Realizing The Full Implications Of The Forthcoming Catastrophe

Authored by EconomicPrism’s MN Gordon, annotated by Acting-Man’s Pater Tenebrarum,

“Facilis descensus Averno.” – Virgil (Publius Vergilius Maro)

Delivering Tomorrow’s Curses

Roman poet Virgil penned these words in his epic, The Aeneid, roughly a generation before the birth of Jesus of Nazareth.  They can be loosely translated to, “the descent to hell is easy.”  Those who’ve traversed this passage can attest to the veracity of this axiom.

Virgil reading the Aeneid to Augustus, Octavia and Livia. Contrary to what one might think at first blush, Octavia didn’t fall asleep because she was bored by it – rather, when Virgil recited Book Six, she fainted (the veracity of this account is not undisputed, but it’s a good story anyway). A little side note: Virgil caught a fever while returning from to Rome from Greece and died in Brundisium in 19 BC. It was Virgil’s wish that the poem be burned, but Augustus ordered his literary executors to preserve it and publish it with as few editorial changes as possible. Thus Augustus rescued the Aeneid for posterity. [PT]

Though not apparent in the milieu of Virgil’s poem, for our purposes today, we will extend its application to the insidious progression of currency debasement.  What short utterance more aptly characterizes the steady degradation, as currently practiced by today’s church of state?

On Thursday, for example, the House acted with untroubled ease to further America’s descent to hell.  With little resistance, federal spending was increased and the debt ceiling was suspended for two years.  Having delivered tomorrow’s curses, the nation’s Representatives can skip town without missing a moment of summer recess.

As you can see, the allure of getting something for nothing is far too enticing for even the most honest politician to pass up.  And with an endless supply of fake money behind you, why stick your neck out and get clobbered?  The public debt encumbered is already well beyond honest repayment.  But that’s a problem for tomorrow; not today.

Total US credit market debt (~USD 73 trillion), total federal debt (~USD 22 trillion) and GDP (~USD 19 trillion).  The growing mismatch between economic output and debt is an unsustainable trend, which is to say, one day it will stop. What happens then is anyone’s guess – the precise shape of the eventual denouement will largely depend on the response by assorted central economic planning agencies, above all on the measures of the central bank. [PT]

Representative government in America, circa now, has nothing to do with upholding individual freedoms and liberties.  Nor is it about making tough decisions in the interest of the long-term health of the nation.  It’s about doing the expedient – and suspending the debt ceiling so the descent to hell can be made as comfortable as possible.

Wreckage from the Past

Rarely are people capable of understanding the full implications of a forthcoming catastrophe of their making.  Perhaps, it’s not because they are truly incapable of it.  More likely, it’s because they’d rather ignore it.

Facing up to the facts of an unpleasant reality can be painful.  It also implies a recognition that what one has been doing isn’t working.  And that the arduous task of righting one’s wrongs must be initiated forthright.

Pursuing delusion, of course, is abundantly easier – for a time.  However, as the wreckage piles up from the past to the present, the day of reckoning becomes much more ominous.  There really is no escaping it.

Certainly, Congress is far from this recognition. Otherwise, they would get serious about the nation’s fiscal doom, tighten their belts, reverse course, and suffer the immediate consequences.  But that is not what is happening at all.

Instead, Congress is doubling down on their wreckage from the past.  They are blowing the debt out like there’s no tomorrow.  The insanity of it, even for a casual observer, is near impossible to ignore.

The federal debtberg – if it were a stock, people would admire its strong momentum. With the “debt ceiling” problem removed, another jump is already baked in the cake. [PT]

For example, at the turn of the new millennium, the national debt was $5.7 trillion.  By 2010 it had more than doubled to $13.5 trillion. By 2020, it will be over $24 trillion.

Hence, over the last 20 years the national debt has increased 320 percent. But over this same period, nominal gross domestic product (GDP) has only increased 100 percent.  What’s more, this divergence stands to get much more extreme…

Realizing the Full Implications of the Forthcoming Catastrophe

When the next recession arrives, and Washington pulls out all the stops to counteract it with massive new applications of debt based stimulus, the debt will go vertical while GDP flat lines or contracts.  These different trajectories will be reconciled by default or price inflation.  Washington, no doubt, prefers price inflation.

The popular delusion of the 21st century is to assume the highest virtues of democracy.  This faulty assumption  propagates a dangerous archetype: the tyranny of the masses and its twin consequences, deficits and inflation.

What the heck, let’s raise the ceiling just one more time… no-one is likely to notice or care. [PT]

Voters want a free lunch.  They want their neighbors to pay for it.  They elect stooges to office who promise massive social welfare, public works, and defense spending programs.  Then, the hack economists advance an absurd theory – like Modern Monetary Theory – to deliver something for nothing.

The deficits mount up year after year, the currency’s debased year after year, until something gives.  In short order, confidence evaporates and price inflation explodes.  The country succumbs to political, economic, and cultural destruction.

Indeed, the descent to hell is easy.  But Virgil also adds a lesser known corollary, “Sed revocare gradum, superasque evadere ad auras, Hoc opus, hic labor est,” which can generally mean,But to retrace the way and return to the upper airs; this is the task, and where the mighty labor lies.

A 3rd century mosaic showing Vergilius seated between Clio and Melpomene. It is widely held that the Aeneid ends with Book 12, in which Aeneas defeats Turnus and spurns his pleas for mercy. The lamenting soul of Turnus then enters the Hades to dwell in the Stygian swamps. What is not so well known is that Virgil actually wrote a 13thbook; the mosaic depicts him reciting the most famous verse from it to his enraptured audience: “…and now it has come to pass, that we are totally screwed. Stick a fork in it.” (it sounds better in dactylic hexameter). [PT]

Congress may still ignore it.  The Treasury Secretary may still ignore it.  The President too.  But for more and more Americans the full implications of the forthcoming catastrophe are becoming painfully clear.  That is, the realization that we are absolutely and utterly screwed.

