Month: July 2019

Authored by Tim Kirby via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

The Jeffrey Epstein child molestation case made big headlines because of just how close he is to many in power or at least with great pull in Washington and the fact that he had already been busted and possibly used said pull to stay out of jail certainly adds to the drama. Although many people can get photographed with celebrities who don’t really know them or claim to be “friends” with this or that person who’s on TV, most media breakdowns of this case put Epstein as, at the very least, a known associate and maybe even actual friend of Bill Clinton and Donald Trumpand others of their social rank. When someone who has abused large numbers of underage girls at his home also chit chats with the US President, this raises eyebrows and shocks the public.

But sadly the public should no longer be shocked as there is a crisis of child abuse and rape throughout the halls of power in nations across the Western World.

Breaking this cycle may be very difficult but there are certain strategies that could work.

In Britain, Operation Hydrant a police investigation into cases of non-recent child sex abuse has over 2,200 open investigations, but the one thing that unites them is that the suspects, like Mr. Epstein, are all people of “public prominence”. This seemingly large scale operation formed to search for perverts and rapists in the UK elite is sadly not a unique phenomenon.

The Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) has been able to shed a lot of light onto numerous suspected pedophiles within Parliament and evaluate how the nation’s political parties dealt with (or refused to deal with) accusations of this crime being thrown at their members. Unlike Operation Hydrant these are much more recent cases that even involve some current politicians. This inquiry (“Westminster”) which deals with MPs is just one of 13 different “strands” of investigation in different areas of British society including religious organizations as well as the aforementioned governmental bodies like Parliament.

Just because someone is looking for pedophilia does not mean it is happening for sure, but many under investigation by the IICSA like Green Party member David Challenor (raping a 10 year old) have been convicted and sentenced for their crimes. These investigations are not just a witch hunt or some sort of PR stunt. There would seem to be enough pedophilia within the British halls of power that the police cannot be bribed or dissuaded from exposing it entirely, which means there is quite a mountain of molestation being hidden in London.

In Australia, Senator Bill Heffernan went forward with police documentation to expose a long list of alleged pedophiles in government which extends even up to one of the former Prime Ministers. The same sort of rumors becoming fact that happened in England are now happening across their former colony.

In America numerous Democratic politicians have been involved in abuse and pedophilia including Jacob Schwartz who was convicted in May 2017 of child pornography and Sen. Robert Menendez who is accused of having sex with underage prostitutes in 2012 and if we are to believe certain independent media sources this is just the tip of the iceberg in Washington.

In France, one cabinet minister was accused of having sex with underage boys while in Morocco. But there are many more possible names still yet to be revealed with him.

In Germany the Green Party which openly advocated for legalizing sex with children in the 1980s has not surprisingly come under investigation/scrutiny for rampant pedophilia. The party at one time had an entire “pedo-commision” working day and night to revoke Section 176 of the German Criminal Code that forbids fornicating with minors.

It would be totally unfair to say that the West is under rule by pedophiles. In the massive rows of seats of Parliament and Congress there are hundreds of people with only dozens of accusations and a handful of convictions being made, but proportionally, relative to the population at-large it would seem that today’s law makers and bureaucrats have a radically higher percentage of pedophile tendencies. Taking shots in the dark you are way more likely to hit Chester Molester in a crowd of senators than car mechanics, waiters or any other profession outside the elite.

Perhaps it is easier for the wealthy/powerful to engage in child rape and get away with it or perhaps it is some bizarre form of sexual ennui that drives the powerful to seek new sexual highs from the weakest of victims. But in the 21st century West, absolute power molests absolutely and this is very dangerous for society far beyond the individual lives that are crushed by freaks and perverts with deep pockets and the right connections to cover it up for years or maybe forever.

Strategically speaking this horrible “tendency” gives governments outside the West the perfect visceral piece of propaganda to use for years to come. “We may be poor, our police may be a little harsh, but at least we don’t *** children” is a message that could make any fumbling government of a poor nation seem tolerable. Even within the West this further undermines any faith the masses may have in their own government and this is the perfect kind of info-armament that could be by revolutionaries. Since many people want pedophiles to be castrated or executed you can see how agitators could use this “stereotype” of men in power to their advantage. These are not strong strategic weaknesses but they exist nonetheless and need to be addressed.

