- Rebuilding Syria… Without Syria's Oil?
Rebuilding Syria… Without Syria’s Oil?
Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Saker blog,
Compare US pillaging with Russia-Iran-Turkey’s active involvement in a political solution to normalize Syria…
What happened in Geneva this Wednesday, in terms of finally bringing peace to Syria, could not be more significant: the first session of the Syrian Constitutional Committee.
The Syrian Constitutional Committee sprang out of a resolution passed in January 2018 in Sochi, Russia, by a body called the Syrian National Dialogue Congress.
The 150-strong committee breaks down as 50 members of the Syrian opposition, 50 representing the government in Damascus and 50 representatives of civil society. Each group named 15 experts for the meetings in Geneva, held behind closed doors.
This development is a direct consequence of the laborious Astana process – articulated by Russia, Iran and Turkey. Essential initial input came from former UN Envoy for Syria Staffan de Mistura. Now UN Special Envoy for Syria Geir Pedersen is working as a sort of mediator.
The committee started its deliberations in Geneva in early 2019.
Crucially, there are no senior members of the administration in Damascus nor from the opposition – apart from Ahmed Farouk Arnus, who is a low-ranking diplomat with the Syrian Foreign Ministry.
Among the opposition, predictably, there are no former leaders of weaponized factions. And no “moderate rebels.” The delegates include several former and current parliament members, university rectors and journalists.
After this first round, significantly, the committee’s co-chair, Ahmad Kuzbari, said:
“We hope that our next meeting could take place in our native land, in our beloved Damascus, the oldest continuously inhabited capital in history.”
Even the opposition, which is part of the committee, hopes that a political deal will be clinched next year. According to co-chair Hadi al-Bahra:
“I hope that the 75th anniversary of the United Nations next year will be an opportunity to celebrate another achievement by the universal organization, namely the success of efforts under the auspices of a special envoy for political process, who will bring peace and justice to all Syrians.”
Join the patrol
The committee’s work in Geneva proceeds in parallel to ever-changing facts on the ground. These will certainly force more face-to-face negotiations between Presidents Putin and Erdogan, as Erdogan himself confirmed: “A conversation with Putin can take place any time. Everything depends on the course of events.”
“Events” seem not to be that incandescent, so far, even as Erdogan, predictably, releases the whiff of a threat in the air: “We reserve the right to resume military operation in Syria if terrorists approach at the distance of 30km to Turkey’s borders or continue attacks from any other Syrian area.”
Erdogan also said the de facto safe zone along the Turkish-Syrian border could be “expanded,” something that he would have to clear in minute detail with Moscow.
Those threats have already manifested on the ground. On Wednesday, Turkey and allied Islamist factions launched an attack against Tal Tamr, a historic Assyrian Christian enclave 50km deep inside Syrian territory – far beyond the scope of the 10km patrol zone or the 30km “safe” zone.
Poorly-armed Syrian troops pulled out under fierce attack, and with no apparent Russian cover. The Syrian military on the same day issued a public statement calling on the Syrian Democratic Forces to reintegrate under its command. The SDF has said a compromise must be reached first over semi-autonomy for the northeastern region. Thousands of residents in the meantime fled farther south to the more protected city of Hasakeh.
Two facts are absolutely crucial. The Syrian Kurds have completed their pull out ahead of schedule, as confirmed by Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu. And, this Friday, Russia and Turkey start their joint military patrols to the depth of 7km away from the border, part of the de facto safe zone in northeast Syria.
The devil in the immense details is how Ankara is going to manage the territories that it now actually controls, and to which it plans to relocate as many as 2 million Syrian refugees.
Your oil? Mine
Then there’s the nagging issue that simply won’t go away: the American drive to “secure the oil” (Trump) and “protect” Syrian oilfields (the Pentagon), for all practical purposes from Syria.
In Geneva, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov – alongside Iran’s Javad Zarif and Turkey’s Mevlut Cavusoglu – could not have been more scathing. Lavrov said Washington’s plan is “arrogant,” and violates international law. The very American presence on Syrian soil is “illegal,” he said.
All across the Global South, especially among countries in the Non-Aligned Movement, this is being interpreted, stripped to the bone, for what it is: the United States government illegally taking possession of natural resources of a third country via a military occupation.
And the Pentagon is warning that anyone attempting to contest it will be shot on sight. It remains to be seen whether the US Deep State would be willing to engage in a hot war with Russia over a few Syrian oilfields.
Under international law, the whole “securing the oil” scam is a euphemism for pillaging, pure and simple. Every single takfiri or jihadi outfit operating across the “Greater Middle East” will converge, perversely, to the same conclusion: US “efforts” across the lands of Islam are all about the oil.
Now compare that with Russia-Iran-Turkey’s active involvement in a political solution and normalization of Syria – not to mention, behind the scenes, China, which quietly donates rice and aims for widespread investment in a pacified Syria positioned as a key Eastern Mediterranean node of the New Silk Roads.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 23:50 - Generation 'Rent': How Millennials Are Fueling The 'Lease, Don't Buy' Economy
Generation ‘Rent’: How Millennials Are Fueling The ‘Lease, Don’t Buy’ Economy
It’s long been said that millennials have the power to disrupt and reshape entire industries.
Most recently, as Visual Capitalist’s Katie Jones points out, this effect has been seen in the retail landscape, where millennial spending habits are setting the tone for the market’s future.
Not only does the millennial generation demand the convenience of making instant purchases – but they can now rent almost anything they want, anytime, and anywhere.
Visualizing the Growth of the Rental Economy
Today’s infographic from Adweek takes a deeper look at the consumer goods rental economy, and the potential long-term impact of this shift in buyer behavior.
Although the current market for rentals is still in its early stages, the sheer momentum that the industry has gained in the last year is enough to threaten even the largest retailers—forcing them to reconsider their own business models.
The data for the visualization above comes from market research company Lab 42. In a survey of 500 people, they found that 94% of the U.S. population has participated in the sharing economy in one way or another.
While the sharing economy spotlight typically shines on global behemoths like Airbnb and Uber, the research used to populate this infographic focuses on renting consumer goods for a short period of time, as a sub-segment of the sharing economy.
The Renting Revolution
Offerings within the rental sector have exploded over the last decade, with furniture being the number one category that consumers rent.
According to the infographic, reasons for renting furniture include:
-
Temporary housing: 45%
-
Expensive upfront costs: 43%
-
Testing products before committing: 41%
-
Hosting events at home: 35%
-
Moving into a new home: 29%
-
Redesigning a house: 27%
Other products that consumers rent include gaming systems, clothes, tools, and technology. Female renters are more likely to rent furniture, clothes, and jewelry, while male renters are more likely to rent tools and gaming systems.
Renting goods is predominantly done on an as-needed basis. The Lab 42 report states that for clothing, 77% of respondents indicate that they either rent, or would rent for a formal event.
The End of Ownership?
Despite the common misconception that millennials are driven by emotional needs, the reasons behind why they rent consumer goods are much more pragmatic.
-
Test things before purchasing: 57%
-
Need a temporary solution: 55%
-
Need an item or a service for a short time-frame : 52%
-
Less expensive than buying: 43%
-
More convenient than buying: 42%
Further, only 6% said that they rent because they do not like owning things. This tells us that the rental economy does not indicate the end of ownership, but rather, provides a strategy for consumers to try before they buy.
Attitudes Towards Sustainability
According to the research, very few millennials choose to rent consumer goods because it is better for the environment. However, Nielsen claim that 73% of millennials are willing to pay more money for sustainable offerings—impacting both retail and rental industries.
As evidence of this, Ikea will test a range of subscription-based leasing offers in all 30 of its markets by 2020 in a bid to appeal to environmentally conscious consumers and boost its sustainability credentials. If Ikea’s evolving business model is a success, it could open the floodgates for others to follow suit.
A Promising Market
In the clothing rental space, brands like Rent the Runway pave the way, but there has also been an explosion of startups entering the market in the last year.
One example is the monthly subscription service Nuuly. The company offers consumers access to over 100 third-party brands and vintage items. Consumers can borrow up to six items a month for $88. Similarly, American Eagle’s Style Drop program rents out the latest collections for a flat monthly fee of $49.95.
