another site
Aside from his “we don’t have a strategy” comment, the loudest statement President Obama made this afternoon appeared to be his choice of a “taupe” jacket. However, with everyone discussing Obama’s “tan pan”, we wonder isn’t the President’s ‘green’ fixation a more relevant topic?
Forget Orange, Green in the new Black…
Green Jackets and Health Care and a $15 Minimum Wage (oh and a Maserati) for all…
h/t @convert_trader
via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1C7Y5fX Tyler Durden
A day in the life of a gym junkie’s shoes… this is just what’s accumulated by my door in the past couple of days; you should see my closet.
13
1
#fitmom,
#runfaster,
#shoes,
#nike,
#fitlife,
#chickswholift,
#nola,
#fitchicks,
#gymjunkie,
#jumphigher,
#fitfam,
#girlswithmuscle,
from @hooper_fit – WEBSTA http://ift.tt/1u2kNjW
via IFTTT
Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse… In a veritable deluge of data from Japan tonight, there is – simply put – no silver lining. First, Japan's jobless rate unexpectedly jumped to 3.8% – its highest since Nov 2013 (despite the highest job-to-applicant ratio in 22 years). Then, household spending re-collapsed 5.9% for the 4th month in a row (showingh no sign of post-tax-hike-recovery). Industrial Production was up next and dramatically missed expectations with a mere 0.2% rebound after last month's plunge (-0.9% YoY – worst in 13 months), quickly followed by a 0.5% drop in Japanes retail trade MoM (missing hope for a 0.3% gain). That's good news, right? Means moar QQE, right? Wrong! Japanese CPI came hot at 3.4% YoY with energy costs and electronic goods 'hyperinflating' at 8.8% and 9.1% respectively. As Goldman's chief Japan economist warns, "the BOJ doesn’t have another bazooka," adding that "The window for reform may already have been half closed." We're gonna need another arrow, Abe!
Japanese unemployment jumps to highest since Nov 2013…
But the job-to-applicant ratio is at its highest since 1992 (no incentive to work?)
Blowing the idea that "slack" is creating deflation out of the water.
Household spending then collapsed 5.9% YoY… 4th month in a row…
As Bloomberg notes, Inflation-adjusted household income fell 6.2% in July y/y, extending its slide to a 10th month in a row, according to data released today by Japan’s statistics bureau. That is the longest period of declines since at least 2004
Retail Sales dropped and missed again…
But don't expect Moar QQE… as inflation is on fire…
But apart from that… what a total disaster… only – we are sure – to be met with some glib comment from the Japanese politicians that the recovery is on track and there are signs of recovery…
* * *
Wondering how this ends… here's Bloomberg Briefs Tom Orlik ( @TomOrlik ) discussing the future for Japan with Goldman Sachs' chief Japan economist Naohiko Baba
Why Japan May Catapult From Deflation to Stagflation
ONE ON ONE TOM ORLIK, BLOOMBERG ECONOMIST
A heroic attempt to lift Japan’s economy out of deflation may succeed only in pushing it into stagflation. Goldman Sachs’ chief Japan economist Naohiko Baba tells Bloomberg Economist Tom Orlik why he thinks reviving growth will be tough.
Q: What’s your assessment of Abenomics’ progress so far?
A: Monetary and fiscal stimulus has provided a boost to the markets but the real economic impact is short lived. Structural reform is most important and progress has been limited. Discussion of the Trans-Pacific Partnership has been delayed. There’s been very little progress on labor market reform. We’re seeing higher labor force participation, but that reflects a recovery trend in place from before the start of Abenomics. The impact of reforms has been very limited.
Q: Do you think the Bank of Japan can hit its 2 percent inflation target?
A: I am skeptical. The CPI has already declined from its April peak. The BOJ says it will come down to around 1 percent over the summer then rise again from the second half of the fiscal year. They expect higher wages to make the difference. My view is the CPI will fall to around 0.8 percent to 1 percent and then stay there. I don’t expect the wage channel to work. If you look at the spring wage negotiations this year, despite a big government push, the results were disappointing. In 2015, weaker profits will mean reduced funds for firms to pay higher wages. My guess is that July 2014 wage growth could be the peak.