If the nations of the West want to set up the necessary invisible barbed wire to filter our pedophiles from crawling into the top levels of government they need to do the following…

• Only allow people who are married with children to be in government. This is no ironclad guarantee but most pedophiles are single and if they are married their marriage is usually hollow meaning they probably do not have children. Being married with children in at least a semi-functional marriage vastly reduces the chances of the individual being a pedophile.

• Forbid any members of secret societies and fraternities from being in government. Although you may have a constitutional freedom to be in a secret society any organization which tries to hide itself is most certainly up to no good and people who engage in these secret groups need to stay in the private sector for the sake of the nation. Child sex rings are a form of secret society all their own. No one needs to conduct charity or raise money to fix local park benches from the shadows of a secret network. Fraternities often involve bizarre sexual rituals to gain entrance which means they are filled with the type of people who may be inclined to rape children. David Cameron had sex with a dead pig to get into a fraternity (technically labeled “dining club”) after all.

• Restrict the privacy of those in governmental power. If one wants freedom they need to stay in the private sector, if they want power and the ability to lead society they are going to have to lead by example and sacrifice any scrap of personal privacy they have as part of their mission to bring glory to the state. When politicians use their privacy it is more often than not for ill. Normal people who are unable to do much harm to society get to have privacy, those who can fund a pedophile ring and bribe their way to freedom when caught or pull strings need to have their privacy revoked in advance.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/32BnH7m Tyler Durden

A Tennessee police department has published a warning on social media to its residents: “Folks…please don’t flush your drugs m’kay,” such as methamphetamine — because this could trigger aggressive “meth-gators.”

The warning was published on Facebook, with a post-dated July 13, by the Loretto Police Department who described how officers executed a search warrant on a home and found the occupant attempting to flush a big bag of meth down his toilet. Although the suspect was unsuccessful at disposing of the drugs – the police department felt compelled enough to remind residents on Facebook that flushing drugs down the drain can have environmental impacts, like “meth-gators.”

“Folks…please don’t flush your drugs m’kay. When you send something down the sewer pipe it ends up in our retention ponds for processing before it is sent down stream. Now our sewer guys take great pride in releasing water that is cleaner than what is in the creek, but they are not really prepared for meth. Ducks, Geese, and other fowl frequent our treatment ponds and we shudder to think what one all hyped up on meth would do,” the statement read.

The post explained how meth traveling in the municipality’s sewer system could find its way into Shoal Creek, down the Tennessee River in North Alabama and into the bodies of alligators.

In an edit to the post, the police department adds: “We feel the need to mention that “drugs” also includes prescription pills. These medications can be disposed of at City Hall in a designated disposal container in the lobby.” Outlining the gators could also ingest prescription opioids if flushed down the drain.

Kent Vliet, an alligator biologist and the coordinator of laboratories in the department of biology at the University of Florida, told NBC News that he has never once heard of an alligator on meth.

“I’ve worked with alligators for 40 years, and I generally can answer any question someone gives me about them. This one’s throwing me for a loop,” Vliet said.

“I would guess they might be affected by it, but they tend to not react to drugs in the same way we do, and I don’t know if it would take a little or a lot to get an alligator to do something on meth,” he said. “I think it’s a ridiculous notion. If you flush meth it’s going to be diluted.”

Tennessee’s problem with “meth-gators” could be a significant issue for other states’ ecosystems who have also been hit hard by a three-decades-long drug crisis that includes opioids, meth, and cocaine.

It’s rarely reported how America’s drug epidemic is affecting nature until now.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2JNUCgk Tyler Durden

Authored by William Hartung via TomDispatch.com,

When, in his farewell address in 1961, President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned of the dangers of the “unwarranted influence” wielded by the “military-industrial complex,” he could never have dreamed of an arms-making corporation of the size and political clout of Lockheed Martin.

In a good year, it now receives up to $50 billion in government contracts, a sum larger than the operating budget of the State Department. And now it’s about to have company.

Raytheon, already one of the top five US defense contractors, is planning to merge with United Technologies. That company is a major contractor in its own right, producing, among other things, the engine for the F-35 combat aircraft, the most expensive Pentagon weapons program ever. The new firm will be second only to Lockheed Martin when it comes to consuming your tax dollars—and it may end up even more powerful politically, thanks to President Trump’s fondness for hiring arms industry executives to run the national security state.

