Oct 30

Today’s News 30th October 2017

  • The Petrodollar's Biggest Challengers

    Authored by Michael Kern via CryptoInsider,

    Established in the early 1970s, the petrodollar has secured the United States’ influence over the oil trade for over 40 years, but recently, it is clear that this monopoly is slowly beginning to fall apart – in some part due to the influence of Bitcoin and other emerging cryptocurrencies.

    Background

    Due to the plummeting value of the dollar, the debt from the Vietnam War, and excessive domestic spending, President Nixon abruptly pulled out of the Bretton Woods Accord, which pegged the dollar to the price of gold and based the value of other currencies on that of the dollar. Labeled the “Nixon Shock,” these actions left the country bursting with debt and low on cash, with many of its key allies such as Britain, France, and Germany questioning whether the U.S. was justified in its position as the leader of the global economy.

    While the U.S. economy entered a nose dive, another geopolitical event was unfolding which exacerbated the economic free fall.

    In 1973, Syria and Egypt, backed by several other Arab Nations, launched an attack on Israel which marked the beginning of the Yom Kippur War (or Ramadan War). The war placed increased pressure on oil prices, and when the United States provided Israel with financial aid and arms, the Arab Nations responded.

    In 1960, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) was formed. At the core of this organization were Kuwait, Iran, Libya, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and the United Arab Emirates – countries which were strongly opposed to U.S. interference in the 20-day war.

    Following U.S. provisions to Israel, resource rich OPEC placed an oil embargo on all those thought to have aided Israel, including the United States, Britain, Canada, Japan, the Netherlands and later South Africa and Portugal. By 1974, the price of oil quadrupled.

    With the success of the embargo, and cartel’s new role as an oil price influencer, Saudi Arabia became the de facto leader of OPEC.

    In 1974, desperate to return value to the U.S. dollar, President Nixon and Secretary of State Kissinger entered negotiations with the Saudi Royal Family. In the agreement, the United States would provide Saudi Arabia with arms and assist with the protection of oil fields. In exchange, Saudi Arabia was to price all oil sales in U.S. dollars and invest surplus oil proceeds in U.S. debt securities. And by 1975, all oil-producing members of OPEC followed suit. This began the reign of the petrodollar.

    The petrodollar has since elevated the United States economically and politically throughout the world, but after years of unprovoked wars and geopolitical belligerence, U.S. influence is beginning to fade.

    Through the years, there have been a number of attempts to move away from the petrodollar system, especially within OPEC, in which many of its members are not particularly friendly with the United States. Another strong advocate of change is Russia, which suggested to China and Japan to purchase oil in yen or yuan.

    Bitcoin, the Russian Miner Coin and the Cryptoruble

    A Kuwaiti finance firm, however, took this debate a step further, suggesting in 2014 that the Gulf Cooperation Council could benefit from trading oil for bitcoin. The suggestion was based on the idea that the GCC could save time and money with faster, cheaper, and more efficient transactions.

    This idea has been debated back and forth for some time, with some even suggesting that the “anonymity” factor could usher in a new era of world peace. The idea is that, using a neutral “petro-bitcoin,” countries would be immune to currency manipulation from governments, which has clear global impacts. In an unbiased-blockchain could act as a great medium for doing business on a global scale.

    While this is all well and good, neither the U.S. or China are looking to ease up on their power push.

    China, indeed, has taken the lead in the fight against the petrodollar. In 2012, Iran began trading oil in yuan,  and earlier this year, in response to U.S. sanctions, OPEC member Venezuela began pricing its oil sales in Chinese yuan, as well. China’s biggest move, however, was its push for Saudi Arabia to do the same. One of the most notable efforts from China to tackle the petrodollar was the country’s yuan-priced crude oil benchmark, which it recently unveiled.

    While China pushes for the petro-yuan, Russia is also making moves which could have serious implications for the U.S. dollar.

    In addition to the Russian Miner Coin, the Kremlin announced that it will be creating a new state-endorsed cryptocurrency backed by gold. The goal of this coin is to allow free exchange between the cryptoruble and the ruble, and to reduce dependence on foreign currency while stimulating the domestic online economy.

    While few details of the cryporuble are known, the technology does seem to be blockchain-based, as Putin has met with Ethereum and WAVES advisors to build the platform.

    With these major moves from China and Russia, there is no doubt that the dollar will see downward pressure in the near future. As the world’s major economies vie for geopolitical power, it is worth following the growing role of bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in this story.

