are supposedly very “BRIGHT” in their respective industries.  When I hear comments that gold is nothing more than a “13th Century Middle Ages Relic”, and that digit currency is the new monetary system… the Good Lord Almighty must be enjoying one hell of a BELLY-ACHING LAUGH.

    These folks who seem to understand the ramifications of falling cheap energy production upon the global markets still cling to a FIAT MONETARY SYSTEM that needs an ever-increasing supply of cheap oil to survive.  How on earth are they unable to CONNECT THE FRICKEN DOTS is beyond me.

    Regardless, the Fed, Central banks and IMF have been rigging the gold market for quite some time… and continue to do so.

    During the 1960’s Gold Pool it was more a physical market intervention as they dumped 78 Moz of gold to maintain the official gold price of $35 an ounce.  Then when Nixon dropped the Gold-Dollar Peg in 1971, these official institutions combined “Physical gold dumping” along with the “Creation of a Paper Gold Futures Market in 1975” to rig the gold market during the wild 1970 decade.

    I don’t have a lot of data on the paper futures market in this article (will be in future Paid Report), but here is a tidbit on some of the trading volume:

    Global Paper GOLD EXCHANGE Annual Trading Volume:

    1975 = 84 Moz

    1977 = 190 Moz

    1979 = 1,027 Moz

    From the beginning of paper gold trading on the Global Exchanges, it increased from 84 Moz in 1975 to an astonishing 1,027 Moz (1.03 billion oz) in 1979.  The tremendous trading of paper gold contracts (later on including options) sucked in a massive amount of funds.  Thus, paper gold trading funneled a great deal of money away from physical gold and into worthless paper gold.

    As I mentioned, I don’t have a full reporting of all the official gold that was dumped into the market from 1971-1980.  That will be included in an upcoming report.  However, it was stated in the USGS 1980 Gold Yearbook, that the IMF did complete its final gold auction in May 1980.  This was their final gold sale that equaled a total of 25.5 Moz from 1976 to 1980.

    If we include this amount with the sales of foreign gold at the Federal Reserve and other official gold sales, the amount of gold sold during the 1970 decade was quite an impressive amount… probably something north of 50 Moz.

    Again, this was all done to guarantee a FREE MARKET price discovery for gold.  Today, most Americans and citizens around the world have no idea just how undervalued gold is.  No idea whatsoever.

    Since the peak of the gold price in 1980, the Fed and Central Banks continued to dump physical gold into the markets at various times up until 2009.  However, “Official gold sales” turned into net “Official purchases” in 2010.  This put a severe KINK in the Western Central Bank plan of gold market rigging.  Just seems like those problematic Chinese and Russians have a much different idea about REAL MONEY than the West.

    Central Bank Net Sales

     

    To continue rigging the gold market in the 1990’s and onwards, the West had to introduce “Gold Leasing” and more exotic “Gold Derivatives” to keep the gold price from going completely BONKERS.  Again, this has been done while the public remains completely in the dark.

    In conclusion, the Fed and Central banks were in serious trouble in 1971.  Not only was the dropping of the Gold-Dollar Peg in 1971 a sign that things were about to get very interesting with the gold price, but the forecast of exploding gold demand would have resulted in a 25 Moz deficit by 1980.  This forced the Fed, IMF and Central banks to dump a massive amount of gold into the market to meet the insatiable demand.

    Which means, gold became too valuable to be used as money in the U.S. and Global economy.  Yes, that sounds strange… but that is the truth.  I mentioned this in a previous article on why silver was removed from U.S. coinage.  It was due to the same reason.

    When I say, “too valuable to be used as money”, I mean it in the way that money has degraded to.  There are no real banks in the world.  A bank should hold stored “ECONOMIC ENERGY” as stated by Mike Maloney.  When someone deposits gold at a bank, that is REAL MONEY.  A bank is supposed to store real money.  Instead, banks store DIGITAL IOU balances, or worse yet, highly leveraged loans.

    Since Nixon dropped the Dollar-Gold Peg in 1971, the amount of debt in the world has skyrocketed.  The Central Banks designed a two-tiered system to remove gold as a reserve asset:

    1. Dump physical gold into the market to suppress or maintain price.  Then add a Paper Futures Market to funnel funds away from a limited supply of physical gold and into an unlimited supply of paper gold contracts.
    2. Increase world debt to such massive levels, that interest rates had to fall towards zero.. or negative.  Thus creating a 30+ year artificial Bond Market Rally.  If interest rates rise… the entire system BLOWS UP.

    While the ultimate revaluation of gold and silver has taken more time than most of us in the precious metals community anticipated, THAT DAY IS COMING.

    As I have mentioned in several articles and interviews, the timing of this event will be known by what takes place in the energy markets as they are the drivers of our economy… and the highly leverage Fiat Monetary System.

    Investors should not try to time the markets by selling Stocks, Bonds or Real Estate before the crash comes and then move into physical gold and silver.  Rather, that should be done on an ongoing basis as the TIMING of the event is impossible to predict.

    However, it is much wiser to do be in the metals a DAY EARLY than a DAY LATE.

    Lastly, if you haven’t checked out our new PRECIOUS METALS INVESTING section or our new LOWEST COST PRECIOUS METALS STORAGE page, I highly recommend you do.

    Check back for new articles and updates at the SRSrocco Report.

  • Austria To Stop Giving Food, Shelter To Rejected Asylum Seekers

    In a bill aimed at encouraging asylum seekers to leave voluntarily, Austrian lawmakers are considering halting the provision of food and accommodation to migrants who are denied asylum and refuse to leave the country.

    Austria took in roughly 90,000 asylum seekers in 2015, more than 1 percent of its population, as it was swept up in Europe's migration crisis when hundreds of thousands of people crossed its borders, most on their way to Germany. As Reuters notes, it has since tightened immigration restrictions and helped shut down the route through the Balkans by which almost all those people – many of them fleeing war and poverty in the Middle East and elsewhere – arrived. Asylum applications fell by more than half last year.

    Asylum seekers in Austria get so-called basic services, including free accommodation, food, access to medical treatment and 40 euros ($42.41) pocket money a month.

    But now, Austria's centrist coalition government on Tuesday agreed on a draft law which would allow authorities to stop providing accommodation and food to rejected asylum seekers who refuse to leave the country.

    “The first thing is basically that they don’t get anything from the Austrian state if they don’t have the right to stay here. Is that so hard to understand?”

    As Politico reports, Interior Minister Wolfgang Sobotka said, said the law, which will need approval by parliament, was designed to encourage rejected asylum seekers to leave voluntarily.

    According to the minister, some 4,000 people receive basic services but should have left the country. Of those, around half could be affected if the law is passed because they are deemed healthy enough to travel to their home countries.

    Most rejected asylum seekers in Austria in 2016 were from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Nigeria. Asylum applicants who lie about their identities face a €5,000 fine or three weeks in jail.

    The Austrian office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) said the bill was "highly questionable" and urged lawmakers to think hard about agreeing to it.

  • "What Is To Be Done?"

    Via Paul Craig Roberts,

    The question in the title is V.I. Lenin’s question. His answer was to create a revolutionary “vanguard” to spread revolutionary ideas among the workers, the economic class that Karl Marx had declared to be the class rising to the ascendency of political power. Finally, democracy, frustrated by upper class interests in its earlier manifestations, would become reality. The workers would rule.

    Given the presence of evil and human failing, it did not work out in that way. But Lenin’s question remains a valid one. Americans whose economic life and prospects for their children have been destroyed by the offshoring of American manufacturing and tradable professional skills jobs, such as software engineering, answered the question by electing Donald Trump.

    The Americans, dispossessed by the offshoring corporations, elected Trump, because Trump was the only American running for a political office who called attention to the problem and declared his intention to fix it.

    By standing up for Americans, Trump alienated the global corporations, their executives and shareholders, all of whom benefit from stealing the economic life of Americans and producing abroad where labor and regulatory costs are lower. Neoliberal junk economists describe this labor arbitrage, which reduces the real incomes of the American labor force, as the beneficial working of free trade.

    These offshoring firms not only have destroyed the economic prospects of millions of Americans, but also have destroyed the payroll tax base of Social Security and Medicare, and the tax base of local and state governments, with the consequence that numerous pension systems are on the verge of failure. The New York Teamsters Road Carriers Local 707 Pension Fund has just failed. This failure, experts predict, is the beginning of a tsunami that will spread into municipal and state pension systems.