Just as Boeing benefited from its former Senior Vice President Patrick Shanahan’s stint as acting secretary of defense, so Raytheon is likely to cash in on the nomination of its former top lobbyist, Mike Esper, as his successor. Esper’s elevation comes shortly after another former Raytheon lobbyist, Charles Faulkner, left the State Department amid charges that he had improperly influenced decisions to sell Raytheon-produced guided bombs to Saudi Arabia for its brutal air war in Yemen. John Rood, third-in-charge at the Pentagon, has worked for both Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, while Ryan McCarthy, Mike Esper’s replacement as secretary of the Army, worked for Lockheed on the F-35, which the Project on Government Oversight (POGO) has determined may never be ready for combat.

And so it goes. There was a time when Donald Trump was enamored of “his” generals—Secretary of Defense James Mattis (a former board member of the weapons-maker General Dynamics), national security adviser H.R. McMaster, and White House Chief of Staff John Kelly. Now, he seems to have a crush on personnel from the industrial side of the military-industrial complex.

As POGO’s research has demonstrated, the infamous “revolving door” that deposits defense executives like Esper in top national security posts swings both ways. The group estimates that, in 2018 alone, 645 senior government officials—mostly from the Pentagon, the uniformed military, and Capitol Hill—went to work as executives, consultants, or board members of one of the top 20 defense contractors.

Fifty years ago, Wisconsin Senator William Proxmire identified the problem when he noted that:

the movement of high ranking military officers into jobs with defense contractors and the reverse movement of top executives in major defense contractors into high Pentagon jobs is solid evidence of the military-industrial complex in operation. It is a real threat to the public interest because it increases the chances of abuse.… How hard a bargain will officers involved in procurement planning or specifications drive when they are one or two years away from retirement and have the example to look at of over 2,000 fellow officers doing well on the outside after retirement?

In other words, that revolving door and the problems that go with it are anything but new. Right now, however, it seems to be spinning faster than ever—and mergers like the Raytheon-United Technologies one are only likely to feed the phenomenon.

THE LAST SUPPER

The merger of Raytheon and United Technologies should bring back memories of the merger boom of the 1990s, when Lockheed combined with Martin Marietta to form Lockheed Martin, Northrop and Grumman formed Northrop Grumman, and Boeing absorbed rival military aircraft manufacturer McDonnell Douglas. And it wasn’t just a matter of big firms pairing up either. Lockheed Martin itself was the product of mergers and acquisitions involving nearly two dozen companies—distinctly a tale of big fish chowing down on little fish. The consolidation of the arms industry in those years was strongly encouraged by Clinton administration Secretary of Defense William Perry, who held a dinner with defense executives that was later dubbed “the last supper.” There, he reportedly told the assembled corporate officials that a third of them would be out of business in five years if they didn’t merge with one of their cohorts.

The Clinton administration’s encouragement of defense industry mergers would prove anything but rhetorical. It would, for instance, provide tens of millions of dollars in merger subsidies to pay for the closing of plants, the moving of equipment, and other necessities. It even picked up part of the tab for the golden parachutes given defense executives and corporate board members ousted in those deals.

The most egregious case was surely that of Norman Augustine. The CEO of Martin Marietta, he would actually take over at the helm of the even more powerful newly created Lockheed Martin. In the process, he received $8.2 million in payments, technically for leaving his post as head of Martin Marietta. US taxpayers would cover more than a third of his windfall. Then, a congressman who has only gained stature in recent years, Representative Bernie Sanders (I-VT), began to fight back against those merger subsidies. He dubbed them “payoffs for layoffs” because executives got government-funded bailouts, while an estimated 19,000 workers were laid off in the Lockheed Martin merger alone with no particular taxpayer support. Sanders was actually able to shepherd through legislation that clawed back some, but not all, of those merger subsidies.

According to one argument in favor of the merger binge then, by closing half-empty factories, the new firms could charge less overhead and taxpayers would benefit. Well, dream on. This never came near happening, because the newly merged industrial behemoths turned out to have even greater bargaining power over the Pentagon and Congress than the unmerged companies that preceded them.