  • "Daggers Are Falling From The Sky" – China Stocks, Bonds Tumble After National Congress Ends

    Who could have seen this coming?

    After weeks of 'calm' – demanded by The People's Party – and well-managed 'National Team' ramps top 'prove' how much Xi's plan for the nesxt five years is being received, the end of China's National Congress has been met with… a plunge in stock and bond markets.

     

     

    This is the biggest drop in the Chinese market in 11 weeks…

    But it's not just stocks. The Chinese bond market is getting slammed…

    China 10Y yield is up 6 days in a row (the biggest surge in rates since May) to their highest since Oct 2014…

    With the Chinese yield curve now inverted for 10 straight days – the longest period of inversion ever…

    As Bloomberg reports, the situation that’s existed for most of 2017 – sovereign yields rising, and corporate debt remaining relatively resilient – is at risk of cracking. As appetite for bonds of any kind dwindles and authorities roll out measures that target higher-risk investments, company securities are in the line of fire.

    Now that the Communist Party Congress is over, China’s bond holders may be about to get hit by “daggers falling from the sky," said Huachuang Securities Co., referring to aggressive deleveraging policies.

     

    “It’s very likely we will see a significant increase in corporate yields in the coming year," said David Qu, a market economist at Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. in Shanghai.

     

    "The trigger could be tougher regulations or a default. A majority of non-bank financial institutions’ debt holdings are corporate bonds, so their selloff can lead to severe consequences. Banks are underestimating authorities’ intentions to tighten regulations.”

     

    “The deleveraging campaign hasn’t even gone half way, and the risk of banks redeeming entrusted funds could surface at the end of this year," said Qin Han, chief bond analyst at Guotai Junan Securities Co. in Shanghai.

     

    "The chance of a selloff in corporate bonds is increasing, which will result in a widening of their yield premium over sovereign notes."

    But this is far from over, as we noted earlier, the end of China's National Congres is also ushering in the end of 'coordinated global growth'…

    As Citi writes, "China’s Party Congress has concluded and Xi Jinping’s position as President has been consolidated. Given there are no standing committee members in their 50s, it suggests there are no apparent heirs for Mr. Xi, opening the door for him to stay on beyond 2022. One of the key questions in the run up to the congress was that once power was consolidated, would China accelerate its economic reforms. We think this is unlikely but do expect a moderation of growth, with data momentum perhaps set to continue to slow at its current pace. Note how China’s MCI tends to lead Citi’s macro data index for China and our MCI is still tightening."

    It gets worse.

    As Capital Economics writes in its China Activity Monitor note this week, the firm's China Activity Proxy (CAP) suggests that growth in China slowed last month to the weakest pace in a year and with property sales cooling and officials continuing their efforts to rein in financial risks, Cap Econ thinks that looking ahead "the economy will slow further over the coming quarters."

    CapEco's ominous conclusion:

    Looking ahead, we think growth will continue to slow over the coming quarters. The current props to growth appear shaky. With investment contracting in real terms, industrial output will probably soften over the months ahead. Property sales also look set to weaken further as the government’s purchase curbs continue to expand. This will weigh on construction before long. More generally, with tighter monetary conditions weighing on credit growth, activity looks set to weaken further.

    That the past 18 months of coordinated global growth will end in China, is quite symmetric: back in January 2016, as global markets were tumbling, aborting the Fed's plans to hike rates 4 times in 2016 and resulting in sharp economic slowdowns around the globe, it was the (still mysterious) Shanghai Accord that "saved" the world, and unleashed a burst of unprecedented, and coordinated, growth… which only cost China some $8 trillion in debt.

    It will only make sense that another major Chinese event will mark the top of this economic mini cycle, and lead to the next global downturn, not to mention spike in market volatility.

  • President Trump's Confidence In Missile Defense Is A Dangerous Illusion

    Authored by Andrei Akulov via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    The US is pushing ahead with expansion of the nation’s homeland ballistic missile defense (BMD). The effort enjoys strong bipartisan support in Congress and among experts. Many allies place a high value on BMD cooperation with the United States. However, there are ample reasons to question the efficiency of US missile defenses, especially the capability to protect against intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).

    “We have missiles that can knock out a missile in the air 97% of the time,” President Donald Trump said in his interview with Fox News on October 11, adding “and if you send two of them, it’s going to get knocked down.” He was talking about the threat coming from North Korea to be repelled by the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) in Alaska and California – the $40 billion project administered by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA).