As more companies incorporate short-term rental services into their offerings, more millennials will shift their behavior from buying to renting—disrupting the traditional retail business model as we know it. With that being said, the impact of millennials having it all, and owning none of it, is yet to be determined.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 23:25 -
- Watch: "You Are Slave Property Of A Corporation Called The United States Of America"
Watch: “You Are Slave Property Of A Corporation Called The United States Of America”
Authored by Mike Adams via NaturalNews.com,
Today we’ve published a powerful new video on Brighteon.com that explains how you are a “slave wage worker” owned by a globalist corporation known as the United States of America.
The video explains how the ability of the Federal Reserve to create new debt (i.e. print new wealth for the elite political criminals who run everything) hinges on the ability of the government to confiscate wealth from workers who are tracked with “social security” numbers.
The term “social security” doesn’t mean security for you. It means that you are being securitized as a guarantee of future confiscated income to support the creation of new debt. You are the security for the Treasury / Fed scam of creating new money, in other words.
It’s not about providing security for you; it’s about exploiting you to provide security for new debt.
That’s why the social security trust fund is already tapped out. The criminal bureaucrats who run the corrupt government have already spent the money they’ve stolen from you, and the only way you’ll ever get it back is if they continue stealing more money from the next generation of workers.
It’s all a Ponzi scheme, in other words. And like every Ponzi scheme, it will eventually run out of new victims to exploit, causing it to catastrophically implode.
Watch the full video to learn more.
Brighteon.com, by the way, has just rolled out a major upgrade, including new video categories on the home page, video channel subscribers and video like buttons. (Many glitches were just resolved today, and the full feature set is now active.)
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 23:00 - Lagarde: "We Should Be Happier To Have A Job Than To Have Savings"
Lagarde: “We Should Be Happier To Have A Job Than To Have Savings”
Any hopes that the replacement of Mario Draghi, who on Halloween left the ECB more polarized than ever, as the core European nations revolted against the Italian’s profligately loose monetary policy in an unprecedented public demonstration of discord within the European Central Bank…
… with the ECB’s new head, former IMF Director and convicted criminal, Christine Lagarde would result in some easing of tensions, were promptly crushed when Lagarde picked up where Draghi left off, calling on Germany and the Netherlands to use their budget surpluses to fund investments that would help stimulate the economy, in a sharp rebuke that will not win the former French finance minister any friends in fiscally conservative Germany.
In an appeal to Germany’s sense of solidarity, and in hopes that Germany’s memory of hyperinflation has faded enough, Lagarde said that there “isn’t enough solidarity” in the single currency area, adding: “We share a currency, but we don’t share much budgetary policy for now.”
“Those that have the room for manoeuvre, those that have a budget surplus, that’s to say Germany, the Netherlands, why not use that budget surplus and invest in infrastructure? Why not invest in education? Why not invest in innovation, to allow for a better rebalancing?” asked Lagarde, blaming Germany and the Netherlands for living within their means, and demanding they should no longer do so, just because most other Europeans decided to pull a page out of the American playbook, and live exorbitantly outside of their means.
Lagarde’s direct attempt at shaming Europe’s fiscal conservatives was nothing short of shocking: normally ECB officials avoid naming individual countries in public statements, because their mandate is to act in the interests of the eurozone as a whole. But when Lagarde made her speech she had not yet officially taken over at the Frankfurt-based institution — she succeeds Mario Draghi on Friday.
We somehow doubt this “explanation” will fly with the German population, which sees itself as funding peripheral Europe’s profligate ways for the past decade, even as it benefited from the weak euro to supercharge the German export machine.
And just to guarantee she is as resented by Germany as was Mario Draghi, she said that the German and Dutch governments, which last year had budget surpluses of 2% and 1.5% respectively, “have not really made the necessary efforts,” she added, referring to establishment’s increasing desperation to force anyone with an even remotely normal balance sheet to sink to the same level as their insolvent peers.
As for the punchline, Lagarde defended the negative interest rates introduced by her predecessor Draghi, arguing that people should be happier to have a job than a higher savings rate. This, as a reminder, comes at a time when virtually everyone who is not named “Draghi” or “Lagarde” thinks that negative rates are catastrophic, and assure doom for the Eurozone.
When asked about the impact of negative rates on savers, Ms Lagarde said on Thursday that they should think about how much worse the situation would be if the ECB had not cut rates as much as it had.
“Would we not be in a situation today with much higher unemployment and a far lower growth rate, and isn’t it true that ultimately we have done the right thing to act in favor of jobs and of growth rather than the protection of savers?” she asked.
The unemployment rate in the 19-country eurozone has fallen from 12 per cent in 2013 to 8.2 per cent last year. GDP growth in the single currency zone was 1.8 per cent last year and the ECB expects it to slow to 1.1 per cent this year.
Finally, for those curious if the authorities will stop at anything to destroy the currency and send rates to even more negative levels if it means kicking the can on a global, populist uprising, by just a few months, weeks or days, here is the answer: “We should be happier to have a job than to have our savings protected,” said Lagarde.
“I think that it is in this spirit that monetary policy has been decided by my predecessors and I think they made quite a beneficial choice.”
Let’s check back on that statement in a year, shall we?
Of course, there is no magic solution here: all the ECB has done is kick the can, and ensure that the next crisis will be even worse than if some semblance of a price-clearing reality had been allowed under Draghi’s 8 years. Instead, the ECB’s balance sheet exploded to €4.7 trillion euros, as the world’s largest central bank-cum-hedge fund bought every bond in sight in hopes of keeping asset prices artificially elevated.
In October, the ECB, less than a year after it ended QE in a failed attempt to “renormalize” monetary policy, announced it would cut rates to a record -0.5% and unveiled open-ended plans to start buying €20bn of bonds starting in November.
Needless to say, the comments by the former French finance minister confirm market expectations that she is likely to pursue similar monetary policy strategy to Draghi who flooded the financial system with cheap money to fight slowing growth and inflation while calling on governments to do more through fiscal policy to take the burden off the central bank.
In the end, the consequences of Draghi’s monetary policy, as we explained before, will be catastrophic, but the former Goldman partner was wise enough to get off the European Titanic before it hit the iceberg. It will now be Lagarde’s task to save as many people as possible once the ship starts sinking, and judging by her remarks, she is perfectly fine of not only going down with the ship, but also being blamed for the collision.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 22:35 - Reddit Must End Politically-Motivated Publishing Decisions
Reddit Must End Politically-Motivated Publishing Decisions
Authored by Congressman Jim Banks, op-ed via RealClearPolitics.com,
Reddit administrators’ decision to “quarantine” r/The_Donald, a subreddit forum for fans of President Trump and Reddit’s largest conservative community, is a recent and egregious example of social media sites meddling in political affairs.
It’s no secret that Silicon Valley is overwhelmingly left wing. For every $1 that employees at the world’s biggest technology companies donated to Donald Trump, they gave $60 to Hillary Clinton.
But tech CEOs assure conservatives that their company’s overwhelming partisanship somehow has no effect on the content they publish. They claim that because their sites are run by algorithms, not people, they’ve managed to uphold a Spockian political impartiality. What a bunch of baloney! Many of tech companies’ editorial decisions are made by people, and ultimately their algorithms were created by a group 99% opposed Donald Trump’s election. Tech CEOs may imitate Spock’s empty gaze, but they’ve strayed far from his actual disposition.
The original r/The_Donald “quarantine” was put in place for what site administrators described as “repeated rule breaking behavior.” Some of r/The_Donald’s 770,000 users commented “encouragements to violence” after Oregon Gov. Kate Brown called on state police to corral Republican representatives back to the statehouse following a skipped global warming vote.
The comments in question were reprehensible and clearly violated Reddit’s rules. The problem is that Reddit, with its 330 million users, was and is rife with similarly disgusting rhetoric. After the controversy in Oregon, a commenter in the liberal subreddit r/Politics had the following to say about Republican legislators: “Shoot these f*ckers. In the knees. For running like pieces of sh*t.” I’m not going to belabor my point and list the thousands of unaddressed, rule-breaking comments on left-wing subreddits. The point is, when such comments are posted in apolitical or left-wing subreddits, nothing happens. Reddit has a responsibility to ensure that it applies its rules equally to all political content.