    When you add up the external costs of jobs offshoring that are imposed on Americans, the costs far exceed the value of the profits that flow to the One Percent. Clearly, this is an intolerable situation.

    Dispossessed Americans rose up. They ignored the presstitute media, or perhaps were driven to support Trump by the hostility of the media. Trump was elected by dispossessed America, by the working class.

    The working class is out of favor with the elite liberal/progressive/left which abhors the working class as racist, misogynist, homophobic, gun nuts who oppose transgendered toilet facilities. Thus, the working class, and their chosen representative, Donald Trump, are under full assault by the presstitutes. “Trump Must Go” is their slogan.

    And well he might. Trump, in a fit of stupidity, dismissed his National Security Advisor, Gen. Flynn, because Flynn did what he should have done and spoke with the Russian ambassador in order to avoid a Russian response to Obama’s provocation of expelling Russian diplomats at Christmas.

    Russians have been demonized and ascribed demonic powers. If you speak to a Russian, you fall under suspicion and become a traitor to your country. This is the story according to the CIA, the Democratic Party, the military/security complex, and the presstitute media.

    Once Trump put Flynn’s blood in the water, he set the situation for the sacrifice of other of his appointees, ending with himself. At the present time, “the Russian connection” black mark is operating against Trump’s Attorney General, Jeff Sessions. If Sessions falls, Trump is next.

    Let’s be clear. As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sessions met with the Russian ambassador, just as he met with a number of other countries’ ambassadors. There is nothing unusual or surprising about a US senator meeting with foreign diplomatic representatives.

    Those who accuse Sessions of lying are misrepresenting the facts. Sessions met with ambassadors in his capacity as a US Senator, not in his capacity as a Trump representative. As a former US Senate staffer, I can attest that it is perfectly normal for US Senators to meet with diplomats. John McCain and Lindsey Graham even fly to the Middle East to meet with terrorists.

    Despite the facts, the Washington Post, New York Times, CNN and all the rest of the CIA’s media whores are consciously and intentionally misrepresenting the facts. Americans do not need any more evidence that the entirety of the American media is totally devoid of integrity and respect for truth. The American media is a collection of whores who lie for a living. The presstitutes are despicable, the scum of the earth.

    The real question is how has contact with Russian government officials become criminalized, grounds for removing a National Security Adviser, an Attorney General, and impeaching a President himself. President John F. Kennedy had ongoing contact with Khrushchev, the head of the Soviet government, in order to resolve the Cuban/Turkish missile crisis without nuclear war. President Nixon had ongoing contact with the Russians in order to achieve SALT I and the anti-ballistic missile treaty. President Carter had ongoing contact with Russians in order to achieve SALT II. President Reagan worked with the Russian leader in order to end the Cold War. I know. I was there.

    But if President Trump wants to defuse the extremely dangerous tensions that the reckless Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama regimes have resurrected with a powerful thermo-nuclear state that only wants peace with the US, President Trump and any of his appointees who spoke to a Russian are unfit for office! This madness is the position of the idiot liberal/progressive/left, the CIA, the Democratic Party, the right-wing morons of the Republican Party such as Lindsey Graham and John McCain, and the two-bit whores that comprise the Western media.

    Dear reader, ask yourself, how did communications with Russians in the interest of peace and the reduction of tensions become a criminal act? Have laws been passed that it is forbidden for US officials to speak with Russian officials? Are you so utterly stupid that a presstitute media that has never in your entire life told you anything that was truthful can convince you that those who seek to avoid a conflict between thermo-nuclear powers are “Russian agents”?

    I have no doubt that the vast bulk of Western populations are insouciant. But if there is no intelligence and awareness left anywhere in the population, and most certainly there is none whatsoever in the governments of the West or in the Western media or the Identity Politics of the liberal/progressive/left, then don’t expect to be alive much longer.

    The entirety of the world has been put on the knife edge of existence by the arrogance, stupidity, and hubris of the neoconservative pursuit of American world hegemony. The neoconservative ideology is perfect cover for the material interest of the military/security Deep State that is driving the world to destruction.

  • Bacon Boom Busts

    Great news America – After soaring to the highest price in three years, wholesale prices for pork bellies, the cut used for making bacon, are heading for a 25% loss over two weeks.

    As Bloomberg notes, increased demand had more than doubled prices since August, but now bellies are so expensive that the high costs are stemming demand, according to David Kruse, president of Commstock Investments Inc.

     

    And while the average joe may see his so-called pocketbook better off as pork prices plunge (or will obviously purchase more bacon), the above-average-joes (who drive their Beamers and Benz's) are facing an ever increasing cost for their luxury lifestyles

    The premium gasoline that fuels luxury cars made by Mercedes-Benz to Audi has always been more expensive than regular, but the difference keeps getting bigger.

    As Bloomberg points out, premium costs almost 50 cents a gallon extra, nearly doubling in the past four years. And don’t expect the trend to change — environmental rules limiting sulfur that kicked in this year could make the higher-octane fuel scarcer and even more costly in the future.

    So, it seems very clear that consumer confidence is soaring because bacon prices are plunging, not Trumptopian hope…

    Never mind the collapse in real wages.

  • The West Submits To Blasphemy Laws

    Via Judith Bergmann of The Gatestone Institute,

    • "Now that Islamophobia has been condemned, this is not the end, but rather the beginning…" — Muslim Brotherhood affiliate Samer Majzoub, Canadian Muslim Forum.
    • The motion still does not offer any definition or any statistics to support its claim that "Islamophobia" is a problem in Canada.
    • However, it should hardly shock anyone that the first motion condemning Islamophobia has so swiftly been followed up by a new motion demanding concrete government measures.

    The West is submitting to blasphemy laws. Denmark, for example, has apparently decided that now is the time to invoke a dusty, old blasphemy provision. Denmark still has a provision in the penal code against blasphemy, but until now, it has only been used three times. The last time was nearly half a century ago, in 1971. Denmark's Attorney General has nevertheless just charged a man for burning a Quran.

    In the West, blasphemy as a criminal offence has for centuries generally been considered a relic of the past. In a largely godless society, few people take offense to blasphemous comments or acts. Christians do not descend upon alleged blasphemers with guns and knives, and publishers do not worry about "offending" Christians.

    In 1997, Danish public service radio financed an artist burning a Bible and broadcast it on national television. No one was charged, even though there were complaints and the state prosecutor investigated the case.

    Yet, a Danish man will be prosecuted. He burned his own Quran in his own garden and then posted the video in a public Facebook group, "Yes to freedom, No to Islam," with the accompanying text, "Consider your neighbor, it stinks when it burns". Attorney General Jan Reckendorff stated:

    "It is the prosecution's view that the circumstances of the burning of holy books such as the Bible and the Qur'an implies that in some cases it may be a violation of the blasphemy provision, which deals with public mockery or scorn against a religion. It is our opinion that the circumstances of this case require that it should be prosecuted in order for the courts to have the opportunity to take a position on the matter."

    The Attorney General may have been mentioning the Bible only out of politeness. After all, no one has been prosecuted for burning the Bible in Denmark, as not even burning it on national television was considered sufficiently offensive. The Quran is clearly a very different matter.

    The decision has caused renewed debate about abolishing the blasphemy provision in Denmark — an issue that regularly pops up.

    In Norway, the provision against blasphemy was abolished in 2005. A poll conducted in January showed that 41% of Norwegian Muslims believe that blasphemy should be punished, and 7% believe that the penalty for blasphemy anywhere should be capital punishment.

    In Britain, at least one man has been prosecuted and sentenced for burning the Quran (in 2011) and several arrested in 2010 and 2014 .

    The enforcement of blasphemy provisions, so out of place in a largely post-Christian Europe, brings back the Middle Ages, when blasphemy was ferociously prosecuted by the Church. Is that really an era for modern European society to be aspiring to after centuries of fighting for freedom of speech?