Q: If inflation goes off track, what will the BOJ do?
A: They will keep their program in place through 2016, make it open ended. They might adjust the composition of purchases, buy more ETFs. It’s difficult for them to increase the size of their JGB purchases. Banks have already sold a large part of their government bond portfolio. Liquidity in the market is low. If they can’t increase the size of their program significantly, the BOJ doesn’t have another bazooka.
Q: How do you assess the impact from April’s tax increase?
A: There was front-loading of purchases ahead of the tax increase and then payback afterward. That’s a temporary impact. The bigger worry is the fall in real income from the tax increase and higher inflation. That’s a longer-lasting impact. Second quarter GDP growth was very weak. If you take out the positive contribution from inventory buildup, real growth was minus 11 percent on a quarter-on-quarter annualized basis. That’s much worse than after the 1997 tax increase.
Q: It seems like Abenomics so far has not been good for households.
A: Real wages are falling 3 percent a year. Real disposable income was down minus 8 percent year on year in the June household survey. It is as if Japan’s economy is heading into stagflation. That’s good for managing debt, bad for quality of life. As households see quality of life fall, it may negatively affect the approval rating f r the Cabinet. That will make it harder to push painful structural reforms. The window for reform may already have been half closed.
Charts: Bloomberg
via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1wKEiTB Tyler Durden
Two years ago, Ruben Chavez, Arthur
Fisher, and Joshua DeLosSantos, members of a Christian evangelical
group known as Bible Believers, attracted a hostile crowd while
preaching hellfire and damnation at the Arab International Festival
in Dearborn, Michigan. The crowd, which consisted mostly of
children, pelted the three evangelists with water bottles and other
trash. Police responded by threatening to arrest Chavez and his
friends for disorderly conduct unless they left the festival.
According to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit,
banishing the provocative preachers from the public festival was
perfectly appropriate and did not violate their First Amendment
rights.
In a ruling
issued yesterday, the appeals court says video of the incident
“demonstrates that [the Bible Believers’] speech and
conduct intended to incite the crowd to turn
violent.” How so? “Within minutes after their
arrival,” Judge Bernice Donald writes in an opinion joined by
Judge Samuel Mays, Chavez and his associates
“began espousing extremely aggressive and
offensive messages—e.g., that the bystanders would ‘burn in hell’
or ‘in a lake of fire’ because they were ‘wicked, filthy, and
sick’—and accused the crowd of fixating on ‘murder, violence, and
hate’ because that was ‘all [they] ha[d] in [their] hearts.’ These
words induced a violent reaction in short order; the crowd soon
began to throw bottles, garbage, and eventually rocks and chunks of
concrete. Moreover, members of the crowd can be heard to shout ‘get
them’ and ‘beat the s*** out of them’; one Bible Believer was
pushed to the ground. Chavez’s face was cut open and bleeding from
where he had been struck by debris.”
Because bystanders reacted violently, in other words, that must
have been the reaction Chavez and his friends aimed to elicit. The
implication is that they were deliberately inciting a riot, meaning
their speech was not protected by the First Amendment. But the
majority opinion is ambiguous on this point. It also suggests that
the the Bible Believers’ preaching was constitutionally
protected but that making them do it elsewhere amounted to a
reasonable “time, place, and manner” restriction in light of the
crowd’s hostility. “The threat of violence had grown too great to
permit them to continue proselytizing,” Donald writes. She explains
that Dennis Richardson, deputy chief of the Wayne County Sheriff’s
Office, “had a reasonable good faith belief that the threat of
violence was too high because the Bible Believers had already been
subjected to actual violence.”