Reddit’s decision to quarantine r/The_Donald is not just unfair — Reddit’s size ensures that it will have far-reaching political effects. Although CEO Steve Huffman touted his small staff during a recent House Energy & Commerce Committee hearing, the truth is that Reddit is an online behemoth. It is the third biggest social media site in the U.S. based on overall web page visits, with a larger reach than Facebook. Reddit’s political forums are important hubs of discussion, debate and organization.
An obvious instance of real-world political effect is the July 27, 2016 question-and-answer session then-candidate Trump held with his supporters on r/The_Donald. Conversely, before the 2016 election Trump’s staff closely monitored the subreddit’s political temperature. Reddit has now intentionally blocked off an avenue of communication between the president and his supporters ahead of the 2020 election.
Other political subreddits, such as r/SandersForPresident, have seen their political efforts uninterrupted. Sen. Sanders hosted a Q&A session there this past June. During the 2016 campaign, in addition to rallying support for Sanders, the subreddit served as a place to coordinate campaign activity. In 2016, a moderator of r/SandersForPresident posted that he had “just got off a conference call with the Bernie 2016 national staff” and relayed instructions for effective political volunteering.
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper stated that the Internet Research Agency (IRA) played a central role in the “most aggressive or direct campaign to interfere in our election process” that he’d ever seen.
Evidently, this was before Reddit quarantined r/The_Donald.
According to a Senate Intelligence Committee report, over a year-long period the 3,900 IRA-connected Twitter accounts posted 600,000 tweets regarding Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Well, researchers from the University of Alabama calculated that from July 2016 to February 2017 r/The_Donald was responsible for an estimated 2,771,030 tweets linking to news stories.
To recap, Reddit CEO Steve Huffman is set to influence conversation about the 2020 election on Twitter 4.5 times as much as Vladimir Putin influenced the 2016 electoral conversation. This doesn’t account for the much larger effect of the quarantine on Reddit’s own political discussion, which is comparable in scope to Twitter’s. I look forward to the Intelligence Community’s soon-to-be-announced special investigation.
During a 2018 interview with Andrew Marantz of the New Yorker, Reddit’s CEO said, “I’m confident that Reddit could sway elections,” followed by “we wouldn’t do it, of course.” Of course, that wasn’t true.
Republicans need to start speaking out about the treatment we’ve received from technology companies. We need to understand that nobody else will stand up for us. It’s time to start exploring legislative solutions to big tech’s bias. The alternative is accepting a status quo where enormous corporations use their publishing power to favor Democratic presidential candidates.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 22:10 - China To Establish $10 Trillion Economic Zone In Space
China To Establish $10 Trillion Economic Zone In Space
Having already created 12 free trade zones (with 6 more coming soon) in and around major Chinese metro areas…
… Beijing’s next project to boost commerce is more ambitious than anything seen on earth before. Literally.
According to the Global Times, China plans to establish an Earth-moon space economic zone by 2050, which is expected to generate $10 trillion worth of services per year. The zone will cover areas of space near Earth, the moon and in between.
Bao Weimin, director of the Science and Technology Commission of the China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation, revealed the ambitious plan at a seminar last week on the space economy, Chinese media reported Friday. CAST is a state-owned company focused on researching, making and launching carrier rockets, satellites, spacecraft and space stations.
Perhaps because by 2050 all of China will be one giant free trade zone (even though the US Trade war will still not be over), the proposed zone will cover areas of space near Earth, the moon and in between, Weimin said, adding that companies involved in basic industries, application exploration and development will feature at the zone, which will focus on three key fields: interspace transport, space resource detection and space-based infrastructure.
In a report on developing earth and moon space, Bao shared his thoughts on the economic potential in this field and pledged that the country would study its reliability, cost and flight-style transportation system between the Earth and moon, The Science and Technology Daily reported Friday.
He pledged to complete basic research and make a breakthrough on key technologies before 2030 and establish the transportation system by 2040. By 2050, China could successfully establish an earth-moon space economic zone, he said.
In other words, while the US contemplates a Green New Deal, China is set to counter with a “Space New Deal”, which would likely cost tens of trillions too.
As the Global Times notes, many Chinese netizens were “thrilled” by the news, with some saying that “if I can catch a flight to the moon during the rest of my life, I would die without any regrets.”
An aerospace scholar told the Global Times that by exploring earth-moon space, China can gain a lot, such as developing the space travel industry or conducting experiments on the moon.
As early as 2016, Zhang Yulin, then deputy commander-in-chief of China’s manned space program, told media that they had plans to explore Earth-moon space.
In May 2018, China launched a relay satellite to set up a communications link between the Earth and the then planned Chang’e-4 lunar probe, which accomplished the first-ever soft landing on the far side of the moon in January. Chinese scientists and engineers hope the Queqiao satellite will form a communications bridge between controllers on Earth and the far side of the moon.
A model of China’s robotic lunar probe Chang’e-4 Aerospace fans predicted that the plan will accelerate many important projects, including the Long March-5 carrier rocket, China’s largest launch vehicle, which is expected to be used to send the Chang’e-5 probe in 2020 to bring moon samples back to Earth, and China’s heavy-lift carrier rocket, the Long March-9, which is expected to make its first flight around 2030 and will support manned lunar exploration, deep space exploration and construction of a space-based solar power plant.
According to Yicai Globa, China will strive to complete its basic research in these fields by 2020, make breakthroughs in key technologies by 2030, and have a robust, low-cost space transport system in place by 2040 in order to make the zone a reality.
Needless to say, between the US “Green New Deal”, and China’s “Space new Deal”, US and Chinese money printers will be on overdrive for the next several decades, working dilligently to inflate away the world’s record debt load and in the process destroy the world’s two most important fiat currencies.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 21:45 - The Metamorphosis Of The Deep State
The Metamorphosis Of The Deep State
Authored by Edward Curtin via Off-Guardian.org,
It gets funny, this shallow analysis of the deep state that is currently big news. There’s something ghoulish about it, perfectly timed for Halloween and masked jokers. What was once ridiculed by the CIA and its attendant lackeys in the media as the paranoia of “conspiracy theorists” is now openly admitted in reverent tones of patriotic fervor. But with a twisted twist.
The “Deep State” has been redefined as career bureaucrats doing their patriotic duty
It was two years ago, early in the Trump administration, when The New Yorker and Salon, among many others, were asserting in no uncertain terms that there was no deep state in the United States, and so Trump had nothing to fear from that quarter since it was a figment of his paranoia.
Kit Knightly, writing in the Off-Guardian, brilliantly demolished this spurious propaganda at the time in a must read reminder of how tricksters play their games.
The corporate mass-media has recently discovered a “deep state” that they claim to be not some evil group of assassins who work for the super-rich owners of the country and murder their own president (JFK) and other unpatriotic dissidents (Malcom X, MLK, RK, among others) and undermine democracy home and abroad, but are now said to be just fine upstanding American citizens who work within the government bureaucracies and are patriotic believers in democracy intent on doing the right thing.
This redefinition has been in the works for a few years, and it shouldn’t be a surprise that this tricky treat was being prepared for our consumption a few years ago by The Council on Foreign Relations.
In its September/October 2017 edition of its journal Foreign Affairs, Jon D. Michaels, in “Trump and the Deep State: The Government Strikes Back,” writes:
Furious at what they consider treachery by internal saboteurs, the president and his surrogates have responded by borrowing a bit of political science jargon, claiming to be victims of the “deep state,” a conspiracy of powerful, unelected bureaucrats secretly pursuing their own agenda.
The concept of a deep state is valuable in its original context, the study of developing countries such as Egypt, Pakistan, and Turkey, where shadowy elites in the military and government ministries have been known to countermand or simply defy democratic directives. Yet it has little relevance to the United States, where governmental power structures are almost entirely transparent, egalitarian, and rule-bound.
The White House is correct to perceive widespread resistance inside the government to many of its endeavors. But the same way the administration’s media problems come not from “fake news” but simply from news, so its bureaucratic problems come not from an insidious, undemocratic “deep state” but simply from the state—the large, complex hive of people and procedures that constitute the U.S. federal government.