    The US military conducted the first-ever missile defense test involving a simulated attack by an intercontinental ballistic missile in May. The ICBM-type target was fired from the Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands toward the waters just south of Alaska. The mission was to prepare for countering an intercontinental missile launched by North Korea. The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) described the test as an “incredible accomplishment”. According to Vice Admiral Jim Syring, director of the agency, “This system is vitally important to the defense of our homeland, and this test demonstrates that we have a capable, credible deterrent against a very real threat.” The assessment appears to be exaggerated as the test was not conducted in a realistic environment.

    The next test of the GMD system is scheduled for late 2018 and, for the first time, will involve firing two interceptors against one ICBM target. It makes unsubstantiated the president’s affirmation that two interceptors are enough to knock out a North Korean missile as no such tests have been conducted so far.

    The US currently deploys 36 interceptors – 32 at Fort Greely, Alaska, and four at Vandenberg Air Force Base, California. By the end of 2017, there will be 44 deployed GBIs. A majority of the interceptors use the CE-I variant of kill vehicle that has scored only two successes in four tests. At least ten interceptors are to be equipped with the CE-II Block I vehicle, which has had two successful intercept tests in three tries.

    It is generally believed that it takes at least four-five interceptors to hit the target. It means President Trump is off base saying the hit probability is 97%. Prior to the ICBM test, the GMD system had successfully hit its target in only ten of 18 tests since 1999. A success rate is about 56%, not 97%. But even 56% is almost certainly an overstatement, given the less-than-realistic nature of the tests.

    A success rate for four-five interceptors per target may be 97% but the possibility that each successive interceptor’s chance of successful kill might not be independent of the previous one, due to correlated factors such as design shortcomings, leading to a lower overall success rate. Nevertheless, President Trump believes each interceptor has a single-shot probability of kill (SSPK) for a given interceptor of 97% (rather than 56%).

    According to the Washington Post, “No single interceptor for ICBMs has demonstrated a 97-percent success rate, and there is no guarantee using two interceptors has a 100-percent success rate. Moreover, the military’s suggestion that it could achieve a 97-percent success rate with four interceptors appears based on faulty assumptions and overenthusiastic math. The odds of success under the most ideal conditions are no better than 50-50, and likely worse, as documented in detailed government assessment.”

    Joe Cirincione, the President of Ploughshares Fund and the author of Nuclear Nightmares: Securing the World Before It Is Too Late, investigated anti-missile programs for almost 10 years as professional staff on the House Armed Services and Government Operations Committees. He believes that “If people took a close look at just one of these interceptor tests, they would likely conclude, as I did, that the tests bear little resemblance to real-world conditions.”

    If North Korea fired an ICBM – or multiple ICBMs – at the United States, the GMD with its Ground-Based Interceptors (GBIs) is only one system that could take a shot at intercepting and destroying the warhead outside the earth’s atmosphere in midcourse flight. Other missile defense systems such as THAAD and Aegis are in no position to hit ICBMs as they’re designed for other classes of targets.

    With only one test against an ICBM, the MDA is not even close to demonstrating that the system works in a real-world setting. The GMD systems have not yet been tested in the range of conditions under which it is expected to operate. No tests have been conducted at night or against complex countermeasures, such as electronic countermeasures and decoys. The tests are always rigged because the intercept team knows the timing and trajectory of the incoming missile. But even the scripted tests have often failed. What has been done so far is insufficient to demonstrate that an operational BMD capability really exists.

    The US has not publicly conducted any tests to see whether the missile-defense radars can distinguish a missile from chaff. Even cheap inflatable balloons can make all intercept efforts go down the drain. With no air resistance (or drag) in space, a decoy like a balloon shaped like a nuclear warhead could travel in the same way as the true warhead, making it difficult for a missile to distinguish the real thing from the decoy. Balloons are light enough to enable a sophisticated warhead launch 20 or 30 decoy balloons to obscure the path of the warhead, swamping the defense system with fake signals.

    In February and April 2016, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) assessed that the MDA has not “demonstrated through flight testing that it can defend the US homeland against the current missile defense threat,” relying on “a highly optimistic, aggressive schedule” to upgrade the system.