In a powerful dissent, Judge Eric Clay rebukes his colleagues
for endorsing a “heckler’s veto,” as reflected in Richardson’s
words to Chavez: “What you are saying to them and they are saying
back to you is creating danger.” Richardson and the other
defendants conceded that the Bible Believers’ speech was
constitutionally protected, Clay notes, and for good reason: It did
not qualify as incitement, which requires an intent to provoke
“imminent lawless action,” or as “fighting words,” i.e., “those
personally abusive epithets which, when addressed to the ordinary
citizen, are, as a matter of common knowledge, inherently likely to
provoke violent reaction.” Clay observes that “fighting words are
defined solely by their impact on the ‘average person,'” not the
“average Muslim child.” The fact that the vast majority of people
at the festival did not respond violently to the
evangelists shows that their preaching, however obnoxious, did not
qualify for this (dubious) exception to the First Amendment.
Confronted by citizens lawfully exercising their First Amendment
rights and bystanders lawlessly punishing them for it, the police
sided with the violent hecklers. Clay argues that they should
instead have tried a little harder to calm the crowd (which, again,
consisted mostly of rowdy children), because their first duty in
this situation was to protect the peaceful party:
In my view, the video tape shows that Defendants did just about
nothing to control the crowd as it grew and became agitated.
Defendants only stepped in to inform Plaintiffs that the police
were powerless and that Plaintiffs needed to leave under threat of
arrest. This is not good faith—it is manufacturing a crisis as an
excuse to crack down on those exercising their First Amendment
rights.
By validating such police work, Clay warns, the court is
inviting more violence and more censorship:
Law enforcement is principally required to protect lawful
speakers over and above law-breakers. If a different rule
prevailed, this would simply allow for a heckler’s veto under more
extreme conditions. Indeed, hecklers would be incentivized to get
really rowdy, because at that point the target of their ire could
be silenced. More perniciously, a contrary rule would allow police
to manufacture a situation to chill speech. Police officers could
simply sit by as a crowd formed and became agitated. Once the
crowd’s agitation became extreme, the police could swoop in and
silence the speaker. The First Amendment does not contain this
large a loophole.
Cathy Young discussed an earlier case involving evangelists at
the Arab International Festival in her 2011 essay “Fear
of a Muslim America.”
from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/1qHjmYK
via IFTTT
Has Germany had enough? Hot on the heels of Mario Draghi’s ‘demands’ that EU leaders undertake “structural reforms” to boost competitiveness and overcome the legacy of Europe’s debt crisis, German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble unleashed perhaps the most worrisome statement tonight for all the free-money-party-goers – the music is about to stop. In an interview with Bloomberg TV, Schaeuble blasted “Europe needs to find ways to foster growth,” adding that “the ECB has reached the limit in helping the Euro Area.” In a clear shot across the bow of his ‘core’ cohort, Schaeuble said he “understood” Hollande’s demands but shot back that “monetary policy can only buy time.”
As WSJ notes, the French are seeking aid…
Growth in France had already ground to a halt in the first quarter, and Paris now says the persistent weakness means it won’t be able to meet its deficit reduction target this year.
“We can’t deny that certain geopolitical risks are playing a very important role at the moment. There are indicators of an economic slowdown,” Mr. Schaeuble said in a joint press conference with Mr. Sapin.
…
French President Francois Hollande has proposed holding a euro-zone summit to discuss using the flexibility of EU treaties to slow the pace of deficit reduction. Mr. Schaeuble avoided saying whether Germany would approve a more flexible approach for any country in particular.
“Nobody has a lesson to give to anyone else because everyone knows the rules,” Mr. Schaeuble said.
Germany has been reluctant to give up on fiscal discipline without seeing results from French promises to make structural changes to the economy in areas like labor law and welfare benefits. Europe last year already granted France a two-year delay to 2015 to bring its deficit within the EU rule of 3% of economic output–a target France is now likely to miss.
Mr. Sapin said the French president’s request for a euro-zone meeting is to discuss the currency bloc’s problems as a whole, not France’s specifically.
“It’s in no way a demand for an extension–that I can tell you straight away,” Mr. Sapin said.