Notice how in these comical passages about U.S. government transparency and egalitarianism, Michaels slyly and falsely attributes to Trump the very definition – “unelected bureaucrats” – that in the next paragraph he claims to be the real deep state, which is just the state power structures.
Pseudo-innocence conquers all here as there is no mention of the Democratic party, Russiagate, etc., and all the machinations led by the intelligence services and Democratic forces to oust Trump from the day he was elected.
State power structures just move so quickly, as anyone knows who has studied the speed with which bureaucracies operate. Ask Max Weber.
Drip by drip over the past few years, this “state bureaucracy” meme has been introduced by the mainstream media propagandists as they have gradually revealed that the government deep-staters are just doing their patriotic duty in trying openly to oust an elected president.
Many writers have commented on the recent New York Times article, “Trump’s War on the ‘Deep State’ Turns Against Him” asserting that the Times has finally admitted to the existence of the deep state, which is true as far as it goes, which is not too far. But in this game of deceptive revelations – going shallower to go deeper – what is missing is a focus on the linguistic mind control involved in the changed definition.
Well, I don’t know about you guys, but I’m convinced.
In a recent article by Robert W. Merry, whose intentions I am not questioning – “New York Times Confirms: It’s Trump Versus the Deep State” – originally published at The American Conservative and widely reprinted, the lead-in to the article proper reads:
Even the Gray Lady admits the president is up against a powerful bureaucracy that wants him sunk.”
So the “powerful bureaucracy” redefinition, this immovable force of government bureaucrats, is slipped into public consciousness as what the deep state supposedly is. Gone are CIA conspirators and evil doers. In their place we find career civil servants doing their patriotic duty.
Then there is The New York Times’ columnist James Stewart who, appearing on the Today Show recently, where he was promoting his new book, told Savannah Guthrie that:
Well, you meet these characters in my book, and the fact is, in a sense, he’s [Trump] right. There is a deep state…there is a bureaucracy in our country who has pledged to respect the Constitution, respect the rule of law. They do not work for the President. They work for the American people.
And, as Comey told me in my book, ‘thank goodness for that,’ because they are protecting the Constitution and the people when individuals – we don’t have a monarch, we don’t have a dictator – they restrain them from crossing the boundaries of law.
What Trump calls the deep state in the United States is protecting the American people and protecting the Constitution. It’s a positive thing in this sense.
So again we are told that the deep-state bureaucracy is defending the Constitution and protecting the American people, as James Comey told Stewart, “in my book, ‘thank goodness for that,’” as he put it so eloquently.
These guys talk in books, of course, not person to person, but that is the level not just of English grammar and general stupidity, but of the brazen bullshit these guys are capable of.
This new and shallow deep state definition has buried the old meaning of the deep state as evil conspirators carrying out coup d’états, assassinations, and massive media propaganda campaigns at home and abroad, and who, by implication and direct declaration, never existed in the good old U.S.A. but only in countries such as Egypt, Turkey, and Pakistan where shadowy elites killed and deposed leaders and opponents in an endless series of coup d’états.
No mention in Foreign Affairs, of course, of the American support for the ruthless leaders of these countries who have always been our dear allies when they obey our every order and serve as our servile proxies in murder and mayhem.
Even Edward Snowden, the courageous whistleblower in exile in Russia, in a recent interview with Joe Rogan, repeats this nonsense when he says the deep state is just “career government officials” who want to keep their jobs and who outlast presidents. From his own experience, he should know better. Much better.
Interestingly, he suggests that he does when he tells Rogan that “every president since Kennedy” has been successfully “feared up” by the intelligence agencies so they will do their bidding.
He doesn’t need to add that JFK, for fearlessly refusing the bait, was shot in the head in broad daylight to send a message to those who would follow.
Linguistic mind-control is insidious like the slow drip of a water faucet. After a while you don’t hear it and just go about your business, even as your mind, like a rotting rubber washer, keeps disintegrating under propaganda’s endless reiterations.
To think that the deep state is government employees just doing their patriotic duty is plain idiocy and plainer propaganda.
It is a trick, not the treat it is made to seem.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 21:20 - Social Media Is Driving A Global Epidemic Of Loneliness Among Millennials
Social Media Is Driving A Global Epidemic Of Loneliness Among Millennials
A team of academics from Swinburne University and VicHealth studied 1,520 Victorians aged 12 to 25, and examined their experience of loneliness, asking questions about their symptoms of depression and social anxiety. The study confirmed that loneliness – the biggest driver behind symptoms of depression – has become a global epidemic tied to the rise of social media.
Here’s what they found: One in four young people – aged 12 to 25 – reported feeling lonely for three or more days within the last week. Among 18 to 25 year olds, one in three – 35% – reported feeling lonely three or more times a week. We also found that higher levels of loneliness increases a young adult’s risk of developing depression by 12% and social anxiety by 10%, according to the WEF.
Adolescents aged 12 to 17 reported better outcomes, with one in seven (13%) feeling lonely three or more times a week. Participants in this age group were also less likely to report symptoms of depression and social anxiety than the 18 to 25 year olds.
There is some evidence that those who are lonely are more likely to use the internet for social interactions, while spending less time on legitimate interactions.
However, some argue that social media can be used to replace offline relationships with online ones, citing one new study. Another recent study found that the relationship between social media use and psychological distress simply isn’t all that clear. Over a six-month period, people who are lonely are more likely to experience higher rates of depression, social anxiety and paranoia. Being socially anxious can also lead to more loneliness at a later time. the study said.
But when lonely people do get out there and socialize, they are more likely to engage in self-defeating actions, such as being less cooperative, while also showing more negative emotions and body language. This is done in an (often unconscious) attempt to disengage and protect themselves from rejection.
Now, doctors are increasingly challenging young people to identify their strengths and learn how they’re important in forging strong, meaningful relationships. Meanwhile, challenging unhelpful thinking and negative views about others is helping more young people learn how to use humor as a strength.
These tools could help young people learn skills to develop and maintain meaningful relationships. And because lonely people are more likely to avoid others, digital tools could also be used as one way to help young people build social confidence and practice new skills within a safe space.
Ultimately, a cornerstone of any solution to the rise in loneliness-fueled depression, will be to normalize feelings of loneliness, so feeling lonely is seen not as a weakness but rather as an innate human need to connect.
When it is ignored, loneliness can have a seriously negatively impact on an individual’s health, especially when it is allowed to persist.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 20:55 - Islamic State Exacts Revenge On Turkey For Selling Out Al-Baghdadi
Islamic State Exacts Revenge On Turkey For Selling Out Al-Baghdadi
Submitted by Nauman Sadiq, an Islamabad-based attorney, columnist and geopolitical analyst focused on the politics of Af-Pak and Middle East regions, neocolonialism and petro-imperialism.
A car bomb exploded in northern Syria killing 13 and wounding 20. The blast on Saturday ripped through a crowded market in Tal Abyad, a town recently occupied by Turkish-backed militant proxies. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the blast targeted pro-Turkey fighters and civilians were also among the dead.
The aftermath of the explosion in Tal Abyad, northern Syria. Photograph: AP Even though the Turkish Defense Ministry promptly laid the finger of blame on Turkey’s arch-foe, the Kurdish YPG militia, without conducting an investigation, car bombing as a tactic for causing widespread fear is generally employed by jihadist groups and not by the Kurds.
It’s important to note in the news coverage about the killing of al-Baghdadi that although the mainstream media had been trumpeting for the last several years that the Islamic State’s fugitive chief had been hiding somewhere on the Iraq-Syria border in the east, he was found hiding in the northwestern Idlib governorate, under the control of Turkey’s militant proxies and al-Nusra Front, and was killed while trying to flee to Turkey in Barisha village five kilometers from the border.
The morning after the night raid, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported on Sunday, October 27, that a squadron of eight helicopters accompanied by warplanes belonging to the international coalition had attacked positions of Hurras al-Din, an al-Qaeda-affiliated group, in Idlib province where the Islamic State chief was believed to be hiding.
According to the “official version” of Washington’s story regarding the killing of al-Baghdadi, the choppers took off from an American airbase in Erbil, the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan, flew hundreds of miles over the enemy territory in the airspace controlled by the Syrian and Russian air forces, killed the self-proclaimed “caliph” of the Islamic State in a Hollywood-style special-ops raid, and took the same route back to Erbil along with the dead body of the “caliph” and his belongings.