    The US abandoned the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty in 2002, which greatly obstructed arms control process. Efficient or not, the US current and potential BMD capability is taken into consideration to influence Russia’s military planning. It provokes Moscow into taking countermeasures to respond to BMD plans and negatively affects the prospects for future Russia-US arms control agreements. With uncertainties raised about the strict balance of arms agreed upon in New START, a chain reaction is triggered leading to arms race.

    Philip Giraldi, a highly respected expert and the Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, believes that the American people are being fooled by the administration, which tries to make them think that a nuclear war is thinkable. According to him, “If that is the message being sent by the White House, it would encourage further reckless adventurism on the part of the national security state.” Mr. Giraldi hit the nail right on the head. The GMD effort creates a dangerous illusion that a victory in a nuclear conflict is achievable and no money should be spared to spur the implementation of the MDA plans. In reality, the US defense industry is the only benefactor while the taxpayers throw money into the drain. The result: further erosion of arms control and reduced security.

  • These Are The Fastest-Growing (And Declining) Jobs In The US

    As the inexorable advance of automation kills jobs from retail to manufacturing to data entry while wages in the US show only marginal signs of improvement, the Labor Department's latest biennial employment projections have revealed the fastest and slowest-growing fields in the US.

    …The industries that dominate the list aren't surprising. Home health aides, statisticians, solar-panel installers and software developers and other jobs that, as Bloomberg points out, reflect the needs of an aging population, a shift to clean energy and employer demand for science, technology and math talent.

    Solar photovoltaic installers – America’s fastest growing field – are responsible for installing systems on roofs or other structures, and earning a median annual wage of $39,240 in 2016 – is projected to more than double from 2016 to 2026, according to data from the Labor Department’s biennial employment projections.

    A staggering eight of the remaining 14 fastest-growing occupations are in health care, with median salaries in 2016 ranging from $21,920 for personal care aides to $101,480 for physician assistants. The highest paid among them – mathematicians – earned a median $105,810 last year, though the job typically requires a master’s degree. And as baby boomers advance into their twilight years – the while the knock-on effects of the opioid crisis continue to multiply – more growth is effectively assured.

    …Meanwhile the fastest de typists, watch repairers, and postal workers are facing a bleaker outlook, the Labor Department data show…

    In America’s topsy-turvey labor market – where the unemployment rate can still tumble to record lows during a month where hurricanes caused the US economy to shed 33,000 jobs – college students and early-career workers need to be cognizant of the challenges they might face in the labor market – especially given the paucity of careers that require or strongly encourage applicants to have a background in Art History.  
     

  • Doug Casey: How I Learned To Love Bitcoin – Part 1

    Via CaseyResearch.com,

    Bitcoin is up 495% this year. Ethereum, another major cryptocurrency, is up 3,507% since the start of the year. Smaller cryptos have soared more than 10,000%.

    When you see gains like that, it’s natural to think that you missed out. I even felt this way for the longest time…that is, until I talked to Doug Casey.

    You see, a few weeks ago, I called Doug to see what he thinks about cryptos. He told me why Bitcoin is money. He told me why the crypto market’s about to get a lot bigger. He even told me why Bitcoin could soon hit $50,000… That’s eight times higher than where it trades today.

    After that conversation, I became convinced that cryptos are the real deal. I even just bought some Bitcoin myself.

    Of course, I realize that not everyone’s got a legendary speculator on speed dial. So over the next two days, I’m sharing a brand-new essay from Doug. In it, he explains why the crypto boom has a long way to go.

    By Doug Casey, founder, Casey Research

    In this article, I’d like to explain how I learned to love Bitcoin. Why it’s a wonderful thing. Its potential as a speculation. How the government is going to co-opt it. And how this is all likely to end.

    I was first introduced to Bitcoin several years ago in Cafayate, Argentina. A young Belgian guy came to visit, I bought him lunch, and we discussed Bitcoin. He was a very early enthusiast. He gave me a physical Bitcoin as a souvenir. They’re now collectibles, but the digital codes are inscribed on them. I still have that Bitcoin. It was worth $13 at the time.

    I wish I had listened to his argument more carefully, because I could have made millions. Over 300-1 over just a few years… that’s rare indeed. I was inclined towards it philosophically, but outsmarted myself on an investment level. Because Bitcoin was pitched to me as an alternative currency, and I failed to see all of its advantages in that role.