    In Canada, meanwhile, anti-Islamophobia motions, aiming gradually to prohibit all criticism of Islam — and part of Muslim blasphemy laws — are being passed. The Ontario Provincial Parliament unanimously passed an anti-Islamophobia motion in February. The motion called on the legislature to "stand against all forms of hatred, hostility, prejudice, racism and intolerance; rebuke the… growing tide of anti-Muslim rhetoric and sentiments" and "condemn all forms of Islamophobia." Needless to say, no such motions were introduced to protect Judaism or Christianity.

    In October 2016, Canada's national Parliament unanimously passed an anti-Islamophobia motion, which was the result of a petition initiated by Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated Samer Majzoub, president of the Canadian Muslim Forum. At the time, no one knew what they were condemning: Criticism of Islam? Criticism of Muslims? Discussing whether ISIS is a true manifestation of Islam? No one knew, as no one had bothered to define it.

    The lack of definition, however, has not stopped Iqra Khalid, a Member of Parliament from the governing Liberal Party, from introducing a new motion on the back of the previous one, Motion M-103, in the Canadian parliament. The motion demands that "Islamophobia" not only be condemned, but that the government develop a comprehensive approach to reducing or eliminating Islamophobia. The motion still does not offer any definition, or any statistics to support its claim that "Islamophobia" is a problem in Canada. However, it should hardly shock anyone that the first motion condemning Islamophobia has so swiftly been followed up by a new motion demanding concrete government measures. After the first motion was unanimously passed, the man who initiated the original petition, Samer Majzoub, had this to say in an interview with the Canadian Muslim Forum:

    "Now that Islamophobia has been condemned, this is not the end, but rather the beginning… We need to continue working politically and socially and with the press. They used to doubt the existence of Islamophobia, but now we do not have to worry about that; all blocs and political figures, represented by Canada's supreme legislative authority, have spoken of that existence. In the offing, we need to get policy makers to do something, especially when it comes to the Liberals, who have shown distinct openness regarding Muslims and all ethnicities… All of us must work hard to maintain our peaceful, social and humanitarian struggle so that condemnation is followed by comprehensive policies."

    Does the West really want to go charging quixotically off to the Inquisitions of the Middle Ages again?

  • TSA Launches "Invasive" Pat-Downs With "More Intimate Contact Than Before"

    As a result of a study, which found that weapons routinely make it past airport security, the TSA is introducing “more rigorous” and “comprehensive” physical inspections at airports around the country, according to Bloomberg. The security agency, which until now had the option of using five different types of physical pat-downs in the screening line, is eliminating the “options” and replacing them with a single, universal method which would involve heavier groping.

    The Transportation Security Administration made the announcement to its agents this week, and in the case of Denver International Airport employees, advised employees and flight crews on Thursday that the “more rigorous” searches “will be more thorough and may involve an officer making more intimate contact than before.”

    In an ominous warning, TSA spokesman Bruce Anderson told Bloomberg that “people who in the past would have gotten a pat-down that wasn’t involved will notice that the [new] pat-down is more involved.” The shift from the previous, risk-based assessment on which pat-down procedure an officer should apply was phased in over the past two weeks after tests at smaller airports. In their notice, Denver airport officials said employees are subject to search at random locations: “If a pat down is required as part of the operation, badged employees will be required to comply with a TSA officer’s request to conduct a full body pat down.”

    The new policy will also apply to pilots and flight attendants, classified as “known crewmembers” who generally receive less scrutiny at checkpoints. The TSA conducts occasional random searches of these employees, and airlines this week inquired as to whether their employees would be subject to more frequent pat-downs. The number of random searches for airline crews isn’t changing and will remain a “very small percentage” of the total, Anderson said. But airport employees may face more random checks.

    Anyone who declines use of the TSA’s existing conventional scanner screen will be subject to the new pat-down. The TSA currently screens about 2 million people daily at U.S. airports. The agency doesn’t track how many passengers are subject to pat-down searches after they pass through an imaging scanner.

    The TSA has been criticized in recent years for its overall screening techniques after an internal investigation by Homeland Security in 2015 found that the TSA failed an unbelievable 95 percent of airport security tests, allowing undercover agents to successfully and repeatedly smuggle mock explosives and banned weapons through checkpoints in the country’s busiest airports. As a result, the TSA has been in desperate need of change and the physical inspection would be a good place to start.

    That said, the agency has been ridiculed for years for causing delays at airports and being largely ineffective at detecting contraband. The good news is that while passengers may find the new patdown more intrusive, Anderson promised that the new screening procedure isn’t expected to increase overall airport security delays. However, “for the person who gets the pat down, it will slow them down.”

    As Bloomberg adds, in December, a CNN political commentator, Angela Rye, posted an article online describing her “humiliation” during a TSA agent’s search. Rye wrote in graphic detail about the pat down of her genitals during a search at the Detroit Airport before a flight to New York.

    TSA officials didn’t immediately address whether the new universal pat-down protocol will mandate touching of passenger genitals.

    While the physical screening process has been a stress point for the TSA practically since its inception, the agency has tried to make travelers more comfortable by pairing them up with people of the same gender for pat-downs and also giving people the option of being inspected in a private room, however at the cost of substantial travel delays. However, as some have mused out, it still doesn’t answer one of the most confounding questions about the TSA: “Is America really any safer because some underpaid worker grabbed a pussy at the airport?”

  • Auto Lending Update – Someone Please Explain How This Is Not A Bubble

    Experian recently released their Q4 2016 Automotive Finance Market update which includes a lot of statistics that seem to confirm our frequently documented concerns about the sustainability of the current level of annual auto sales (see here, here and here for our recent notes on the topic).

    First, there is the staggering growth of auto loans outstanding.  It should be readily apparent to almost anyone that a 21% expansion in credit issuance over the course of just two years likely implies there has been at least some degradation in underwriting standards.

    Auto Loans

     

    But you don’t have to speculate as Experian lays out the facts…and, sure enough, the outstanding loan balances of “Deep Subprime” borrowers have increased by double the amount of any other bucket, other than the plain “Subprime” folks, of course.

    Auto Loans

     

    Of course, an impaired credit profile has, in no way, hampered America’s entitled consumers’ demand for driving around in style as average subprime loan balances actually exceed “Super Prime.”

    Auto Loans

     

    But don’t worry, those subprime borrowers can “afford” those loans because they simply offset higher interest costs with stretched out terms…

    Auto Loans

     

    …which keeps there average monthly payments low.

    Auto Loans

     

    But, despite all the financial engineering, a look at 60-day auto delinquencies around the country may imply that the auto party is slowly coming to an end.

    Auto Loans

     

    But sure, auto sales should be perfectly sustainable around 18mm per year…

  • Middlebury Professor Assaulted, Injured While Escorting Conservative Speaker

    In the latest literal assault on free speech at an allegedly tolerant educational institution, a Middlebury College professor was injured by protesters on Thursday evening as she was escorting a controversial speaker from campus. She was treated at Porter Hospital and released, the Addison County Independent reported.

    The night’s event unfolded in two parts.

    At first, Middlebury students forced conservative American Enterprise Institute scholar Charles Murray –  a political scientist who has been criticized for his views on race and intelligence – to stop his address before a campus audience Thursday night.


    Charles Murray looking at an audience of students who had turned their backs on him

    Murray was invited to speak on campus by a student group, and was set to talk about his 2012 book, “Coming Apart,” and how its analysis of the white-working class explains politics in the age of President Donald Trump. But most of the controversy over the scholar’s appearance at the Vermont-based school related to his 1994 book, “The Bell Curve,” which connected genetics with socioeconomic outcomes and has long been criticized by the Left as “racist.”  The Southern Poverty Law Center has called Murray a “white nationalist” who has used “racist pseudoscience.”

    According to the Burlington Free-Press, and as seen on the video below, student protesters in the audience refused to give Murray a chance to speak as they turned their backs to him, and chanted and shouted for several minutes before faculty members moved the scheduled speaker to a private room to deliver his address via livestream video without a live audience.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Despite attempts by faculty and more tolerant students to restore normalcy, the protesters refused to compromise. “We need to foster a climate where we can listen and respect differences,” Middlebury’s dean of students Baishakhi Taylor said in an attempt to calm down the student protesters, according to the Burlington Free Press. “We don’t have to agree with everything. How do we engage in civil discourse?”