Although Washington has conducted several airstrikes in Syria’s Idlib in the past, those were carried out by fixed-wing aircraft that fly at high altitudes, and the aircraft took off from American airbases in Turkey, which is just across the border from Syria’s northwestern Idlib province. Why would Washington take the risk of flying its troops at low altitudes in helicopters over the hostile territory controlled by myriads of Syria’s heavily armed militant outfits?
In fact, several Turkish journalists, including Rajip Soylu, the Turkey correspondent for the Middle East Eye, tweeted [4] on the night of the special-ops raid that the choppers took off from the American airbase in Turkey’s Incirlik. As for al-Baghdadi, who was “hiding” with the blessing of Turkey, it now appears that he was the bargaining chip in the negotiations between Trump and Erdogan, and the quid for the US president’s agreeing to pull out of Syria was the pro quo that Erdogan would hand Baghdadi to him on a silver platter.
After the betrayal of its erstwhile allies, the Islamic jihadists, by the Erdogan administration, a tidal wave of terrorism in Turkey was expected, and its first installment has apparently been released in the form of a car bombing in Tal Abyad in northern Syria occupied by Turkish-backed militant proxies.
The reason why the Trump administration is bending over backwards to appease Ankara is that Turkish President Erdogan has been drifting away from Washington’s orbit into Russia’s sphere of influence. Even though the Kurds too served the imperialist masters loyally for the last five years of Syria’s proxy war, the choice boiled down to choosing between the Kurds and Turkey, and Washington understandably chose its NATO ally.
Turkey, which has the second largest army in NATO, has been cooperating with Russia in Syria against Washington’s interests for the last several years and has also placed an order for the Russian-made S-400 missile system, whose first installment has already been delivered.
In order to understand the significance of relationship between Washington and Ankara, it’s worth noting that the United States has been conducting airstrikes against targets in Syria from the Incirlik airbase and around fifty American B-61 hydrogen bombs have also been deployed there, whose safety became a matter of real concern during the foiled July 2016 coup plot against the Erdogan administration; when the commander of the Incirlik airbase, General Bekir Ercan Van, along with nine other officers were arrested for supporting the coup; movement in and out of the base was denied, power supply was cut off and the security threat level was raised to the highest state of alert, according to a report [5] by Eric Schlosser for the New Yorker.
Perceptive readers who have been keenly watching Erdogan’s behavior since the foiled July 2016 coup plot against the Erdogan administration must have noticed that Erdogan has committed quite a few reckless and impulsive acts during the last few years.
- First, the Turkish air force shot down a Russian Sukhoi Su-24 fighter jet on the border between Syria and Turkey on 24 November 2015 that brought the Turkish and Russian armed forces to the brink of a full-scale confrontation in Syria.
- Second, the Russian ambassador to Turkey, Andrei Karlov, was assassinated at an art exhibition in Ankara on the evening of 19 December 2016 by an off-duty Turkish police officer, Mevlut Mert Altintas, who was suspected of being an Islamic fundamentalist.
- Third, the Turkish military mounted the seven-month Operation Euphrates Shield in northern Syria, immediately after the attempted coup plot, from August 2016 to March 2017 that brought the Turkish military and its Syrian militant proxies head-to-head with the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces and their American backers.
- Fourth, Ankara invaded Idlib in northwestern Syria in October 2017 on the pretext of enforcing a de-escalation zone between the Syrian militants and the Syrian government, despite official protest from Damascus that the Turkish armed forces were in violation of Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
- Fifth, Turkey mounted Operation Olive Branch in the Kurdish-held enclave Afrin in northwestern Syria from January to March 2018.
- And lastly, the Turkish armed forces and their Syrian jihadist proxies invaded and occupied 120 kilometers stretch of Syrian territory between the northern towns of Tal Abyad and Ras al-Ayn on October 9, even before the American forces had a chance to fully withdraw from their military bases in northern Syria, as soon as an understanding between Trump and Erdogan was reached in a telephonic conversation on October 6.
To avoid confrontation between myriads of local militant groups and their regional and international backers, Russia once again displayed the stroke of a genius by playing the role of a peace-maker in Syria, and concluded an agreement with Turkey in a Putin-Erdogan meeting in Sochi, Russia, on October 22 to enforce a “safe zone” in northern Syria.
According to the terms of the agreement, Turkish forces would have exclusive control over 120 kilometers stretch between Tal Abyad and Ras al-Ayn to the depth of 32 kilometers in northern Syria. To the west and east of the aforementioned area of the Turkish Operation Peace Spring, Turkish troops and Russian military police would conduct joint patrols to the depth of 10 kilometers in the Syrian territory, and the remaining 20 kilometers “safe zone” would be under the control of Syrian government which would ensure that the Kurdish forces and weapons are evacuated from Manbij, Kobani and Tal Rifat to the west and the Kurdish areas to the east, excluding the city of Qamishli.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 20:30 - The Great Decoupling Has Begun, Sinophobia Erupts, DJI Drones Banned
The Great Decoupling Has Begun, Sinophobia Erupts, DJI Drones Banned
Before a complete fracturing of the US and Chinese economies, there have already been numerous signs of decoupling that are currently taking place behind the scenes.
But before we tell you about the decoupling and the latest evidence we’ve found. You must be asking: Where are we in the trade war? Beginning innings? Imminent trade deal?
The flurry of trade headlines from the US and China over the last 15 or so months have certainly been confusing. The fact is, there’s so much fake trade news that it’s hard to tell exactly the progress between both countries.
But what’s certain is that the trade war is in the beginning innings and nowhere near being resolved. Yes, there’s a Phase 1 deal being floated around, but that’s only for President Trump to save Midwest farmers and to create positive sentiment ahead of the 2020 election to pump the stock market.
In reality, the trade war is a winner take all game, it’s really about empire, and how Washington is attempting to prevent China from becoming the next global superpower. Hence the reason for tariffs, which is an attempt by President Trump, the Pentagon, and US corporate elites to limit China’s ascension.
The decoupling will be slow at first, then rapid. We’re already seeing small to medium-sized Chinese companies being denied IPOs on Nasdaq. President Trump has already banned Haweui access to key US markets. And now, the next evidence that the decoupling is gaining momentum comes from the US Department Of The Interior.
The Department has grounded its entire fleet of 800 drones for fear that Chinese hackers could spy on critical infrastructure, reported The Wall Street Journal.
“Secretary Bernhardt is reviewing the Department of the Interior’s drone program. Until this review is completed, the Secretary has directed that drones manufactured in China or made from Chinese components be grounded unless they are currently being utilized for emergency purposes, such as fighting wildfires, search and rescue, and dealing with natural disasters that may threaten life or property,” the Department told The Verge via an email statement.
US officials worry that the Department is relying too heavily on Chinese drones and has put critical infrastructure at risk of being spied on by the Chinese.
Last month a bipartisan bill was introduced that would limit federal agencies from purchasing Chinese drones.
Several years ago, the Department of Homeland Security warned federal agencies from purchasing Chinese drones, specifically ones made by Shenzhen-based SZ DJI Technology Co., Ltd.
A DJI spokesperson told The Verge in a statement that the latest grounding of their drones by the Department Of The Interior is rather “disappointing.”
“We are aware the Department of Interior has decided to ground its entire drone program and are disappointed to learn of this development…As the leader in commercial drone technology, we have worked with the Department of Interior to create a safe and secure drone solution that meets their rigorous requirements, which was developed over the course of 15 months with DOI officials, independent cybersecurity professionals, and experts at NASA. We will continue to support the Department of Interior and provide assistance as it reviews its drone fleet so the agency can quickly resume the use of drones to help federal workers conduct vital operations,” the DJI spokesperson said.
The Department’s decision to ground Chinese drones is a clear trend of what’s to come in the year ahead: more groundings across a wide array of agencies.
Just wait until the groundings start hitting state and local municipalities and lower-level agencies. It’s going to be a nightmare.
Nevertheless, when the government starts banning certain Chinese products from consumers, you’ll know the great decoupling between the US and China is imminent.