    My original objection was that Bitcoin isn’t backed by anything. It’s really a private fiat currency. It’s very much like the Zambian Kwacha, the Argentine peso, the US dollar, or any of the other 150-plus currencies in today’s world. It’s a floating abstraction. Unlike state currencies, though, its acceptance isn’t enforced by laws. But, on the other hand, its quantity is limited. But would that be enough to get large amounts of people to use it as a currency?

    I missed something when I said, back then, that it had no value. It’s a fiat currency, yes, but it has much more practical value than any other.

    A currency has to be a good medium of exchange, and a store of value. Even a few years ago, both of those things were wild speculations when it came to Bitcoin. I tried to analyze the situation rationally, using Aristotle’s five characteristics of a good money.

    Aristotle defined the five characteristics of good money in the 4th century BC. And his analysis is as accurate now as it was then. It must be durable, divisible, convenient, consistent, and have use value in and of itself. Based on that, Aristotle believed gold and silver were best suited for use as money. Let’s analyze how Bitcoin does by these five criteria.

    Durable. Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are definitely durable—unless we have a major electromagnetic pulse (EMP) or a significant solar flare that wipes out all the computers. Bitcoins are not as durable as the metals, but they’re adequate, barring a collapse of civilization.

    Divisible. Bitcoin is infinitely divisible. Better than the physical metals, actually—although the metals can be accounted in tiny fractions too.

    Convenient. Yes—as long as you have a smartphone, Bitcoin is very convenient. But your smartphone, or something like it, may not always be with you. And your counterparty also has to have one. And it’s not very convenient if someone doesn’t know or trust Bitcoin. Right now, that’s still probably 98% of humanity.

    Consistent. Absolutely. Every Bitcoin is exactly like another one. It’s at least as good as .999 fine gold that way.

    The problem I had with Bitcoin was the fifth point: Does it have use value in itself, so you can’t get stuck holding the bag?

    If you have a million US paper dollars, and nobody accepts them, they have no use in and of themselves—except as wall decorations or kindling. They’re just unsecured liabilities of a bankrupt government. In essence like a million Zimbabwe dollars, although there’s obviously a continuum. Fiat currencies can be easily destroyed by their issuers. The things are burning matches. They have half-lives, like radioactive elements.

    Sure, there were advantages to Bitcoin being a privately issued fiat currency. But I didn’t see its real use value; that’s where I went wrong.

    Bitcoin is certainly a fiat currency like the dollar or the Kwacha. But it’s also an excellent transfer device. You can move wealth from one country to another, or to another person, quickly and privately. I’d say secretly, but you’re not supposed to say “secret” anymore, you can only say “private.” Part of the politically correct corruption of language, I might add.

    And you can do so outside of the banking system, which is increasingly important. If you use Bitcoin, you don’t need a bank to store your money.

    Cryptocurrencies, like Bitcoins, are just the first, and most obvious, application of blockchain technology. Hopefully, among other things, blockchain and Bitcoin are going to destroy the SWIFT system, the vehicle for wiring money from one bank to another. SWIFT is expensive (at least $50-100 per transaction), slow (generally a day or two, sometimes a week or more), and insecure (who trusts either big banks or the US Government?). And SWIFT requires that all dollars clear through New York; non-Americans don’t care for that. SWIFT is used by thousands of banks around the world to send payment instructions worth trillions of dollars each day. Incidentally, it's not that I'm against SWIFT itself. It's just that it's become a creature of the banks—who abuse it and are actually responsible for its problems.

    So, this is one big use value of Bitcoin. It allows you to transfer something that is accepted as money outside of the banking system, and outside of government fiat currencies.

    Bitcoin is well on the way to being accepted as money. I think it will succeed.

    What is money? Money is a medium of exchange and a store of value. Almost anything can be used as money. Some things are just much better than others.

    Salt, seashells, and cows have all historically been used as money. After all, the word pecuniary comes from the Latin pecus, which means cow. And salary comes from the Latin sal, which is salt. Wampum were seashells. Cigarettes are money in prisons and war zones. Even giant Yap island discs have been used as money.

    Bitcoin is becoming more and more accepted as a medium of exchange, while most government fiat currencies approach their intrinsic values—essentially zero.

    Bitcoin is a bit more problematic as a store of value. Once again, let’s get back to the basics. You’ve got two kinds of currencies: commodity currencies and fiat currencies.

    The commodity currencies are actual physical commodities. You know they have use value. Fiat currencies, on the other hand, are just made up. They’re totally arbitrary and political.