Which means only one thing – it is a demand for an extension… which perhaps explains Schaeuble’s extreme tone this evening (bia Bloomberg):
- *SCHAEUBLE SAYS HE ‘UNDERSTANDS’ HOLLANDE’S EU ECONOMIC PLAN
- *SCHAEUBLE SAYS EUROPE NEEDS TO FIND WAYS TO FOSTER GROWTH
- *SCHAEUBLE SAYS ECB HAS REACHED LIMIT IN HELPING EURO AREA
- *SCHAEUBLE SAYS MONETARY POLICY CAN ONLY BUY TIME
As he explains:
“Monetary policy can only buy time,’’ Schaeuble said in the interview yesterday.
“Liquidity in markets is not too low, it’s even too high. Therefore I think monetary policy has come to the end of its instruments and therefore what we urgently need is investments, regaining confidence by investors, by markets, by consumers.”
“I don’t think ECB monetary policy has the instruments to fight deflation, to be quite frank,” Schaeuble said.
Schaeuble said he’s confident that “my French colleagues will do what’s needed in line with the rules that have been agreed again and again.”
“It’s very important that we all know in Europe — every member state — that we have to stick to structural reforms and enhance competitiveness, even in Germany.”
Yet another nail in the coffin of any large scale sovereign asset purchase scheme…
* * *
With pressure from the French on Draghi to do “whatever it takes” again (for real this time) it appears this is as clear a message from Zee Germans that they won’t stand for anymore.
via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1qH9vC5 Tyler Durden
In the last year, even the 'smartest men in the room' PhDs with advanced degrees have seen their wages shrink, according to a new study by the Economic Policy Institute. As The WSJ notes, inflation has been low by most measures in recent years, but wage growth for the majority of workers has been even lower.
That means even small amounts of inflation have been painful for vast swaths of the workforce.
In recent years, one thing is clear: Neither monetary policy nor labor market policies nor fiscal policies have been able to boost earnings for most Americans. Only workers in the 80th percentile and up have seen their wage gains outpace inflation, though not by much.
Even the PhDs are losing money this year…
But since 2007, only the 80th percentile of wage-earners and above have seen any gains…
As EPI notes,
“The poor performance of American workers’ wages in recent decades – particularly their failure to grow at anywhere near the pace of overall productivity, is the country’s central economic challenge,”
* * *
In recent years, one thing is clear: Neither monetary policy nor labor market policies nor fiscal policies have been able to boost earnings for most Americans.
via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1qH9wGm Tyler Durden
Polls have previously shown:
A new Gallup poll shows that more than twice as many Americans “strongly disapprove” as “strongly approve” of Obama:
The poll also shows that almost twice as many Americans strongly approved of Obama in July 2009 as do today … his "strongly approve" rate plummeted from 32% to 17%.
Why is Obama so unpopular?
Because – as horrible as Bush was – Obama is worse than Bush in favoring the super-elite, bailing out the big banks, protecting financial criminals, targeting whistleblowers, keeping government secrets, trampling our liberties and starting military conflicts in new countries.
Obama is even worse than Bush in redistributing wealth from the American people to a handful of fatcats and spying on Americans.
Obama is also worse than Bush in appointing cronies to powerful government positions.
Americans now realize that Obama is not following the will of the people.
Moreover, having a sell-out president Obama after a sell-out president Bush has shown the people that neither mainstream parties represents them.
Indeed, both the mainstream Republican and Democratic parties are virtually identical regarding core issues including:
Any apparent difference is just a scripted show.
Under both Republican and Democratic politicians, both the rule of law and free market capitalism have been trashed.
In reality, we no longer have free market capitalism. Instead, we have socialism for the rich and sink-or-swim capitalism for everyone else. Conservatives see the socialism half of this equation, and liberals see the laissez faire free market half. Both liberals and conservatives hate crony capitalism. Look here, here, here.
People have lost faith in the 2 party system.
via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1tPXbjd George Washington
For several months we’ve noted that the US equity market was entering a kind of mania that was indicative of a top forming.
In particular we noted:
1) Investors piling into stock-based mutual funds at a pace not seen since the Tech Bubble.
2) Margin debt (debt investors take on to buy stocks) at a record high.