For this to all happen, the Trump administration will need to ramp up Sinophobia propaganda to convince the American people that decoupling is the right move.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 20:05 - Hedge Fund CIO: "You Either Have Risk On, Or You Do Not"
Hedge Fund CIO: “You Either Have Risk On, Or You Do Not”
Submitted by Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management
“You either have risk on, or you do not,” said Simplicity, walking Occam’s Razor, “There are only these two states, nothing more.” He lifted both hands, palms up, to illustrate the point.
“Now, reflect on the levels of anxiety you have experienced in each state throughout your career.” And decades of an agitated existence flashed before my eyes.
“There are times when you are carrying an enormous amount of risk and sleep like a newborn. And there are times when you have a tiny amount of risk yet feel deeply perturbed.” Sometimes you carry no risk and feel supremely relaxed.
“But the most interesting state is the one where you have no risk and experience intense anxiety.”
There are only a few times in a year to make a lot of money. When those times occur, you need to be involved, aggressive, big. The rest of the year it’s best to do as little as possible.
“How do you tell the few opportune times from all the others?” asked Simplicity, weighing imaginary scenarios in each hand,
“The answer is: you just do.” And I smiled, because of course, that is at once the simplest and most complex answer in all the world. “I was wrong about the election result,” he explained. “And I was then wrong about the reaction to the election.” He bought gold when Florida looked likely to fall. It rallied, then reversed unexpectedly.
“I knew enough to immediately get out of all of my risk, everything.” Leaving him to observe the world with clear eyes.
“For two days I watched, as a growing anxiety consumed me. I had no risk on at all but wanted to jump off a bridge.” And Simplicity paused, reflecting. “There are times when you just know that something important is happening. And that you must take risk.”
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 19:40 - Ken Fisher Taking Out "Women Friendly" Ads As Redemptions Near $4 Billion
Ken Fisher Taking Out “Women Friendly” Ads As Redemptions Near $4 Billion
It’s a bold strategy, Cotton, let’s see if it pays off for him.
Embattled money manager Ken Fisher, who has seen almost $4 billion withdrawn from his firm after making lewd sexual jokes at a financial conference about a month ago, is now “fighting back” by taking out advertisements that feature women, according to Bloomberg.
“You Heard Their Story. Now Hear Ours,” the headline to one of his ads reads. It features 7 female employees at Fisher Investments and statistics that put the company in a favorable light. “Over 800 women strong, with women leading 63% of employees,” the ad reads.
Fisher may feel as though the blowback from his recent comments may not just go away on their own, especially as redemptions and withdrawls from his firm continue. They now total about $3.9 billion.
John Dillard, a Fisher spokesman, said: “Over the past few weeks, numerous women at Fisher Investments expressed their desire to share their stories in reaction to recent, inaccurate media reports. The women in the ad were asked if they wanted to participate, and were eager to do so.”
We bet it was a real tough decision – either participate or let the firm go under and risk losing their jobs.
One testimonial from a VP at Fisher says:
“The stories out there don’t feel like who we are, and if they were, I wouldn’t be here.”
Fisher has also launched a website, which for some reason has a toll free number on it. We wonder if the women are standing by, working the phones, eager to reassure callers of how un-oppressed they are.
Recall, we have been following the sustained outflows from Ken Fisher’s firm over the last few weeks. We recently noted that the firm had seen more than $3 billion in redemptions since Fisher’s comments.
The latest to cut bait was the Employees Retirement System of Texas, who announced last week that it was going to pull $350 million from the asset manager.
Mary Jane Wardlow, a spokeswoman for the pension system, said: “Texas ERS has completed its due diligence. With respect to our fiduciary duty, we are defunding Fisher Investments, which had served as an external manager in the international equities portfolio with $350 million [as of Sept. 30] under management.”
Recall, just days after the $70 billion state of Michigan retirement fund pulled its assets from Fisher Investments, the city of Boston also did the same.
Fisher managed $600 million in retirement funds for Michigan and the state’s exit ends a 15 year relationship with Fisher’s firm.
Boston Mayor Martin Walsh said at the time: “Boston will not invest in companies led by people who treat women like commodities. Reports of Ken Fisher’s comments and poor judgment are incredibly disturbing.”
Michigan’s chief investment officer, Jon Braeutigam, notified the state investment board of the termination on October 10. In his letter, he said that Fisher’s comments were “unacceptable” and that although employees at his fund hadn’t witnessed similar comments, “history does not outweigh the inappropriateness of the comments.”
Fisher was managing about $10.9 billion on behalf of 36 state or municipal government entities at the end of 2018, down from $13.2 billion at the end of 2017. That number will likely be sizeably lower at the end of 2019.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 19:15 - Morgan Stanley Asks "What Returns Can Long-Run Investors Expect In This Market", Offers Frightning Answer
Morgan Stanley Asks “What Returns Can Long-Run Investors Expect In This Market”, Offers Frightning Answer
Authored by Andrew Sheets, chief cross-asset strategist at Morgan Stanley
Morgan Stanley’s Research department is currently working on, and debating, what we think the market will look like in 2020. But before thinking about the year ahead, it can be useful to take an even longer perspective. If we put aside the noise around politics and trade, ignore the market’s obsession about every word that central banks utter, or every data release, and step back from it all, what sort of returns can a long-run investor expect from this market?
This is not purely an academic exercise.
Assumptions about the long-run return outlook have real implications for how investors think about retirement security, how institutions think about solvency and how asset allocators think about strategic tilts. Long-run views of the market have limits; by being rooted in valuation, they are driven by a factor that often has little bearing on performance over the next 6 or 12 months. But valuation also has its advantages, proving far more accurate than any other variable in determining what the 5- or 10-year experience of an investor will be.
And at the moment, that experience looks challenging: On our estimates, the expected return of a US 60/40 portfolio of stocks and government bonds will return just 4.1% per year over the next decade, close to the lowest expected return over the last 20 years, and one that has only been worse in 4% of observations since 1950.
For a European investor, that blended 60/40 return is also 3.9%, better than just 6% of historical observations since 1970. And lest you think we are placing our hand on the scale, other approaches to estimating long-run returns can lead to even lower long-term numbers, especially if one assumes that currently above-trend margins need to fully mean-revert (we do not).
If we put this in terms of portfolio theory, our long-run return assumptions suggest an unusually low ‘efficient frontier’ for portfolio construction. This frontier is flattest for US dollar assets, and steeper for European and Japanese assets, thanks to higher equity risk premiums.
An important caveat here is that expected returns for the market have looked low before, only to be bailed out, so to speak, as central banks eased policy and pushed prices up ever higher. But it’s important to remember that these higher prices are simply pulling forward ever more future return to the present. That’s great for today’s asset owners, especially those close to retirement. It is much less good for anyone trying to save, invest or manage well into the future, who face an increasingly barren return landscape.
Indeed, we think that there remains an underappreciation of the costs of easy policy and its pull-forward of returns; it is not a free lunch:
- First, by pressuring insurance and pension solvency, low rates, ironically, may drive less ability to take risk through traditional higher-beta assets, such as equities.
- Second, for investors who are able to move out the risk curve, low return in public equity and bond markets drives more money into illiquid corners of the market.
- Third, by confronting individual investors with low returns, it increases the pressure to save more to hit a given level of retirement savings, potentially one reason why the savings rate in developed markets remains stubbornly high.
Do any markets offer a better long-run story? We’d highlight two: UK equities, which trade at a historically large discount to global markets, show little sign of over-earning or margin extension versus history and enjoy a high dividend yield, and emerging market hard currency debt, which offers higher expected long-run returns than other bond assets of similar volatility, on our framework.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 18:50 - Under Armour Faces Federal Accounting Probe Amid Major C-Suite Churn
Under Armour Faces Federal Accounting Probe Amid Major C-Suite Churn
Sources have told The Wall Street Journal that Baltimore-based Under Armour Inc. is at the center of a federal investigation for its accounting practices.
The probe, which hasn’t been publicly announced, is being coordinated by civil investigators at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
The announcement of the probe via The Journal comes one day before Under Armour reports Q3 results on Monday.
Investigators are examining “revenue-recognition practices, authorities generally focus on whether companies record revenue before it is earned or defer the dating of expenses to make earnings appear stronger, among other possible infractions,” The Journal noted.
Under Amour shares have crashed more than -60% in the last 17 quarters on weak apparel sales.