    It’s like that old joke about sardines. You’ve got eating sardines and trading sardines. Commodity currencies are eating sardines. Fiat currencies are trading sardines. Of course, there’s no guarantee that Bitcoin is going to be accepted a year or two from now. It’s a high tech innovation, and maybe a Version 2.0 will collapse the value of the current version. So in a few years, we may find that Bitcoin fails the store of value test. But it’s accepted at the moment. And it’s been growing in value at a crazy rate—unlike fiat currencies, which have all been falling against real goods and services at about 5-10% a year. Incidentally, I don’t put much faith in the accuracy of government inflation figures.

    Bitcoin has been a great speculation so far. But as a store of value? Bitcoin is a technological innovation. There likely will be Bitcoin 2.0 and 3.0, not to mention other, even more advanced cryptos. What will the current Bitcoin then be worth? There’s a reason the expression “High tech, big wreck” is true. Just because so far it’s been a great speculation, doesn’t mean it’s a good store of value. Technology, a solar flare, or even government action could wipe it out.

    The bottom line? Bitcoin passes the medium of exchange test for the moment and store of value test for the moment. So you can definitely say it’s money—for the moment. But so does the Argentine peso, for the moment. I have little confidence, however, Bitcoin will be here, say, five years from now. Buying cryptos is not like socking away gold coins.

    The $64 question is: Where are we in the market cycle for cryptos? Clearly, we’re no longer early in the game. It’s like getting into the Internet stocks back in 1998—they weren’t cheap, but the bubble got much, much bigger. And the Internet—contrary to what people like Paul Krugman thought—was not itself a bubble. Up till now, the only way to play this has been the coins, the tokens, like Bitcoin. There are perhaps a thousand of them out there now, and most of them are garbage.

    Because I think the bubble will get much bigger, I’m getting involved in these cryptocurrencies on several levels. Including public mining companies, which is not germane to this article. I’m trying to make the trend my friend. But cautiously, because there’s a lot of speculation going on.

    I am concerned about the market, which is very bubbly. But I think it’s going much higher, for several reasons. One, as we discussed, is that some of the cryptos have great utility, and only about 25 million out of the 7 billion people in the world currently own them. I promise you that five years from now that number will be more like three billion. They’re going to get much bigger in the developed world, but even bigger in the Third World.

  • Caught On Video: This Is All That's Left Of Sears Canada

    On October 11, we reported that the now defunct Sears Canada announced plans to liquidate its remaining 150 stores instead of restructuring, the latest admission of brick and mortar defeat in the war with Amazon, with the result some 12,000 job losses in the coming weeks. The Canadian version of Sears is the latest victim of department-store decline that’s swept North America as shoppers gravitate online. While the retailer has dabbled in pop-up stores and e-commerce, its distribution centers aren’t as automated as Amazon.com Inc. or even Canadian peer Hudson’s Bay Co., which last year opened its own robotic facility to accelerate online orders.

    For thousands of soon to be unemployed Sears Canada workers and retirees the future of their pensions remains in limbo: Sears Canada has 18,000 retirees and beneficiaries whose monthly pensions its has to address. A motion was filed in August for a windup of the plan, which would require the company to pay the full C$266.8 million deficit, according to the filing. That motion has been postponed until at least Nov. 30.

    There is also the question of what happens to all the local malls that suddenly find themselves without 150 anchor tennants. The Sears bankruptcy comes two years after Target’s liquidation left a hole in many of the country’s malls, which made it tougher for Sears Canada to find buyers for its real estate and leases.

    What there is zero confusion about however, is what happens to liquidating stores once their employees – aware their termination is imminent – lose all interest in even pretending to keep up an appearance of normalcy.

    The answer is shown in the following video from Vtography, which was taken in the Fairview Mall in Toronto on October 22, 2017, and which captures the chaos from a liquidation sale at, well, liquidating Sears Canada. All that’s missing from the post-apocalyptic scenes are the zombies.

  • "Unhinged" Billionaire Steyer Urges Nation To "Impeach Mentally Unstable Trump" In Prime Time World Series Ad

    In the commercial break before the National Anthem was sung at tonight's game 5 of The World Series, hedge fund billionaire Tom Steyer decided it was time to release his full length ad demanding that President Trump be impeached…

    "He's brought us to the brink of nuclear war, obstructed justice at the FBI, and in violation of the constitution, he has taken money from foreign governments and threatened to shut down news organizations who report the truth.

     

    If that isn't a case for impeaching and removing a dangerous president then what has our government become?