Draw your own conclusions about what’s likely to happen in this next round of mergers, since cost overruns and lucrative contracts continue apace. Despite this dismal record, Raytheon CEO Thomas Kennedy claims that the new corporate pairing will—you guessed it!—save the taxpayers money. Don’t hold your breath.

INFLUENCE ON STEROIDS

While Donald Trump briefly expressed reservations about the Raytheon-United Technologies merger and a few members of Congress struck notes of caution, it has been welcomed eagerly on Wall Street. Among the reasons given: the fact that the two companies generally make different products, so their union shouldn’t reduce competition in any specific sector of defense production. It has also been claimed that the new combo, to be known as Raytheon Technologies, will have more funds available for research and development on the weapons of the future.

But focusing on such concerns misses the big picture. Raytheon Technologies will have more money to make campaign contributions, more money to hire lobbyists, and more production sites that can be used as leverage over members of Congress loathe to oppose spending on weapons produced in their states or districts. The classic example of this phenomenon: the F-35 program, which Lockheed Martin claims produces 125,000 jobs spread over 46 states.

When I took a careful look at the company’s estimates, I found that they were claiming approximately twice as many jobs as that weapons system was actually creating. In fact, more than half of F-35-related employment was in just two states, California and Texas (though many other states did have modest numbers of F-35 jobs). Even if Lockheed Martin’s figures are exaggerated, however, there’s no question that spreading defense jobs around the country gives weapons manufacturers unparalleled influence over key members of Congress, much to their benefit when Pentagon budget time rolls around. In fact, it’s a commonplace for Congress to fund more F-35s, F-18s, and similar weapons systems than the Pentagon even asks for. So much for congressional oversight.

Theoretically, incoming defense secretary Mike Esper will have to recuse himself from major decisions involving his former company. Among them, whether to continue selling Raytheon-produced precision-guided bombs to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) for their devastating air war in Yemen that has killed remarkable numbers of civilians.

No worries. President Trump himself is the biggest booster in living memory of corporate arms sales and Saudi Arabia is far and away his favorite customer. The Senate recently voted down a package of “emergency” arms sales to the Saudis and the UAE that included thousands of Raytheon Paveway munitions, the weapon of choice in that Yemeni air campaign. A similar vote must now take place in the House, but even if it, too, passes, Congress will need to override a virtually guaranteed Trump veto of the bill.

The Raytheon-United Technologies merger will further implicate the new firm in Yemeni developments because the Pratt and Whitney division of United Technologies makes the engine for Saudi Arabia’s key F-15S combat aircraft, a mainstay of the air war there. Not only will Raytheon Technologies profit from such engine sales, but that company’s technicians are likely to help maintain the Saudi air force, thereby enabling it to fly yet more bombing missions more often.

When pressed, Raytheon officials argue that, in enabling mass slaughter, they are simply following US government policy. This ignores the fact that Raytheon and other weapons contractors spend tens of millions of dollars a year on lobbyists, political contributions, and other forms of influence peddling trying to shape US policies on arms exports and weapons procurement. They are, in other words, anything but passive recipients of edicts handed down from Washington.

As Raytheon chief financial officer Toby O’Brien put it in a call to investors that came after the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi, “We continue to be aligned with the administration’s policies, and we intend to honor our commitments.” Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson made a similar point, asserting that “most of these agreements that we have are government-to-government purchases, so anything that we do has to follow strictly the regulations of the US government.… Beyond that, we’ll just work with the US government as they are continuing their relationship with [the Saudis].”

HOW POWERFUL ARE THE MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMBINES?

When it comes to lobbying the Pentagon and Congress, size matters. Major firms like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Raytheon can point to the jobs they and their subcontractors provide in dozens of states and scores of congressional districts to keep members of Congress in line who might otherwise question or even oppose the tens of billions of dollars in government funding the companies receive annually.

Raytheon—its motto: “Customer Success Is Our Mission”—has primary operations in 16 states: Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, and Virginia. That translates into a lot of leverage over key members of Congress and it doesn’t even count states where the company has major subcontractors. The addition of United Technologies will reinforce the new company’s presence in a number of those states, while adding Connecticut, Iowa, New York, and North Carolina (in other words, at least 20 states in all).