    Not even appeals to the anti-Trump sentiment would sway the crowd: Alexander Khan, a leader of the American Enterprise Institute Club which invited Murray to speak, tried to appeal to the crowd by citing the scholar’s criticism of Trump. Demonstrators jeered that that doesn’t matter because Murray is “still a racist.”

    However, it was what happened next that was more troubling.

    As noted above, after the initial chaos, college officials led Murray to another location and a closed circuit broadcast showed him being interviewed by Stanger, the Russell J. Leng ’60 Professor of International Politics and Economics. As Stanger, Murray and a college administrator left McCullough Student Center last evening following the event, they were “physically and violently confronted by a group of protestors,” according to Bill Burger, the college’s vice president for communications and marketing.

    Burger said college public safety officers managed to get Stanger and Murray into the administrator’s car.

    “The protestors then violently set upon the car, rocking it, pounding on it, jumping on and try to prevent it from leaving campus,” he said. “At one point a large traffic sign was thrown in front of the car. Public Safety officers were able, finally, to clear the way to allow the vehicle to leave campus.”

    “During this confrontation outside McCullough, one of the demonstrators pulled Prof. Stanger’s hair and twisted her neck,” Burger continued. “She was attended to at Porter Hospital later and (on Friday) is wearing a neck brace.”

    Murray, who apparently was unhurt in the incident, is best known for his 1994 book, “The Bell Curve,” for which he was criticized for an assertion that people of different races have different economic outcomes because of their inherent difference in intelligence.

    The incident was so shocking it prompted even well-known neocon Bill Kristol to tweet:

    “What happened at Middlebury to Charles Murray threatens not just campus free speech, but free speech–indeed freedom in America–generally.”

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    He then said: “I may have missed them, but in light of Middlebury where are the statements by college presidents, scholars & writers defending free speech?”

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    In this particular case, Kristol is actually right, and one wonders if the tables were reversed and if a liberal speaker had been abused in similar fashion at one of America’s top liberal colleges, just what would the media’s reaction – which has largely ignored this incident – have been.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 3rd March 2017

  • How To Counter Leftist Violence While Maintaining The Moral High Ground

    Via Brandon Smith of Alt-Market.com,

    Social division is an undeniable reality of human existence; it is also not necessarily a negative aspect of human existence. The moment a society is forced or manipulated into blindly agreeing on everything is the moment that society begins to die and the future of mankind in general becomes rather bleak. Ideas need to be tested, they need to be scrutinized and they need to be verified, perpetually. That said, there are right ways and wrong ways of doing this.

    Diving into a culture of zealotry is certainly the WRONG way. Zealotry requires a religious-like idolization of a particular idea or philosophy; it requires unverified faith and an unwavering devotion. Once people become zealots, they cannot be reasoned with, they cannot be debated, they cannot be dissuaded. They are, for all intents and purposes, automatons with only one mission — to spread their beliefs by any means necessary.  They do not care about being right, they only care about “winning.”  Because, in their minds, their position is unassailable.  They are righteous, and thus, the ends will always justify the means.

    The culture of the Left in the U.S. is beginning to embrace zealotry and the path can only get more ugly from here. This is evident not only in the violent behavior of more vocal groups like Antifa, but also in the lack of self criticism by many on the left that would consider themselves more moderate. There are very few voices among liberals and “progressives” today that are openly admonishing the counterproductive and thuggish actions of their more extreme members (this includes not only Antifa, but other groups like Black Lives Matter).  In many cases, “moderate” leftists even cheer such actions.

    There is this notion among some in the Liberty Movement that to even point out this dynamic is irresponsible because it only reinforces the concept of the false left/right paradigm. Most of these people I find are very new (newbies) to the Liberty Movement and don’t really understand what the false left/right paradigm is. When we talk about the Left and the Right as an illusion, we are talking about the elites who sit at the TOP of the sociopolitical sphere. Meaning, the elites have no loyalties to concepts on either the left or the right in politics. In fact, they often switch back and forth like chameleons depending on what they want from the public at the time. They have their own agenda which does not include the rest of us.

    To be clear, I was just as much against the fake conservatism of George W. Bush as I was against the fake liberalism of Barack Obama.

    This false paradigm does not, however, apply to regular citizens. The further away you get from the top of the pyramid, the more people tend to legitimately associate closer to one philosophy or the other. In times of crisis and uncertainty, these divisions become more pronounced. This is reality. Anyone who argues that there is no left/right paradigm when it comes to the average citizen has no idea what they are talking about.

    So, now that we have acknowledged that the problem exists, lets examine it more in depth…

    The Problem

    All one needs to do is observe the attitudes, insane demands and criminality of hardcore leftists in the past year to see that at least one side of the paradigm cannot be salvaged. They are a lost cause.

     

    This is a prime example of how it is impossible to win an argument when your position is fundamentally illogical. In most cases, these protesters can’t even specify their reasons for protesting, and they don’t really care to examine why they do what they do. They only know that their ideology is not being represented in totality.  They are unsuccessful at debating their ideas coherently and don’t have the intelligence to convince others that they are correct. They aren’t going to give up simply because they are wrong, so, their only other option is to slander the character of those who disagree, attack them physically and disrupt their ability to speak freely.

    Keep in mind, there is no moral conundrum for zealots. They believe they are completely justified in what they do because the other side represents a “greater evil.” Labeling their opponents as “fascists” is a get-out-of-conscience-free card for them.

    It is important to note that we are not quite at the moment of crisis yet, but I would consider 2017 a turning point. This is where our (conservatives and sovereignty champions) decisions now could affect the future for decades to come. I suspect that as we move closer to summer and warmer weather, riots designed to cancel conservative speaking events (and random riots with no specific purpose) will expand tenfold. Leftists seem to be more active in warmer weather (there is a reason most of them live near the coasts).

    All American citizens, regardless of their political leanings or personal ideals, have a right to speak and the right to listen to those speaking. All American citizens also have a right to redress grievances. This includes leftists. That said, it is important to make a distinction here — NO ONE has the right to silence speech in public spaces in the name of “activism,” and this is where the Left has gone off the rails. My right to speak and be heard is protected; their “right” to silence me is not protected.

    There is a line here that cannot be crossed. Conservatives must be allowed free speech in public places, and leftists must be allowed to protest in public places as long as that protest is PEACEFUL. Once an individual or group uses force to silence speech, they have given up the moral high ground.

    I recognize that there are paid provocateurs operating among liberal protesters and that this likely contributes to higher chances of violence and the madness of mobs. The presence of elitist money among leftist groups has been exposed on numerous occasions in reference to George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, which admitted to injecting $33 million dollars into the Ferguson protests (riots). WashingtonCAN! (another Soros-funded group) put out a Craigslist ad in Seattle offering to pay people $15-$20 an hour to “organize” anti-Trump rallies. WashingtonCAN claims this was merely an ad to hire “phone solicitors,” but they do in fact help organize protests, and nowhere in the ad is phone solicitation mentioned.  I do not think it is a stretch to suggest that these paid "organizers" are present at protests, nor do I think it is a stretch to suggest that they are contributing to the mob mentality.

    This should be taken into account as well. There are moments in any high-tension protest where the mob can be swayed to remain peaceful or to break out into thuggery. Usually, if the mob sees a few people getting away with violent attacks, this gives them license to unhinge as well.

    Is the proper response to crush all leftist protests simply because of the violence of a handful? No. The key is to disrupt individual provocateurs before they can entice the mob to forget themselves. Normally, this would be the job of police on the scene, but as I’m sure many of you have noticed recently (Berkeley being a prime example), the police have been reticent to intervene in a tactically intelligent manner, depending on what municipality they are operating. It seems that when it comes to state and local law enforcement there are only two modes of response, either they are mostly hands off, or, they go full crackdown.

    The issue that needs to be considered is when police or the federal government do initiate a full crackdown on all protests. Will conservatives cheer the measure?

    As I have noted in past articles including 'Globalists Want To Destroy Conservative Principles – But They Need Our Help', I believe the greatest danger today is not crazed leftists, but how we RESPOND to crazed leftists.

    To give some historical perspective, the Antifa movement, for example, is nothing new. It is an odd plagiarism of the “Anti-Facist” movements in Europe during the 1920s. Antifa was essentially an offshoot of communist movements in Italy opposed to the rise of Benito Mussolini, but it then spread to other European nations. It was in fact the belligerence of communist groups that actually inspired public support for fascist leaders like Mussolini and Hitler. As common people grew fearful of a monstrous Bolshevik-style revolution, the only other option offered to them was fascism, which at the time appeared to many to be a saving grace.