     

     

    …I'm Tom Steyer, and like you, I'm a citizen who knows it's up to us to do something.

     

    …this president is a clear and present danger who's mentally unstable and armed with nuclear weapons…

    As a reminder, President Trump was not impressed with Mr. Steyer during the week:

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

    Incidentally, not one of the players, coaches, ballboys, crowd, or concession workers 'took a knee' during the singing of the National Anthem.

    Here is the full commercial.

    While some approved of this striking political statement, others were rather displeased with the stunt receiving some angry feedback from social media:

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

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

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

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

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

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

    As some enjoyed it:

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

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

        The billionaire environmentalist has also been sharply critical of California Senator Dianne Feinstein, who he considers soft on Trump because she once said he could be “a good President.”

    In fact, according to CNN, Steyer is strongly considering a run against Feinstein in California’s primary election next year.    

  • Why Cities All Across America Are Suddenly Buying Up Trailer Parks

    Much like the historic run that nearly resulted in the collapse of the global financial system in 2009, home prices in the U.S. are once again looking more like an Amazon or Facebook stock price chart than a stable store of value that should probably grow roughly inline with overall inflation. 

    And while these price gains are great news for the private equity firms that scooped up foreclosed homes after the last housing crisis, they’re once again making it nearly impossible for the average American family to find affordable housing. 

    As such, as the Pew Charitable Trusts points out, municipalities all across the country are suddenly scooping up trailer parks in an effort to prevent them from being converted to the next McMansion track-housing project and maintain some affordable housing options.

    Here in the heart of one of Colorado’s most expensive cities, Isabel Sanchez bought a mobile home seven years ago for just $6,000. Her four-bedroom bungalow now sits on a lot she rents for $355 a month.

     

    The mobile home park Sanchez and her family live in offers a glimpse of Boulder’s hippie past. Small houses and trailers, many dating to the 1960s and ’70s, sit close together on tree-lined streets. “I love the space, I love the location, I love the community here,” Sanchez, 55, said recently, relaxing in a blue armchair in her spotless living room.

     

    Affordable neighborhoods like these have become hard to find in Boulder and cities across the country where home prices are soaring. In some metro areas, rising prices are prompting park owners to sell their land to developers, affordable housing advocates say. “When the mortgage crisis came about it sort of slowed down, and now it’s heating up again,” said Carolyn Carter, deputy director of the National Consumer Law Center.

     

    So Boulder and a handful of other localities, desperate to hang on to homes middle- and working-class people can afford, have stepped in to buy parks, fix them up, and transfer ownership to residents or to a nonprofit on condition that rents be kept low.

     

    Portland, Oregon’s housing authority financed a deal last year that saved a mobile home park from being sold to a developer. Pitkin County, Colorado, is buying a park it intends to set aside for people who work in the area. And Boulder bought a park this summer, with the twin goals of improving its infrastructure and maintaining affordable housing.

     

    Affordable housing advocates say that the best way to preserve mobile home parks is to turn them into co-operatives owned by residents. But in Boulder, land is so valuable — and parks need so many infrastructure upgrades — that it wouldn’t be possible for low-income residents to finance the purchase alone.  

    TPB

    As Pew notes, roughly 8 million Americans live in trailer parks around the country and when their land is sold off for the next housing development they have no choice but to scramble to find new housing.

    About 20 million Americans live in manufactured homes — so called because they’re built in a factory, rather than on site — and about two-fifths of those can be found in mobile home parks, mostly in suburbs and exurbs.

     

    Mobile homes are an important source of low-income housing. But homeownership can be precarious for people who live in mobile home parks. Because they don’t own the land beneath their houses or trailers, they have to move if the park closes down.

     

    And many mobile homes aren’t all that mobile. Sanchez, who works at a nonprofit in Denver, says she could probably move her house if she had to because it was built recently. Her daughter’s house across the street may be a different story. It has sat there for over 40 years, like most of the homes in the park.

     

    The closure of a mobile home park can create a crisis for residents and for the city or town they live in as dozens of displaced people scramble to find new housing, says Esther Sullivan, a sociologist at the University of Colorado Denver who has studied mobile home parks in Texas and Florida. In her research, she found that city council members who agree to rezone a park often argue that park residents can move into low-income housing elsewhere. But that’s not always the case, she said.

    Meanwhile, national nonprofits have sprung up to help residents form co-ops and finance purchases.