Meanwhile, if the merger is approved, the future Raytheon Technologies will be greasing the wheels of its next arms contracts by relying on nearly four dozen former government officials the two separate companies hired as lobbyists, executives, and board members in 2018 alone. Add to that the $6.4 million in campaign contributions and $20 million in lobbying expenses Raytheon clocked during the last two election cycles and the outlines of its growing influence begin to become clearer. Then, add as well the $2.9 million in campaign contributions and $40 million in lobbying expenses racked up by its merger partner United Technologies and you have a lobbying powerhouse rivaled only by Lockheed Martin, the world’s largest defense conglomerate.

President Eisenhower’s proposed counterweight to the power of the military-industrial complex was to be “an alert and knowledgeable citizenry.” And there are signs that significant numbers of individuals and organizations are beginning to pay more attention to the machinations of the arms lobby. My own outfit, the Center for International Policy, has launched a Sustainable Defense Task Force composed of former military officers and Pentagon officials, White House and congressional budget experts, and research staffers from progressive and good-government groups. It has already crafted a plan that would cut $1.2 trillion from the Pentagon budget over the next decade, while improving US security by avoiding unnecessary wars, eliminating waste, and scaling back a Pentagon nuclear-weapons buildup slated to cost $1.5 trillion or more over the next three decades.

The Poor People’s Campaign, backed by research conducted by the National Priorities Project of the Institute for Policy Studies, is calling for a one-year $350 billion cut in Pentagon expenditures. And a new network called “Put People Over the Pentagon” has brought together more than 20 progressive organizations to press presidential candidates to cut $200 billion annually from the Department of Defense’s bloated budget. Participants in the network include Public Citizen, Moveon.org, Indivisible, Win Without War, 350.org, Friends of the Earth, and United We Dream, many of them organizations that had not, in past years, made reducing the Pentagon budget a priority.

Raytheon and its arms industry allies won’t sit still in the face of such proposals, but at least the days of unquestioned and unchallenged corporate greed in the ever-merging (but also ever-expanding) arms industry may be coming to an end. The United States has paid an exorbitantly high price in blood and treasure (as have countries like Afghanistan and Iraq) for letting the military-industrial complex steer the American ship of state through this century so far. It’s long past time for a reckoning.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2JVl7QW Tyler Durden

Despite an overall glut in luxury apartments in Manhattan, apartments on Billionaire’s Row are rising in price regardless, according to Bloomberg.

Developer Michael Stern, who co-developed 111 W. 57th St. is hiking prices on eight units in the middle of the tower from $1 million to $1.75 million on apartments that are priced between $27 million and $30 million dollars. Changes reflect increases of between 3.5% and 5.6%.

Stern said: 

“Candidly, I think the building is a little bit underpriced. This building is really a sculpture in the sky. There’s nothing else like it, and we’re going to price it for what it deserves.”

The 60 unit project is now nearing completion and potential buyers are able to tour the property and experience its unobstructed views of Central Park from higher floors. Developer Stern says this gives the property an advantage over competitors that have less impressive views. He also conveniently declined to say how many condos have sold in the property, but one penthouse that was listed at $50 million is under contract.

The increases come months after Ken Griffin set a record by paying $238 million for a penthouse at 220 Central Park South. However, they also come at the same time that sales of ultra-luxury apartments are on the decline. In Q2, 19% of all purchases in new developments were priced at $5 million or higher – the lowest share in 10 quarters.

In the second quarter, units priced at $20 million or more offered average discounts of 14%.

At 111 W. 57th St., the condos that are getting marked up are in the middle of the tower. They all have three bedrooms, three bathrooms and about 4500 square feet of space. Inclusive of the price increases, they are now going to be priced from $6300 a square foot to $6900 a square foot.

“When they walk into this building and see and feel the proportions and understand the grandeur of the spaces — people get it,” Stern concluded. 

Or, as one Fin Twit member put it…

Fed has to cut rates https://t.co/pjnp0pI6aj pic.twitter.com/ECjLjhmMF0

— Hipster (@Hipster_Trader) July 14, 2019

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2M1mfFB Tyler Durden

Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

Railroad CEO James Foote says that the behavior of this economy is the “most puzzling” he’s seen in his 40-year career in the railroad industry.