The investigation comes several weeks after Kevin Plank, founder/CEO, stepped down from the helm, and perhaps most suspiciously, The Journal reports that Under Armour had three CFOs from 2016 to 2017.
Brad Dickerson, who had served as CFO since 2008, left the company in February 2016.
Chip Molloy, a former PetSmart Inc. executive, took over but stayed a year on the job. Under Armour at the time cited unspecified personal reasons for his departure.
David Bergman was named acting finance chief in February 2017, after the company reported its quarterly sales miss and Mr. Molloy’s exit. Mr. Bergman, who has worked at Under Armour since 2004 in various finance roles, was named permanent CFO in December 2017.
Makes one wonder just what the ‘outsider’ CFO saw to depart so quickly.
The apparel company has spent two years restructuring operations, in the attempt to turn the tide and increase sales. Still, nothing seems to work as their North American segment continues to sink.
Last year, Plank and top executives were exposed by The Journal for using company funds at strip clubs in Baltimore.
What The Journal missed, which was an even more important story, is that Plank and top executives hosted wild parties at his 18 million dollar farm in Baltimore County. All of the partying has been suspected to be on the company’s dime.
Plank and his brother, Scott Plank, sold company stock over the years to expand their real estate empire, called Sagamore Development Company. The brothers dumped company stock and built an exotic hotel, and a whiskey distillery as the market capitalization of the company was halved.
After the #MeToo movement hit Under Armour in 2018, mainly because lower-level staff, women staff to be exact, complained about a highly toxic male environment in management, it now seems that one year later, with Plank out the door and the company currently under federal investigation for its accounting practices — sh*t is hitting the fan.
With the company imploding and now a federal investigation underway, it seems that one local investor has “rang” Plank’s doorbell this evening in the attempt to see the accounting books. Does this mean a run on the stock is coming?
Just rang Kevin Plank Under Armour’s gate and asked him to show me the accounting books. Sadly no answer. Limit down Monday $UA $UAA pic.twitter.com/V3zm6GgA7G
— Alastair Williamson (@StockBoardAsset) November 3, 2019
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 18:25 - Exposing The Bogus "97% Consensus" Claim Over Climate Change 'Science'
Exposing The Bogus “97% Consensus” Claim Over Climate Change ‘Science’
Authored by Robert Murphy via The Mises Institute,
One of the popular rhetorical moves in the climate change debate is for advocates of aggressive government intervention to claim that “97% of scientists” agree with their position, and so therefore any critics must be unscientific “deniers.”
Now these claims have been dubious from the start; people like David Friedman have demonstrated that the “97% consensus” assertion became a talking point only through a biased procedure that mischaracterized how journal articles were rated, and thereby inflating the estimate.
But beyond that, a review in The New Republic of a book critical of mainstream economics uses the exact same degree of consensus in order to cast aspersions on the science of economics. In other words, when it comes to the nearly unanimous rejection of rent control or tariffs among professional economists, at least some progressive leftists conclude that there must be group-think involved. The one consistent thread in both cases – that of the climate scientists and that of the economists – is that The New Republic takes the side that will expand the scope of government power, a central tenet since its birth by Herbert Croly a century ago.
The Dubious “97% Consensus” Claim Regarding Climate Science
Back in 2014, David Friedman worked through the original paper that kicked off the “97% consensus” talking point. What the original authors, Cook et al., actually found in their 2013 paper was that 97.1% of the relevant articles agreed that humans contribute to global warming. But notice that that is not at all the same thing as saying that humans are the main contributors to observed global warming (since the Industrial Revolution).
This is a huge distinction. For example, I co-authored a Cato study with climate scientists Pat Michaels and Chip Knappenberger, in which we strongly opposed a U.S. carbon tax. Yet both Michaels and Knappenberger would be climate scientists who were part of the “97% consensus” according to Cook et al. That is, Michaels and Knappenberger both agree that, other things equal, human activity that emits carbon dioxide will make the world warmer than it otherwise would be. That observation by itself does not mean there is a crisis nor does it justify a large carbon tax.
Incidentally, when it comes down to what Cook et al. actually found, economist David R. Henderson noticed that it was even less impressive than what Friedman had reported. Here’s Henderson:
[Cook et al.] got their 97 percent by considering only those abstracts that expressed a position on anthropogenic global warming (AGW). I find it interesting that 2/3 of the abstracts did not take a position. So, taking into account David Friedman’s criticism above, and mine, Cook and Bedford, in summarizing their findings, should have said, “Of the approximately one-third of climate scientists writing on global warming who stated a position on the role of humans, 97% thought humans contribute somewhat to global warming.” That doesn’t quite have the same ring, does it? [David R. Henderson, bold added.]
So to sum up: The casual statements in the corporate media and in online arguments would lead the average person to believe that 97% of scientists who have published on climate change think that humans are the main drivers of global warming. And yet, at least if we review the original Cook et al. (2013) paper that kicked off the talking point, what they actually found was that of the sampled papers on climate change, only one-third of them expressed a view about its causes, and then of that subset, 97% agreed that humans were at least one cause of climate change. This would be truth-in-advertising, something foreign in the political discussion to which all AGW issues now seem to descend.
The New Republic’s Differing Attitudes Towards Consensus
The journal The New Republic was founded in 1914. Its website states: “For over 100 years, we have championed progressive ideas and challenged popular opinion….The New Republic promotes novel solutions for today’s most critical issues.”
With that context, it’s not surprising that The New Republic uses the alleged 97% consensus in climate science the way other progressive outlets typically do. Here’s an excerpt from a 2015 article (by Rebecca Leber) in which Republicans were excoriated for their anti-science stance on climate change:
Two years ago, a group of international researchers led by University of Queensland’s John Cook surveyed 12,000 abstracts of peer-reviewed papers on climate change since the 1990s. Out of the 4,000 papers that took a position one way or another on the causes of global warming, 97 percent of them were in agreement: Humans are the primary cause. By putting a number on the scientific consensus, the study provided everyone from President Barack Obama to comedian John Oliver with a tidy talking point. [Leber, bold added.]
Notice already that Leber is helping to perpetuate a falsehood, though she can be forgiven—part of David Friedman’s blog post was to show that Cook himself was responsible (Friedman calls it an outright lie) for the confusion regarding what he and his co-authors actually found. And notice that Leber confirms what I have claimed in this post, namely that it was the Cook et al. (2013) paper that originally provided the “talking point” (her term) about so-called consensus.
The point of Leber’s essay is to then denounce Ted Cruz and certain other Republicans for ignoring this consensus among climate scientists:
All this debate over one statistic might seem silly, but it’s important that Americans understand there is overwhelming agreement about human-caused global warming. Deniers have managed to undermine how the public views climate science, which in turn makes voters less likely to support climate action.
Now here’s what’s really interesting. A colleague sent me a recent review in The New Republic of a new book by Binyan Appelbaum that is critical of the economics profession. The reviewer, Robin Kaiser-Schatzlein, quoted with approval Appelbaum’s low view of consensus in economics:
Appelbaum shows the strangely high degree of consensus in the field of economics, including a 1979 survey of economists that “found 98 percent opposed rent controls, 97 percent opposed tariffs, 95 percent favored floating exchange rates, and 90 percent opposed minimum wage laws.” And in a moment of impish humor he notes that “Although nature tends toward entropy, they shared a confidence that economies tend toward equilibrium.” Economists shared a creepy lack of doubt about how the world worked. [Kaiser-Schatzlein, bold added.]
Isn’t that amazing? Rather than hunting down and demonizing Democratic politicians who dare to oppose the expert consensus on items like rent control – which Bernie Sanders has recently promoted – the reaction here is to guffaw at the hubris and “creepy lack of doubt about how the world [works].”
Conclusion
From the beginning, the “97% consensus” claim about climate change has been dubious, with supporters claiming that it represented much more than it really did. Furthermore, a recent book review in The New Republic shows that when it comes to economic science, 97% consensus means nothing, if it doesn’t support progressive politics.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 18:00 - Freight Railroad Traffic Plunged 8% At The End Of October
Freight Railroad Traffic Plunged 8% At The End Of October
US freight railroads, which along with Class 8 trucking have long been used as a gauge of the country’s economic health, continue to show declines in traffic.