    Of course, it was not, and totalitarianism in the name of defeating the communists only led to atrocities equal to communist dictatorships. This is what I call a “morally relativistic choice;” a catch-22 that is usually engineered, forcing the populace to pick between the “lesser of two evils.”

    There are those who might argue that there is little chance of a similar development in America today, but consider this — conservatives movements were prodded and harassed for eight years by a constitution-trampling president who originally claimed he was going to undo the trespasses of the constitution-trampling president before him. This took place while leftist organizations imposed thought control and political correctness on us with relative glee. Conservatives have been organizing, training and arming themselves for nearly a decade in the event that globalist and Marxist ideologies take one more inch of rope, the expectation being that Hillary Clinton would attempt to take a mile.

    Now, with Trump in office, we are a hammer looking for a nail.

    This is what the left simply does not grasp. We are certainly not fascists now, but with continued violence from the left something in the collective conservative mind will eventually snap. My suspicion is that this is exactly what elites like George Soros want. They are using the left as sacrificial pawns in order to goad conservatives into going nuclear.

    There are millions of conservatives coming home from work right now, sitting with their families, and seeing news each day filled with leftist protesters trampling all over conservative events and in many cases getting away with it. These conservatives are becoming more and more angry; more and more willing to embrace an ends justify the means reaction. Ultimately, they may very well support a full spectrum government stranglehold on protests and the speech of those we disagree with. This will make us the villains of our little period in history, and this is something I would like to avoid.

    So, the question is, how do we counter violent leftists like those in Antifa without abandoning our constitutional principles?  Lets talk about solutions…

    The Solution

    There is a school of thought that suggests we should stand back, let the mobs tire themselves out and in this way we avoid “escalation.” I would point out that the Left has been escalating matters quite expertly without our intervention. When you have elitist funded organizations generating momentum at a constant pace, it is hard for me to back the notion of complete pacifism. On the other hand, moderation and an even hand rule the day.

    Countering leftist mobs requires a scalpel, not a bulldozer, metaphorically speaking.

    Conservatives are less likely to support police state intervention if they see that leftist attacks are already being countered in a rational way.  I would argue that this could be done by limited groups of civilian volunteers (around 50-100 men strong), without any government involvement, acting as security for speakers and the attendees of events.

    These people would have to be highly vetted — no criminal background, no background of mental instability or psychotropic usage, a professional demeanor, absolutely no ties to federal agencies, no propensity to be ruled by emotion, no stolen valor, etc. etc.  They would also have to be physically capable.

    Members would need previous training as well as updated training in self-defense and riot response, as well as defusing confrontation.  They would have to be invited by the event organizers in question and their goal would be to defend attendees from violence in a non-lethal manner.  Their purpose cannot be to stop a protest from happening, only ensuring that protesters do not overstep their bounds and harm others.

    Of course, the immediate accusation that will be used is that this kind of organizing is simply the formation of “brownshirts” for Trump.  This is why a security group of this caliber would have to also be willing to offer their services to ANY speaker or event, regardless of political affiliation.  It cannot be exclusively about Trump. If a mob of conservatives were threatening to use violence to shut down a liberal speaker, then the group would have to be willing to protect those people as well. I don’t see any examples of this happening anywhere, but again, the group’s concerns must focus on free speech and those that are trying to squash it, regardless of who they are.

    This civilian security organization would require funding at a grassroots level through donations from regular people. Large sums of cash from major political donors or non-profit foundations could not be accepted.  The group would have to be beholden to no one.  It would also need to be separate from any already existing organization and function as its own animal in order to prevent conflicting goals.

    Donations would be needed to fund travel and food expenses for volunteers, as well as some protective gear, the cost of initial training, the expense of background checks as well as legal defense. This organization would have to be limited in size to prevent confusion and a lack of structural discipline.  I suspect that such a venture would start small, and truly qualified people would be limited in the beginning anyway.

    I am willing to coordinate this effort with others depending on the level of enthusiasm that is generated and if donations are adequate. I am ready to help provide training for those who pass the vetting process.  Interested parties can contact me at: brandon@alt-market.com

    I am also willing to be present and in harms way at every single event that requires a security response.

    I have looked into money raising avenues like Kickstarter, but I believe strongly that these websites will not allow crowdfunding for this venture for political reasons. If there is a strong response to this idea, I will post regular updates to Alt-Market.com on money raised as well as progress made.

    It is entirely possible that I will not be able to find the support needed to make this volunteer venture happen. I can only present the concept and hope that people agree with it. Make no mistake though, if I do not do it, someone else eventually will. It is vitally important that these people are found trustworthy and have a track record of supporting Constitutional principles as well as a track record of competence.  Anyone that arrives on the scene from nowhere should not be trusted.  Anyone looking merely for notoriety and celebrity should not be taken seriously. Anyone looking to start a confrontation rather than prevent one should be dismissed.  We cannot allow ourselves to become what the left accuses us of being.  This is a time for extreme caution, and quiet professionalism.

  • Navy Punishes "Special Warfare Unit" For Flying Trump Flag In Military Convoy

    About a month ago the Naval Special Warfare Group 2 of Virginia Beach set the Twittersphere ablaze after video surfaced of their military convoy flying a Trump flag on their lead vehicle.

    Photos and videos of the ‘event’ quickly spread around the internet and prompted a full Navy investigation into the incident.  Here’s a photo of the convoy:

    Trump

     

    And here is the original video that made the rounds, complete with the full commentary of an obviously emotionally scarred Hillary voter.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

     

    Now, fast forward a month and Lt. Jacqui Maxwell has just announced that the world can go on spinning again because some of America’s finest soldiers have been appropriately disciplined for their ‘heinous’ crime.  Per the Washington Post:

    Lt. Jacqui Maxwell, a spokeswoman for Naval Special Warfare Group 2, said in a statement to The Washington Post that punitive actions were taken but declined to comment on the precise nature of the punishment or how many individuals were affected.

     

    “The inquiry was completed between the unit’s commanders and service members,” Maxwell’s statement said. “It has been determined that those service members have violated the spirit and intent of applicable DoD regulations concerning the flying of flags and the apparent endorsement of political activities. Administrative corrective measures were taken with each individual based on their respective responsibility.”

     

    “Department of Defense and Navy regulations prescribe flags and pennants that may be displayed as well as the manner of display,” Maxwell said last month.

     

    “Naval Special Warfare strives to maintain the highest level of readiness, effectiveness, discipline, efficiency, integrity, and public confidence,” her statement continued. “To this end, Naval Special Warfare leaders are committed to thoroughly and impartially investigating all non-frivolous allegations of misconduct. Where misconduct is present, the Naval Special Warfare commander responsible for ensuring good order and discipline within his unit will make a disposition decision as to the appropriate administrative and/or disciplinary action, if any.”

    We don’t know about you but we’re ever so thankful for this special snowflake who helped to expose the hateful and insensitive actions of these soldiers.  Imagine if they behaved this way during a deployment…they might offend some terrorists and start an international crisis.

  • Paul Craig Roberts Fears "The Resurrection Of Armageddon"

    Via Paul Craig Roberts,

    “The U.S. intelligence community’s extraordinary campaign of leaks claiming improper ties between President Trump’s team and Russia seeks to ensure a lucrative New Cold War by blocking detente.” — Gareth Porter

    It only required 24 days for the Deep State to castrate President Donald Trump and terminate the promise that the high tensions with Russia created during the Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama regimes would be terminated by Trump’s presidency.

    As Gareth Porter shows conclusively, the case against General Flynn, Trump’s 24-day National Security Adviser, and by implication against Trump himself, is a fake news creation.

    Obama’s CIA director, John Brennan, planted fake reports, none of which contained any evidence whatsoever, on the CIA-compliant media whores known as “presstitutes.” The CIA’s media whores knew that the reports were a CIA response to the threat to the $1,000 billion annual budget of the military/security complex that desperately needs “the Russian threat” for its justification. But the media whores—-principally the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC—-and all the rest as well are more dedicated to serving their CIA master than they are to serving peace between nuclear powers. Interesting, isn’t it, that the US and Western media are more committed to conflict with Russia than they are to peace, despite the brutal fact that 10 percent of the nuclear arsenal of either the US or Russia is sufficient to terminate all life on earth.