“The present economic backdrop is one of the most puzzling I have experienced in my career,” Foote told Wall Street analysts on a conference call Tuesday evening.

“Both global and U.S. economic conditions had been unusual this year, to say the least, and have impacted our volumes. You see it every week in our reported carloads,” the CSX CEO said according to Yahoo. 

“We are seeing a range of conflicting data points and economic indicators and regularly speak with customers who despite the recent downtime – slowdown, remain cautiously optimistic about the second half.”

Foote blamed the trade war for the crushing economic data. And he’s not far off, as industrial customers are a group caught smack in the middle of the trade war – much like farmers. 

CSX shares tanked 11% on Wednesday as second-quarter earnings came in 2 cents short of analyst forecasts. Sales dropped 1% to $3.06 billion, roughly in line with projections. “Although it shouldn’t have come as a shock that CSX lowered its FY19 revenue guide (the weekly industry volume data has been telegraphing macro weakness for some time), investors balked at the shortfall in yields relative to expectations. And while negative mix did have an impact, CSX also saw a sequential deceleration in core pricing in some parts of its book,” railroad analyst Allison Landry wrote in a note to clients.

“We expect solid cost side execution from CSX but weaker markets are a meaningful headwind to both EPS performance and the stock,” Landy said.

In case you need a point of reference: U.S. GDP is generally viewed to have grown by 2% in the second quarter. Judging by CSX’s results, that’s not a real number. –Yahoo

The economy has been acting odd for over a year now. 

The Federal Reserve will likely cut interest rates during an economic expansion, the United States government is running historically high deficits while unemployment is at low levels.

There is something else going on below the surface we aren’t being told about, and yet we’re just expected to believe the mainstream media when they say things are going great.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2XMyMDM Tyler Durden

Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte says he won’t answer to white people over alleged human rights violations – insisting that he will “only face, be tried or face a trial in a Philippine court, presided by a Filipino judge, [and] prosecuted by a Filipino,” adding “maybe they can reimpose death penalty, [so I can] die in Filipino land.” 

“I will not answer a Caucasian… You must be stupid. Who are you? I am a Filipino,” said Duterte. “We have our courts here. You have to bring me somewhere else? I would not like that. I have my country. It’s working, I know it’s working, justice is working here.” 

Duterte comments follow a vote by the United Nations Human Rights Council on a resolution brought by Iceland to investigate alleged abuses. He is accused of overseeing thousands of extrajudicial killings, according to Newsweek. His administration is also accused of arbitrary arrests, detentions, kidnappings and other measures amid an anti-drug crackdown. 

Duterte had already suggested he could cut diplomatic ties with Iceland over its resolution, which passed the U.N. Human Rights Council by 18 to 14 votes, with 15 countries abstaining.

Ravina Shamdasani, a spokesperson for the U.N. Human Rights Office, told Newsweek: “The HRC resolution on the human rights situation in the Philippines and its request for a comprehensive written report is an opportunity for all stakeholders, including the government to assess the current state of human rights in the country and in particular to get clarity around the contested facts, figures and circumstances.” –Newsweek

The ‘formerly gay‘ Duterte, known for his inflammatory rhetoric, has claimed everything from throwing drug dealers out of helicopters to molesting his maid as a teenager. 

The Human Rights Council expressed “concern at the allegations of human rights violations in the Philippines, particularly those involving killings, enforced disappearances, arbitrary arrest and detention, the intimidation and persecution of or violence against members of civil society, human rights defenders, indigenous peoples, journalists, lawyers and members of the political opposition, and restrictions on the freedoms of opinion and expression, peaceful assembly and association.” 

Recently, Philippines Senator Ronald dela Rosa, the former police chief responsible for running Duterte’s war on drugs and an ally of the president, downplayed the death of a toddler during a police raid, saying “s*** happens.”

Myka Ulpina, 3, died in crossfire during a drugs raid by armed police in Rodriguez, Rizal. Ulpina’s father Renato also died in the shootout. Police reportedly accused him of using the girl as a shield, which her mother denied. An undercover officer was killed too. –Newsweek

“We are living in an imperfect world,” said former police chief dela Rosa during a news conference, adding “Would a police officer want to shoot a child? Never, because they have children as well. But shit happens during operations.”