    One way to preserve mobile home parks is to give the people who live in them a chance to buy the park themselves at a fair market rate, says Carter of the National Consumer Law Center. A national nonprofit called ROC USA will, with the permission of the park owner, help residents form a co-operative and finance a purchase. ROC USA has sponsored some 200 resident-owned communities in the United States.

     

    At least 19 states have laws on the books that help residents buy a park, Carter says. Some states require park owners to give residents months of advance notice before a park is sold, to notify residents if they request a zoning change for the property, or to allow residents to organize into homeowners associations. Other states will free up money when a park closes to help residents pay their relocation costs or require park owners to chip in.

    Of course, we could also just reduce artificial demand for McMansions by reversing a decade of misinformed Fed policies…but that might result in the bursting of yet another nasty little bubble…

  • Mainstream Media Now Claiming That It Is 'A Crime' To Investigate Hillary Clinton's Ties To Russia

    Authored by Alex Thomas via SHTFplan.com,

    As the public has finally began to realize the extent of the corruption surrounding Hillary Clinton, including the now infamous Russia Uranium One deal, the mainstream media has gone into hyper-drive to discredit and distract from documented facts and are now going as far as to float the idea that Trump may be committing a crime for simply investigation Clinton at all.

    That’s right, in the sick world of the establishment media, Trump is committing a criminal act by even considering an investigation into shady Clinton dealings with the Russians. After all, she is above the law right?

    Even more disgusting, the so-called reporters spewing this nonsense are using the fact that Mueller is conducting a deep state operation (now discredited) against the president that accuses him of working with Russia to win the election when in reality it is the exact opposite. In other words, Trump is being accused of something he didn’t do but because of this, he can’t investigate real crimes committed by Clinton.

    Absolutely unbelievable.

    During an appearance on MSNBC’s “AM Joy” legal analyst Paul Butler laughably claimed that it “absolutely is” obstruction of justice for the government to investigate Hillary Clinton because… Russia.

    “Would these attempts to distract from the investigation, even attempting to unseal or remove the gag order from an FBI informant in order to further what is essentially a side investigation that they’re pursuing, is that in itself an element of obstruction?” Host Joy Reid stunningly asked, making clear that she believes selling off 20% of the countries uranium supply to Russia is a “side issue”.

     

    “It absolutely is. The statute says if you try to impede a federal investigation, then you are guilty of a federal felony. And with Donald Trump, it’s not just that he asked for a pledge of loyalty from his FBI director. It’s not only that he asked the national security intelligence folks if there’s any way they could thwart the investigations, not only that he reaches out to Michael Flynn after he’s been fired and tell him to keep your head up. I’ll see what I can do. It’s this attitude that he has,” Butler declared.

    Not only does the above exchange once again show the establishment media’s ridiculous bias, it also shows that they are now running scared about the recent revelations and have since resorted to straight up nonsense as some sort of Orwellian defense.

    Amazingly, criticism of even considering investigating Clinton didn’t stop there, as another guest on the show accused the “autocratic” Trump administration of attempting to get Clinton locked up over nothing. Keep in mind, we have literally dozens of reports showing how guilty Clinton actually is.

    “Trump’s trying to feed his base. He’s trying to set up prosecution and persecution of people who he dislikes,” Fake news journalist Sarah Kendzior told Reid.

     

    “He was not able to deliver. There’s no wall. There is still Obamacare, and so he’s shooting for lock [Clinton] up.”

    In other words, Clinton has done nothing wrong at all and the only reason anyone is even talking about the failed presidential candidate is because Trump is failing in other parts of his presidency.

    This is pure desperation at its finest folks.

    “What I worry about is that this lock her up will extend beyond Clinton to any kind of opponent. He targets private citizens. Last week, he was targeting a grieving widow. So, there’s really no limits to what this administration would do. And so, I think even though it’s become obvious that this propaganda blitz was in part due to draw attention away from what Mueller did, we need to watch it in the weeks to come because his is an autocratic administration and I don’t think that they’re going to stop with these baseless smears and persecutory attempts,” Kendzior continued, adding in a mix of straight up lies and mischaracterizations while claiming with a straight face that Clinton has done nothing.

    It doesn’t get any clearer than this. No matter what the Clinton machine is found to have done, the mainstream media, especially the puppets at MSNBC, will go to bat for her and they are now so desperate that they are willing to float the idea that even investigating queen Hillary is a crime.

Digest powered by RSS Digest