    As Patrick Lawrence says: “The lights upon us are dimming. We have been more or less abandoned by a press that proves incapable of informing us in anything approaching a disinterested fashion. As suggested, either the media are Clintonian liberals before they are newspapers and broadcasters, or they are servants of power before they serve us.” 

    All we have left, says Lawrence, is the alternative media. “To put this simply and briefly, they and we must learn that they are not ‘alternative’ to anything. In the end there is no such thing as ‘alternative media,’ as I often argue. There are only media, and most of ours have turned irretrievably bad.”

    The alternative media is the Internet media, websites such as this one, RT, the Intercept, USAWatchdog, Alex Jones, Information Clearing House, Global Research, Unz Review, etc. These independent news sites are under attack. Remember the list of 200 “Russian agents/dupes”? Every source of information that does not subscribe to the Deep States’ Matrix creation of “the Russian Threat,” which is the Deep State’s replacement for the orchestrated “Soviet Threat,” has been selected for shutdown. Apparently, Alex Jones is already having problems with Google. Several websites managed to get off the 200 List, and those that have seem to have collapsed as members of the opposition.

    As the Nazis said, all it takes is fear, and the people collapse.

    Trump’s presidency is effectively over. Even if he is permitted to remain in office, he will be a figurehead for the Deep State’s presidency. President Trump has already fallen into line with the military/security complex. He has said Russia has to return Crimea to Ukraine, whereas in fact Crimea returned itself to Russia. He has rejected a new strategic arms limitations treaty (START) with Russia, stating that he wants supremacy in nuclear armaments, not equality. Obama’s one trillion dollar upgrade of the US nuclear arsenal is likely to get a boost from Trump.

    After one month in office the goal has changed from reduced tensions with Russia to greater tensions. Greater tensions might soon be upon us. There are plans to occupy part of Syria with US troops in order to prevent Syria with Russia’s help from reuniting the country. http://www.globalresearch.ca/rand-corporations-plan-for-dicing-up-syria/5577009 Part of Syria is to go to Turkey, part to the Kurds, and Washington will keep a chunk. This way Washington can keep the turmoil going forever. The Russians brought this problem on themselves. Ever hopeful for Washington’s cooperation against ISIS, Russia dallied in cleaning out ISIS. The prospect that Trump would work with Russia as part of better relations assumed that Trump would actually be in charge, which has turned out to be delusional.

    It is difficult to know if the new Trump regime is more Iranophobic than Russophobic. The Trump regime’s inclination to jettison the Iran agreement and reopen the conflict means more conflict with Russia. Washington’s continued provocations of both Russia and China will dispel any lingering Russian expectations of better relations with Washington.

    It is bizarre to see the liberal-progressive-left allied with the warmongers against Trump. As the neoconservatives pull nuclear Armageddon out of the grave that Reagan and Gorbachev put it in, the American left demands the impeachment of the president whose goal was better relations with Russia. Once the champion of the working class, the left now champions Identity Politics. Trump’s goal of jobs for the working class leaves the leftwing cold. The left wants to destroy the “Trump deplorables,” which the left describes as “racist, misogynist, homophobic, gun nuts.” In Identity Politics, every identity is a victim except the oppressor identity—white heterosexual males.

    Where then is the opposition to the neoconservative ideology that is driving US foreign policy toward world hegemony? There are a few of us, but we are being cast as “Putin agents.” In other words, those who have sufficient intelligence to understand that Washington is not going to achieve hegemony over Russia and China or even Iran, but is likely to provoke nuclear war by trying, are relegated to the traitor class.

    The reason that there is still life on earth after more than a half century of nuclear weapons is that American presidents and Soviet leaders worked together to reduce tensions. During these decades, there were numerous false alarms of incoming ICBMs. However, because the leadership of both countries were working together to avoid nuclear conflict, the warnings were disbelieved both by the Soviets and Americans.

    Today the situation is vastly different. The last three US presidents, and now apparently Trump also, worked overtime to increase tensions between the two nuclear powers. Moreover, it was done in ways that convinced the Russian government that Washington is completely untrustworthy. The ongoing vicious lies about the Russian connections of Trump and his associates are so obviously false as to be laughable, but the Russians are seeing that the falsity of the charges notwithstanding, Trump’s National Security Adviser has fallen and Trump himself might be next.

    In other words, the Russians are observing that in America facts are not relevant to outcomes. The Russians have already experienced this with regard to themselves with the lies about Putin, the Ukraine, Georgia, and Russian intentions toward Europe. Putin is routinely called a “thug,” “murderer,” “the new Hitler” by US politicians, presstitutes, and the Democratic Party’s candidate in the recent presidential election. Ranking US generals describe Russia as the “principal threat to the US.” NATO commanders assert that the Russian Army could occupy the Baltics and/or Poland at any moment. These nonsensical accusations and predictions suggest to the Russians that the West is preparing its populations for an attack on Russia.

    In such a tense state of affairs, how will false alarms be interpreted? Will Americans convinced that Putin and Russia are evil incarnate believe the false alarms this time? Will Russians convinced that they have been set up for attack believe them this time?

    This is the extreme risk to which the insane neoconservatives, the idiot liberal-progressive-left, the greedy military/security complex, and the aggressive generals have exposed life on earth.

    And the few voices warning of the risk are dismissed as “Russian agents.”

  • Tesla Admits It Still Hasn't Completed A Model 3 Beta Prototype

    With Tesla stock price down 15% in the last few weeks, amid a roaring market, it appears doubts about Elon Musk's omnipotence are creeping in once again… and rightly so. Despite the hype surrounding hundreds of thousands of pre-orders due to start production in H2 2017, buried deep within the company's most recent 10-K filing is an admission that there is still no Model 3 beta prototype.

    The fanfare surrounding the pre-order-fest for the Tesla Model 3 continues to support the stock in many analyst's (and investor's minds). However, with production due to begin in H2 2017 (just 4 months away) and delivery in 2018, doubts are starting to appear, judging by the stock's demise since earnings…

     

    And Car and Driver's Anton Wahlman – who appears to be one of the few who actualy read Tesla's 10-K filing – may have found the reason for the doubts…

    From the filing:

     

    “We expect that the next performance milestone to be achieved will be the successful completion of the Model 3 Beta Prototype, which would be achieved upon the determination by our Board of Directors that an eligible prototype has been completed. Candidates for such prototype are among the vehicles that we are currently building as part of our ongoing testing of our Model 3 vehicle design and manufacturing processes.”

    In other words, Wahlman points out, Tesla has not “completed” a Model 3 “beta prototype” as of, well, either of these two dates: December 31, 2016 (the period that the SEC filing covers), or March 1, 2017 (the date on which the document was filed). Pick your poison.

    We know that around mid-February 2017, Tesla is said to have started building the next stage of Model 3 prototypes. It is from this batch that they appear to be creating the first “beta prototype.”

    What does this mean for production? In theory, there is nothing that prevents Tesla from delivering what a normal car company would call a prototype test vehicle of some sort and simply declare victory on its original timeline. This is what Tesla did for the Model S in June 2012 and for the Model X in September 2015. After those events, it took at least another approximately three months—arguably a fair bit more—for proper volume production to take root.

    That is to say that, no matter how immature, Tesla could indeed deliver a Model 3 in July 2017 and declare victory. However, that is not to be confused with what a normal car company would call its start of sales to the general public.

    Basically, Car and Driver's Wahlman says, it comes down this:

    If it’s prudent to start production of an all-new car three to six months after the advent of a “beta prototype,” then why don’t all automakers do this? Why do they take approximately two years for the preproduction testing stages, if only three to six months are necessary?

    We will find out in the second half of this year.

    More smoke and solar panel mirrors?

    Still withcash burn at a billion dollars, there's probably nothing to worry about…

  • Islam Will Surpass Christianity To Become The World's Largest Religion, New Report Says

    Via Michael Snyder of The End of The American Dream blog,

    If current trends continue, Islam is on track to become the largest religion in the entire world by the end of this century according a stunning new report that was just released by the Pew Research Center.