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2XZAjBB Tyler Durden

Authored by Mohamed Younis of Gallup.com

• Nearly three in 10 (29%) view the American dream as unattainable
• Republicans are more likely than Democrats to say American dream is achievable
• Younger women among the most likely to view American dream as unattainable

While most Americans, 70%, continue to view the American dream as personally achievable, 29% tell Gallup that even by working hard and playing by the rules, the American dream is unattainable for them. The latter figure represents a slight increase from 25% in 2009, when Gallup last asked Americans this question.

However, this nationwide outlook masks important disparities in the perceptions of various groups across the country. Women aged 18 to 49, for example, are significantly more likely than older women — and men in all age groups — to say that even by working hard and playing by the rules, the American dream is unattainable for them in their lifetime.

Earlier this year, Gallup reported a record-low percentage of women feeling satisfied with how women are treated in the U.S. Younger women were especially pessimistic about the treatment of women.

As might be expected, those in higher-income households are more likely to view the American dream as achievable — with 80% of those living in households earning $100,000 or more holding this view. Sixty-one percent of those in households making less than $40,000 agree, while 37% in this group describe the American dream as unattainable for them.

Democrats Less Likely to View American Dream as Achievable

Democrats are less likely than Republicans to describe the American dream as achievable, a pattern also seen when Gallup previously asked this in March 2009, at the start of Barack Obama’s presidency. However, the gap has widened, with nearly four in 10 Democrats now saying the American dream is unattainable for them, up from 29% back then.

A similarly sized improvement in Republican perceptions of the attainability of the American dream took place after President Donald Trump was elected. It is important to note that the 2009 poll took place under a Democratic presidency. Yet unlike other metrics more prone to partisan swings from one party-led administration to another, there seems to be less of a partisan swing among Americans on this question.

Majority Expect Youth to Live Better Lives Than Parents

Consistent with their views on the achievability of the American dream, most U.S. adults (60%) say it is very or somewhat likely that today’s youth will have a better life than their parents did.

About four in 10 (39%) describe such an outcome as very or somewhat unlikely.

Views on opportunities for future generations grew relatively dim during the peak-unemployment years after the Great Recession. In 2011 and 2012, less than half of Americans (44% and 49%, respectively) said it was likely that younger Americans would have better lives than their parents, reflecting the economic pain felt by many during this period.

Implications

Most U.S. adults still view the American dream as achievable in their lifetime. However, a significant percentage say it is unattainable and think that today’s young people will not have better lives than their parents did. Perhaps most troubling is the relatively higher rate of young women across the country who describe the American dream as unattainable, placing them apart from older women and men in general. This disparity coincides with other assessments of life in America, in which women have less positive views than men on the treatment of women in society — as well as whether women are treated with respect and dignity in the U.S.

The growing partisan gap in perceptions of the attainability of the American dream coincides with a noticeable decline over the past two years (since Trump was elected) in Democrats saying they are extremely proud to be American. Similar to their more positive views on the attainability of the American dream, Republicans were also more likely than Democrats in that poll to express extreme pride in being American.

While Democrats are increasingly less likely than Republicans to say the American dream is achievable, this could simply be a reaction to the current administration. It remains to be seen whether views on the American dream have become as subject to partisan swings as other metrics Gallup tracks, such as assessments of the economy. In 2009, Republicans were not less likely than Democrats to view the American dream as unattainable, even under the Democratic Obama administration.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2XWPwsh Tyler Durden

The number of US deaths from drug overdoses fell last year by more than 5%. While the number is perhaps modest, it’s the first time the figure has fallen in nearly 30 years, according to Axios, citing data from the Centers for Disease Control. 

As Axios notes, “This progress is both fragile and modest,” while pointing out that “overdose deaths rose by roughly 316% between 1999 and 2017.” 

There’s still a long way to go, and more than 68,000 Americans still died of overdoses last year.

• “Lives are being saved, and we’re beginning to win the fight against this crisis,” Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said in a statement yesterday.

• “This crisis developed over two decades and it will not be solved overnight,” Azar said.

• Overdoses from prescription opioids are falling, but deaths from fentanyl, cocaine and meth all continued to increase last year. –Axios

By state, OD deaths are up in Missouri (16.3%), Vermont (11.6%), South Carolina (9.3%) and between 6% – 8% in the southwestern United States. 