Freight railroads logged 513,147 carloads and intermodal units during the week ending October 26, according to data from the Association of American Railroads reported on by Progressive Railroading. This marks an 8.8% decline compared to the same week last year.
Total carload traffic for the week was down 9.4% to 243,321 units and intermodal volume fell 8.3% to 269,826 containers and trailers.
The AAR tracks 10 carload commodity groups on a weekly basis – none of them showed growth for the week. Coal fell 14,797 carloads, grain fell 2,512 carloads and metallic ores and metals fell 2,064 carloads.
Canadian and Mexican railroads also reported traffic declines for the week. Canadian railroads were down 7.9% and intermodal units were down 3.6%. Mexican railroads logged 19,573 carloads for the week, down 1.1% and intermodal units fell 5.6%.
As the report notes, in aggregate:
-
U.S. railroads reported a combined 22,300,581 carloads and intermodal units, down 4.3 percent;
-
Canadian railroads reported a combined 6,523,922 carloads, containers and trailers, up 0.7 percent; and
-
Mexican railroads reported a combined 1,625,137 carloads and intermodal containers and trailers, down 2.8 percent.
Total North American rail volume for the YTD 43 week period is still 3.2% lower than 2018. Recall, we wrote earlier this month that Class 8 orders for September had also crashed 71%, with the two indicators marking an obvious slowdown in the country’s economic productivity that everybody except Jim Cramer and Jerome Powell are able to see.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 17:35 -
- McDonald’s CEO Fired Over Relationship With Employee
McDonald’s CEO Fired Over Relationship With Employee
McDonald’s Corporation dropped a press release on Sunday afternoon detailing it had fired Chief Executive Officer Steve Easterbrook for having a consensual relationship with an employee.
Easterbrook “violated company policy and demonstrated poor judgment involving a recent consensual relationship with an employee,” the release stated.
McDonald’s said Sunday that its board voted Friday to terminate Easterbrook over the “consensual relationship,” indicating that he violated company policy on personal conduct.
Chris Kempczinski, most recently President of McDonald’s USA, was voted by the board to succeed Easterbrook. Easterbrook has also been removed from the board.
Easterbrook emailed employees after his hiring and said: “I engaged in a recent consensual relationship with an employee, which violated McDonald’s policy. This was a mistake. Given the values of the company, I agree with the board that it is time for me to move on. Beyond this, I hope you can respect my desire to maintain my privacy.”
Easterbrook took the reins as CEO in 2015, during his tenure, traffic volumes in the North American segment have slumped.
McDonald’s tumbled last week when Q3 earnings missed on the top and bottom line, while US comp sales disappointed lofty expectations.
McDonald’s stock has more than doubled over the last five years as fundamentals have worsened.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 17:11 - Sleepwalking Toward A Crisis – Got Gold?
Sleepwalking Toward A Crisis – Got Gold?
Via InvestmentResearchDynamics.com,
“By sticking to the new orthodoxy of monetary policy and pretending that we have made the banking system safe, we are sleepwalking towards that crisis.”
– Mervyn King, former head of the Bank of England in a lecture at the IMF’s recent annual meeting
The market levitates higher on phony economic data from the Government, Trump tweets, Fed money printing and hedge fund algorithms chasing headline and twitter sound bites. Currently the stock market, dulled by money printing and official interventions, could care less about economic reality and rising global systemic geopolitical and financial risk. Corporate headline earnings “beats” are considered bullish even if the earnings declined YoY or sequentially.
But for those who don’t have their head in the sand, clinging desperately to the “hope” offered by the misdirecting Orwellian propaganda, it’s difficult to ignore the message signaled by the legendary levels of insider selling.
Someone is not telling the truth – The Fed once again last week increased the size of both the overnight and “term” repo operations. Starting Thursday (Oct 24th) the overnight repos were increased from $75 billion to “at least” $120 billion and the term repos (2 week term) of “at least” $35 billion were extended to the end of November, with two “at least $45 billion” term repos thrown in for good measure. The Fed is also outright printing helicopter money for the banks at a rate of $60 billion per month (via “T-bill POMOs).
At the height of the last QE/money printing cycle, the Fed was doing $75 billion per month. So whatever the problem is behind the curtain, it’s already as large or larger than the 2008 crisis..
That escalated quickly – When the repo operations started in September, the Fed attributed the need to “relieve funding pressures.” At the time the public was fed the fairytale that corporations were pulling funds from money market funds to pay quarter-end taxes. Well, we’re over five weeks past that event and the repo operations have escalated in size and duration three times. Someone is not telling the truth…
The rapid increase in Fed money printing in just five weeks reflects serious problems developing in the global financial system. Actually, the problem is easy to identify:
At every cohort – government, corporate and household – the level of debt has become unsustainable, with not insignificant portions of that debt in non-performing status (seriously delinquent or in default).
Thus, the Central Banks have had to resort to money printing to help the banks manage the rising level of distress on their balance sheet and to monetize the escalating rate of Treasury debt issuance.
The quote at the beginning is from the former head of the Bank of England, Mervyn King. King is warning that the global financial system is headed toward a crisis and that money printing ultimately won’t save it. While it’s pretty obvious that a disaster waits on the horizon, when the former head of a big Central Bank delivers a message like that instead of Orwellian gobbledygook, the world should pay heed. I would suggest that the Fed’s money printing signals that the risk of a crisis intensifies weekly.
Got Gold?
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 17:10 - US Convoy In Syria Attacked By Turkey-Backed Militants: Russian MoD
US Convoy In Syria Attacked By Turkey-Backed Militants: Russian MoD
Russia’s Ministry of Defense announced Sunday that a US military convoy came under attack by Turkey-backed militants in Syria.
“American troops heading toward the Iraqi border have been attacked from land held by Turkish-backed militants in northern Syria, Russia’s Ministry of Defense has claimed,” according to a breaking report by RT.
Russian military sources, who have this week been seen in close vicinity with US troops amid a Pentagon draw down from border areas, reported no casualties as a result of the alleged incident.
US convoy in northern Syria file image, via Zuma Press/WSJ Though the Pentagon did not immediately confirm the report, there’s been increasing tensions between Washington and Ankara over proposed Congressional sanctions on Turkey, also as the ‘US withdrawal’ from northern Syria became in reality a mere ‘partial’ draw down with American forces redeployed to ‘secure’ oil fields in partnership with the Kurdish-led SDF.
According to details from the Russian Defense Ministry (MoD), the American convoy was attacked near the town of Tell Tamer on the M4 highway, which runs parallel to the Turkish border near areas captured by pro-Turkish forces as part of ‘Operation Peace Spring’.
An official statement from the Russian MoD reads as follows:
“As part of deconfliction exchange, information has been received from the US side that on November 3 a convoy of American servicemen…was fired upon from the territory controlled by the pro-Turkish Syrian National Army.”
This follows an incident last month which involved American troops in the Syrian Kurdish town of Kobani coming under Turkish artillery fire.
Since Trump’s declared US withdrawal from the border areas due to Erdogan’s Turkish military incursion, American and Russian convoys have been seen passing each other on the roadways.
Picture pretty much sums up situation in N. Syria: Encounter of U.S and Russian military convoy on M4 highway pic.twitter.com/iiedQFJUzY (via @OmerOzkizilcik)
— Gregor Peter (@L0gg0l) November 3, 2019
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Subsequent to that mid-October incident Defense Secretary Mark Esper told reporters that US forces had permission to fire back if fired upon.
Multiple media reports have lately documented the presence of former ISIS and al-Qaeda fighters swelling the ranks of Turkish-backed Sunni militias currently serving as the main ground force for Erdogan’s ‘Operation Peace Spring’.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/03/2019 – 16:45
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...![<!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>](https://i0.wp.com/zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b792-20bd8d8fa069.storage.googleapis.com/s3fs-public/inline-images/922a1121-6961-4a8f-bea2-ba8c0ce828f7.jpeg?ssl=1){kind=link}
![<!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>](https://i0.wp.com/www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/car%20bomb%20turkey.jpg?ssl=1){kind=link}
![<!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>](https://i0.wp.com/www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/ustroopssyria2.jpg?ssl=1){kind=link}