    While it is true that Christianity is still growing on a global basis, it is not growing nearly as rapidly as Islam. So unless something changes, Christianity will only be the second largest faith in the world by the year 2070. According to this newly released report, Islam is the only major religion that is growing faster than the global population overall, and it is being projected that the number of Muslims on the planet will rise by a staggering 73 percent between 2010 and 2050

    Islam is the only religion growing faster than the world’s population, and it will be the largest in the world by 2070, research has found.

     

    US-based Pew Research Center analyzed demographic change among the world’s major religions and found that the world’s population of Muslims will grow by 73 percent between 2010 and 2050, compared to 35 percent for Christians, the next fastest-growing faith.

     

    The world’s population will grow by 37 percent over the same period. If those rates of growth continue past 2050, Muslims will outnumber Christians by 2070, the report found.

    Of course there are religious groups that are growing even faster than Islam, but they were not part of this study.

    For example, I have previously written about how witchcraft is the fastest growing faith in America, and yesterday I wrote about how membership in the Satanic Temple in the United States has been absolutely exploding since Donald Trump was elected.

    So it isn’t just Islam that is gaining ground.

    But without a doubt, Islam is now the dominant worldview on much of the planet. Many in the western world tend to think of it as a Middle Eastern religion, but the truth is that most Muslims actually live in the Asia-Pacific region

    Some 62 percent of Muslims live in the Asia-Pacific region with large populations in Indonesia, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Iran and Turkey, Pew researchers said.

     

    In 2050, India is set to take over from Indonesia as the country with the world’s largest Muslim population, according to the study.

    In India, there truly is a battle going on for the spiritual future of that nation right now. Christianity and Islam are both making a tremendous amount of progress, and this has greatly upset a lot of traditional Hindu groups.

    Islam is making a lot of progress in Europe as well. A tremendous amount of immigration has caused the number of European Muslims to surge in recent years, and this new report is projecting that 10 percent of all Europeans will belong to Islam by the year 2050.

    Here in the United States, Muslims still only make up a very small percentage of the population, but that percentage is growing too. The following comes directly out of the new Pew Research Center report

    In 2015, according to our best estimate, there were 3.3 million Muslims of all ages in the U.S., or about 1% of the U.S. population. Pew Research Center’s 2014 Religious Landscape Study (conducted in English and Spanish) found that 0.9% of U.S. adults identify as Muslims. A 2011 survey of Muslim Americans, which was conducted in English as well as Arabic, Farsi and Urdu, estimated that there were 1.8 million Muslim adults (and 2.75 million Muslims of all ages) in the country. That survey also found that a majority of U.S. Muslims (63%) are immigrants.

     

    Our demographic projections estimate that Muslims will make up 2.1% of the U.S. population by the year 2050, surpassing people who identify as Jewish on the basis of religion as the second-largest faith group in the country (not including people who say they have no religion).

    Once the number of Muslims in the United States surpasses the number of Jewish people, what impact will that have on U.S. politics?

    That is something to think about.

    The report indicated that there are a couple of primary reasons why Islam is growing so rapidly around the world.

    First of all, Muslims tend to have larger families than everyone else. The report said that the average Muslim woman has 3.1 children during her lifetime, while all other groups only have 2.3 children per woman.

    So in the end, Islam could end up dominating the world just by simply making more babies than everyone else.

    Muslims are also younger on average than other religious groups. According to the report, on a global basis Muslims are “seven years younger than the median age of non-Muslims”.

    Unfortunately, when Muslims become dominant in a society they often want to impose their systems of government, law, economics, etc. on everyone else. That is why “sharia law” is such a sensitive issue, and the report found that in some Islamic countries an overwhelming majority of Muslims want to impose sharia law on everyone else

    For instance, a Pew Research Center survey of Muslims in 39 countries asked Muslims whether they want sharia law, a legal code based on the Quran and other Islamic scripture, to be the official law of the land in their country. Responses on this question vary widely. Nearly all Muslims in Afghanistan (99%) and most in Iraq (91%) and Pakistan (84%) support sharia law as official law. But in some other countries, especially in Eastern Europe and Central Asia – including Turkey (12%), Kazakhstan (10%) and Azerbaijan (8%) – relatively few favor the implementation of sharia law.

    Nobody can deny that Islam is one of the most dominant forces on the entire planet in 2017, and it looks like it is going to become even more dominant in the years ahead.

    And that is troubling news for Christians and those of other faiths, because all you have to do is to look at countries such as Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Iran to see what happens to other faiths once Islam takes total control of a nation.

    In a truly Islamic state, there is no room for religious freedom, and so the growth of Islam is likely to be one of the greatest global threats to the free exercise of religion for the foreseeable future.

  • Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman to CNN: 'Stop Spreading Lies and Fake News'

    Russia’s outspoken foreign ministry spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, had some choice words for CNN — after being confronted by their reporters over the AG Sessions’ hysteria. In a prepared statement, she called the event ‘media vandalism’ and a ‘disgrace’ — suggesting the US media is down in the depths of depravity and deceit.

    She stated the American media had “cross(ed) the line far beyond the professional ethics and their competence. They accuse and judge by simply fabricating false information.”

    “I have a question: is it rock bottom, which the US media has reached, or is there an even greater depth for them to dive?” Zakharova said.
     
    “The things that the US media affords itself to report are just an attempt at… a total disinformation of the public in America and worldwide,” Zakharova explained, adding the US audience is, of course, the main target.

     
    During the exchange, which was caught on camera and posted below, she laid into CNN — asking them to ‘stop spreading lies and fake news.’

    ‘Stop spreading fake news’, cuckburgers.

    Watch.

    Content originally generated at iBankCoin.com

     

  • Minimum Wage Hikes Don't Benefit Low-Income Families But Do Raise Youth Unemployment Rates

    As written by Jack Salmon and first appearing on The Hill

    With 19 states raising the minimum wage at the beginning of 2017, it seems that Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) “Fight for 15” campaign is becoming a reality.

    While Democrats have been wholeheartedly behind the movement to increase the minimum wage, now Republican lawmakers are increasingly leaving the door open to minimum wage increases. The prevailing argument in favor of raising the minimum wage is that a higher minimum wage would reduce poverty and alleviate income inequality.

    So, what does the empirical research reveal about the effectiveness of the minimum wage to reduce poverty?

    From a lawmaker’s perspective, setting a higher minimum wage seems to be a viable remedy for lifting families out of poverty. However, it is important to note that the minimum wage targets individual low-wage workers, not low-income families. The merits of using minimum wage as a tool to combat poverty depend on the level at which poor families benefit from such policy changes.

    The statistics show that the relationship between being a low-wage worker and a low-income family is very weak. In fact, data from CPS suggests that the majority of poor families with heads of household of prime working age simply don’t work, so a minimum wage has no impact on these families.

    What’s more, a sizable proportion of low-wage workers are new entrants to the labor force, such as teenagers, who are not necessarily in low-wage families. Taking these facts into consideration, basic calculations indicate that a sizable share of benefits derived from a minimum wage increase does not go to impoverished families.

    In fact, if the federal minimum wage was hiked from $7.25 to $10.10, only 18 percent of resultant increases in income would go to poor families (based on 2010-2014 data), meanwhile 32 percent would go to families with incomes more than three times the poverty line. With a $15 minimum wage the corresponding figures would be 12 percent and 38 percent, respectively.

     

    Several studies have analyzed changes in the poverty rate between states that increase the minimum wage versus those that don’t. The conclusion these studies reveal is that there is no statistically significant relationship between raising the minimum wage and reducing poverty.

    What becomes increasingly clear from several studies on the targeted effects of minimum wage increases is that minimum wage is a very imprecise way to raise the relative incomes of the poorest families and may actually marginally benefit wealthier families.

    We know who wins, but who loses?

    The debate surrounding the negative effects of minimum wage increases on employment levels continues to take center stage. Some recent studies have even gone as far as suggesting that there is no negative impact on employment levels derived from an increase in the minimum wage.

    The opinions of a majority of labor economists, however, paint a very different picture. A national survey conducted by the University of New Hampshire found that over 73 percent of American Economic Association (AEA) labor economists believe significant increases in the minimum wage will lead to employment losses and 68 percent believe employers will be deterred from hiring low-skilled workers.