3) Market leaders (Tesla, Netflix, etc.) showing clear signals of investor rotation.
4) Corporate profit margins at record highs and primed to fall.
5) Market breadth shrinking (meaning fewer stocks participating in the rally).
6) The VIX (a measure of investor sentiment) dropping to levels of complacency not seen since 2007.
7) Investor bullishness hitting record highs and investor bearishness hitting record lows.
8) Investment legends either returning capital to investors (Icahn, Klarman) or sitting on mountains of cash (Buffett).
In simple terms, the bull market of the last five years finally went into mania mode as retail investors stopped worrying about income (investing in bonds) and drank the Fed’s Kool-Aid: bought stocks.
Note, in particular, that the blow off/ mania component of the rally occurred when retail investors began to pile into stocks (as is always the case with tops).
Whether this is just A top, or THE top, remains to be seen.
Let’s see what history has to tell us about manic tops.
In 2007, we had A top followed by a sizable correction… then THE top hit.
Many of the macro drivers in 2007 are in place today (housing bubbling away from median incomes, richly priced equity valuations, excessive leverage in the financial system, etc.).
However, a key difference is that in 2007, the Fed had engaged in several money pumps to the tune of several hundred billion dollars and had only just begun cutting interest rates.
Today, the Fed has spent over $3 TRILLLON and kept interest rates at zero for some five years. Monetary policy will not be nearly as flexible should the markets form a MAJOR top today.
This concludes this article. If you’re looking for the means of protecting your portfolio from the coming collapse, you can pick up a FREE investment report titled Protect Your Portfolio at http://ift.tt/170oFLH.
This report outlines a number of strategies you can implement to prepare yourself and your loved ones from the coming market carnage.
Best Regards
Phoenix Capital Research
via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1pNIMnC Phoenix Capital Research
While voter identification laws are a hot button
issue in national politics, those laws aren’t usually discussed in
the broader context of identification requirements in various
aspects of everyday life. For starters, border patrol agents
dozens of miles away from an international border ask for
identification purportedly to root out illegal immigrants.
Identification is required at the doctor’s office, for increasing
amount of medication, at the airport, on trains and now even for
some interstate bus trips, for renting a car, getting into most
government buildings, and so on in that manner. A mere fifteen
years ago much of this may have seemed unthinkable.
So while the debate over whether voter ID laws are effective or
whether they infringe on the right to vote (which ought to be
universal given citizenship, which should be based on residency and
necessary and proper paperwork) continues, it misses the point that
citizens and non-citizens alike who don’t have identification have
a harder time accessing all kinds of goods and services, government
and otherwise, often due to government regulations and edicts.
This is not just an issue of taking a bus instead of flying, as
former homeland security secretary Janet Napolitano once suggested
for those tired of the security theater at the airport. And a bus
is increasingly not an option either. In Houston Representative
Barbara Jackson Lee (D) lauded the Department of Homeland Security
sending TSA agents onto local buses!
Eventually it becomes about the freedom of movement at the most
basic level. Witness this interaction between an officer and a man
who told them he was waiting to pick up his kids from the local
charter school. Note how quickly it escalates despite the man’s
calm demeanor, all over a demand to produce identification:
Minnesota City Pages
identified the man, who spoke to them, as Chris Lollie. He was
arrested for “disorderly conduct” and “obstructing the legal
process,” and was charged with those crimes as well as trespassing.
They were, unsurprisingly, all dropped. Police insist they were
dealing with an “uncooperative male refusing to leave” and said
there were no complaints filed after the incident (many incidents
of police brutality can go unreported), which happened in January
but video of which only emerged online this month. The YouTube user
who posted claims the cellphone was seized for six months (likely
the length of time before charges were dropped and the
“investigation” ended).
If it’s a
war zone out there for cops, it’s the “civilians” that often
seem most at risk.
Sensible rules of engagement for cops, as well as effective
disciplinary processes, are needed to attempt to root out behaviors
and attitudes like those of the officer’s in the video.
from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/1qGZ0yG
via IFTTT