According to the report, the decline in overdose deaths looks to be driven primarily by a reduction in the abuse of prescription painkillers. That said, doses involving fentanyl, meth and cocaine continue to rise. 

• Naloxone, the drug that reverses the immediate effects of an overdose, has also become much more widely available as the crisis has worsened, and that is all but certainly helping to save lives.

• But it’s not clear whether efforts to get people into longer-term treatment programs are making a dent yet, given the rising demand for illegal drugs. –Axios

 The CDC’s detailed report can be seen here. 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/32Li6eS Tyler Durden

What a farce.

A few short hours after NY Fed President John Williams sparked mayhem  in the markets by dropping the most dovish of hints in a speech:

“First, take swift action when faced with adverse economic conditions.

Second, keep interest rates lower for longer.

And third, adapt monetary policy strategies to succeed in the context of low r-star and the ZLB.”

Signaling to the market that lower, sooner, and longer is the way forward, a Fed spokesman has issued a ‘just kidding’ statement in a desperate attempt to walk back market expectations.

After Williams spoke, bond yields tumbled along with the dollar as stocks and gold spiked and the market’s odds of a 50bps rate-cut in July spiked to over 70%!

And so a New York Fed spokesman quickly ran to the nearest reporter to explain that Williams didn’t intend to suggest Thursday that the central bank might make a large interest rate cut this month.

“This was an academic speech on 20 years of research. It was not about potential policy actions at the upcoming FOMC meeting.”

Oh sure yeah. So what exactly was the point of it? Have we ever been this low in rates before? What little credibility The Fed had after its massive flip-flop this year has just been washed down the toilet of ivory tower speculation.

The market reacted to the walk-back with the dollar rebounding…

Fed rate change expectations tightening…

And the odds of a 50bps cut tumbling from over 70% to around 40%…

All still adjusted for Williams speech, the dollar is still down,and gold, bonds, and stocks higher…

 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2JFy6ri Tyler Durden

As far back as 2013, China’s macro-economic data has been ‘questionably’ smoothed at best, and outright fake at worst. Whether it is trade data (“never been faker” than in 2016) or aggregate production (2018’s massive GDP distortions), as economist Nouriel Roubini once asserted, China just makes its numbers up.

And, as we pointed out earlier this week, this month was no exception, when following China GDP’s dramatic slowing to just 6.2% YoY – the slowest since record began – there was a delightful surprise to appease those who are wondering whether record credit injections and more easing measures than during the financial crisis had any effect at all. To wit, China retail sales and industrial production rebounded handsomely with the former spiking 9.8% YoY – the most since March 2018.

There’s just one thing though – the entire surge in retail sales (and industrial production) seems to have been triggered by an almost unprecedented sudden surge in auto sales to – who else – the government itself, in the form large, state-owned enterprises. Think Cash for Clunkers on steroids – if the clunkers belonged to the Federal Government, and the new cars purchased were made by the Government.

Yet there was one critical data set in China’s manipulated economic data spreadsheet, which failed to get the royal goalseek treatment, one with dramatic implications for the broader market.

According to Commodore Research, Chinese June data showed that furniture sales in China totaled only 18.4 billion yuan last month. This marks a year-on-year decline of 14% from the 21.3 billion yuan in sales that was reported last year for June 2018’s furniture sales.

This is puzzling in light of the official Chinese data according to which the local housing market continues to hum along, firing on all cylinders, with the average, 70-city primary market property price rising 10.5% Y/Y in May.

Alas, that does not seem feasible when one considers that furniture sales in China have now contracted on a year-on-year basis for eighteen straight months.

What does this mean? As Commodore Research concludes, “we continue to believe that there is a good chance that the ongoing plummet in furniture sales in China is pointing to much greater weakness existing in the Chinese housing market than is generally being recognized.“

This could potentially be very bad news not only for China, but the entire world because as we explained all the way back in March 2017, “The Fate Of The World Economy Is In The Hands Of China’s Housing Bubble“, and if China’s biggest, and most resilient bubble has now indeed burst, the not only is Trump about to steamroll China in the trade war, but the resulting deflationary shock wave is about to send every bond around the world deep into sub-zero territory.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2LtoWA1 Tyler Durden