    A consensus on minimum wage studies conducted in the 1980’s finds that for every 10 percent increase in the minimum wage, employment of young and unskilled workers declines by 1-2 percent.

    With over half of minimum wage workers being aged 16-24, continuously raising the minimum wage simply guarantees that those young people, whose skills are not sufficient to justify that kind of wage, will instead remain unemployed.

    It’s clear that the minimum wage is an ineffective tool at reducing poverty and alleviating income inequality. The benefits of increases in the minimum wage are not targeted toward impoverished families and the costs of minimum wage increases deny youth the skills and experience they need to launch their careers.

    The basis of poverty is not low-paid workers, but those who are not in work altogether. Perhaps policymakers would be wise to consider reforms that will grow the economy, generate jobs and create the incentives to choose work over welfare.

    Jack Salmon is a Washington, D.C.-based researcher focused on federal fiscal policy. Salmon holds an M.A. in political economy with specializations in macroeconomics and comparative economic analysis from King’s College London.

  • Mike Krieger Warns "America Is In Big Trouble"

    Via Mike Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

    I hate to break it to you, but Donald Trump isn’t going to make America great again. He doesn’t have the insight or courage to stand up to the financial elite, and he’s insufferably authoritarian. This is not a recipe for greatness.

    Democrats are even worse. At the most ideal moment possible, the party was gifted an energetic populist movement primed for activism thanks to a non-Democrat who unified tens of millions of Americans sick of the ways thing were going, but couldn’t get behind Trump. How did the party respond? By rigging its primary and forcing down our collective throats one of the most corrupt, unethical, political monsters in American history. Afterwards, how did the party respond following her loss to Donald Trump? By making zero meaningful changes in party leadership, by endlessly propagating CIA-fueled Russia conspiracy theories and by very publicly rejecting Bernie Sanders and his supporters by choosing Tom Perez to run the DNC (for more read this excellent article).

    As demented as many of Trump’s views are, at least he’s talking about shaking up the system. The only things Democrats have done since the election is attempt to co-opt Bernie Sanders, dress in all white and hyperventilate about Russia. The party is so worthless, it doesn’t even deserve to exist anymore. Then there’s the corporate media. The elitist propaganda mouthpieces that are even more destructive than our two deranged political parties, and that’s saying a lot. We are in big trouble as a people.

    The past 36 hours have been really telling. The reaction to two events have demonstrated to me just how much trouble this country is in. The first event revolves around Trump’s speech to Congress. I watched the speech, and was thoroughly unimpressed. Like his critics, who falsely claim Trump is the root of all evil as opposed to a symptom of an evil system, Trump appears more interested in targeting symptoms as opposed to the core problems. While “draining the swamp” is a great slogan, he shows no intention of actually doing it. Rather, he’s filled his economic advisor positions with a cadre of particularly gross parasitic Wall Street cretins. This wasn’t the surprising part of Trump’s speech, however. The truly surprising, and disturbing part, was the tremendous praise heaped upon him by the corporate media afterwards, further proving the point that corporate media is worthless.

    Why did the corporate media like the speech so much? Mainly it had to do with the moment Trump honored Carryn Owens, the widow of slain Navy SEAL William “Ryan” Owens. Will this standing ovation do anything to improve the lives of struggling Americans? Does it tell us anything at all about how Trump will handle foreign policy and out of control militarism in order to prevent deaths like this going forward? Of course not. What it tells you is that all the corporate media cares about is pomp and circumstance. Corporate media is obsessed with the show, the red carpet, with superficiality. Even if you loved the speech, it was a freakin’ speech. I’m not comparing Trump to such men, but most of the most heinous thugs in human history were great at giving speeches. Actions, not words are what matter, as we should have learned from eight years of Obama.

    Moving along, the second event that solidified to me the amount of trouble we’re in as a nation relates to Jeff Sessions. As all of you already know based on my recent posts, I think Jeff Sessions is a dangerous, disconnected, goon. A fossil from another era, a hypocrite, and a terrible choice for Attorney General. That said, I think the controversy about what he told Congress related to his meetings with Russia is being blown grossly out of proportion. Here’s the clip in case you haven’t seen it:

    What’s the big deal here? From what we know, he was simply a Senator who met with the Russian Ambassador publicly. These meetings consisted of one at a Heritage Foundation event in July 2016, where other ambassadors were present. The other was in Sessions’ Senate office in September.

    As The Washington Post reported:

    Two months before the September meeting, Sessions attended a Heritage Foundation event in July on the sidelines of the Republican National Convention that was attended by about 50 ambassadors. When the event was over, a small group of ambassadors approached Sessions as he was leaving the podium, and Kislyak was among them, the Justice Department official said.

    These encounters seem pretty transparent, it’s not as if they were slinking around back allies handing-off envelopes filled with cash. It seems obvious to me that former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper lying to Congress about unconstitutional government spying on American citizens was far worse, and he wasn’t forced to resign.

    Of all the terrible things about Jeff Sessions, this is the least of my concerns. Naturally, it’s being portrayed as one of the greatest scandals in U.S. history by the corporate media as well as establishment Democrats (to understand why, see: How the Corporate Media Continues to Use the Russia Scapegoat as a Distraction from Status Quo Failure).

    Proving once again that the only thing Democrats can really get passionate about is anti-Russia hysteria. A hysteria which the corporate media is likewise obsessed with, despite countless really significant domestic issues which remain unaddressed.

    For example, take a look at the following images recently published by New York Magazine and The New Yorker.

    Do these publications realize how utterly ridiculous they look to anyone capable of critical thought?

    So what have we learned from all this? For starters, it should be abundantly clear by now that no one is coming to save us, and no one will be making America great again for us. We need to focus on making ourselves great. Once we do that, we will be able to surmount all obstacles and make this world a better place, but don’t think the path will be easy. I think we are in for an extraordinarily bumpy ride, and the only thing we’ll be able to depend on is the decency and goodwill of our fellow citizens. The government isn’t going to save us, we need to save ourselves.

  • "Hillary For Mayor" Posters Popping Up All Around New York City

    Like a nagging case of “pneumonia” that brings with it random, yet inevitable, bouts of full-body paralysis, the rumors/threats of Hillary tossing her hat in the ring for the New York City Mayoral race simply won’t go away.

    Now, per a report from The American Mirror, it seems that a group of disaffected Hillary supporters in New York City are following in the footsteps of a recent movement in Paris to elect Obama as the next French President…when you can’t convince your chosen candidate to run for elected office we guess plastering a bunch of posters in public spaces and hoping for the best is the next most logical option.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

     

    Ironically, just last night we jokingly noted that “We sense an opening for you, Hillary” after incumbent Mayor Bill de Blasio faced public backlash, even from members of his own party, over his inability to control the homelessness crisis which is spiraling out of control in NYC.

    Unfortunately, particularly for a man seeking re-election later this year, the following stats on NYC homelessness are fairly damning.

     

    Homeless

     

    Meanwhile, as we pointed out in January, in a hypothetical matchup a Quinnipiac poll found that Hillary would crush de Blasio by 20 points.

    The latest example comes from a Quinnipiac University Poll which analyzed a hypothetical head-to-head match-up between Clinton and New York’s current mayor, Bill de Blasio.  Unfortunately for de Blasio, the poll found that, while he would beat almost everyone else whose name has been mentioned as potential contender, he would almost certainly be crushed by Hillary. 

    In a very hypothetical race for New York City Mayor, Hillary Clinton, running as an independent, tops incumbent Bill de Blasio, running as a Democrat, 49 – 30 percent, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

     

    “New Yorkers aren’t in love with Mayor Bill de Blasio, but they seem to like him better than other possible choices – except Hillary Clinton, who probably is an impossible choice,” said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll.

     

    “None of the possible contenders has made any real noise or spent any money, so this race still could get interesting.”

     

    In the Clinton – de Blasio matchup, Clinton leads 61 – 29 percent among Democrats and 45 – 31 percent among independent voters. Republicans back de Blasio 28 – 18 percent. She leads among men and women and black, white and Hispanic voters. She also leads in every borough except Staten Island, which goes to de Blasio 28 – 22 percent.

    Hillary Poll

     

    Certainly this guy seems pretty stoked about the possibility.

    HFM

Digest powered by RSS Digest