Woohoo!

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

Cryptos Flash-Crash Overnight, Alt-Coins’ Post-Libra Collapse Continues

Another ugly overnight session in cryptos with a sudden high volume collapse striking around 0620ET driving Bitcoin down towards $9000 and Ether down towards $200…

The usual sea of red…

Source: Coin360

Early this morning, it appears someone decided it was time to exit their crypto positions en masse…

Sending Bitcoin down towards $9000…

 

And There down towards $200…

 

 

It’s not been a great month for bitcoin, but bitcoin has actually outperformed…

 

 

Notably, since Libra’s white-paper was released, Bitcoin is practically unchanged but the biggest alt-coins have all crashed…

 

 

 

 

 

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

Justice GInsburg on Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh

The Washington Post‘s Robert Barnes reports on recent remarks by Justice Ruth Bader GInsburg during her annual “conversation” with Duke Law’s Neil Seigel.  The discussion covered quite a bit of ground, including some of the Court’s more contentious decisions. This bit about the newest justices caught my eye:

Siegel noted that President Gerald Ford had said he had looked for the best legal mind in the country before selecting Stevens in 1975. He suggested that may not be the criterion for more recent court nominations.

But Ginsburg pushed back gently. “I can say that my two newest colleagues are very decent and very smart individuals,” she said, referring to Trump’s choices of Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh.

Later, she invoked the pair when saying “there are a number of cases this term where we didn’t divide along so-called party lines.”

“Keen observers of what the court does will have noticed that I assigned an opinion this term to Justice Kavanaugh and two to Justice Gorsuch.” The chance to assign majority opinions is dictated by seniority, so Ginsburg has the power only when Roberts and the court’s longest-serving justice, Clarence Thomas, are on the other side.

Barnes also reports that Justice Ginsburg made no comment on the sexual assault allegations that arose during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings, but did note (as she has before) that Justice Kavanaugh “made history” by being the first justice to hire all female clerks for a single term. As a consequence, Barnes notes, this past term was the first time ever there were more female clerks than male clerks at the Court.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2yiiZxw
via IFTTT

Overdosing On Crazy Pills

Authored by Chris Martenson via PeakProsperity.com,

If you think everything’s OK, you’re nuts…

Sometimes an otherwise-forgettable movie will be lifted up out of obscurity by the internet and made into a useful meme.

In the movie Zoolander Will Ferrell’s character, ‘Jacobim Mugatu,’ screams the line “I feel like I’m taking crazy pills!” because it seems nobody else sees what he does.

I have that feeling nearly every day now. And it’s getting more frequent and intense.

To the point where, some days, it feels like I’m in danger of overdosing on crazy pills.

Crazy Pill #1

Financial bubbles happen. History is full of them.  It’s just that they’re just not supposed to happen more than once a generation.

How can so many people have completely forgotten the painful lessons of not one, but two, recent bubbles?

The bursting of the DotCom bubble in 2000 was traumatic.  “Eyeballs” were favored for a time over “earnings.” But then investors woke up to the fact that all of their rationalizations for the sky-high valuations of profitless companies were actually ridiculous.

Okay, fine.  Lesson learned.  Earnings are actually important.

But here we go, again, less than 20 years after the DotCom bubble (and only 10 years post-subprime bubble — both far less than a full generation later to allow the keepers of the memories a chance to die off) with exactly the same dynamic at play:

In the pre-financialization era that ended a few decades ago, a more normal mix would have been roughly 15% of IPOs with negative earnings.  Today it’s nearly 80%.

Just as it was in 2000.

By way of example, let’s look at Uber and Lyft.  Both companies aren’t just unprofitable, but wildly so.  The more these companies make in revenue, the greater the accompanying losses:

(Source)

This is the very essence of a broken business model. It’s no different – literally, exactly the same – as a circa-1999 DotCom losing gobs of money on a pie-in-the-sky business scheme that sounded great but didn’t actually work.

No matter to Lyft’s stock price, though, as the market (or ““market”” as I refer to it because it’s so deformed it needs double quote marks to signify that condition) now values this cash-burning furnace at $18.9 billion:

Lyft’s stock price just keeps going higher, no matter the losses. One can only imagine how much higher it will explode if Lyft manages to somehow turn in slightly-less-than-negative-as-last-time earnings next quarter.

What matters during an asset price bubble is not the rational, but the rationalizations.  Uber and Lyft are “transforming transportation” and “reducing urban congestion” even though taxis already existed and there’s zero evidence of the latter.

Wolf Richter said it very well in a recent piece:

Anything goes: story stocks, momentum stocks, hyperventilation stocks, consensual hallucination stocks, and financial engineering stocks that generate mind-boggling share prices that give these companies incomprehensible market capitalizations, and the mere mention of “fundamentals” gets naysayers ridiculed and thrown out.

It’s like the whole market has gone nuts.

(Source)

The full quote that goes with the meme is “Doesn’t anyone notice this?!? I feel like I’m taking crazy pills!!”

How can people not notice what’s going on?

Crazy Pill #2

I keep reading articles where hapless financial journalists try earnestly to make sense of a world that is now senseless.

It must be terribly frustrating to see the impact the central bank bubble is having on distorting the markets, but your editors disallow you to point any of that out to your readers.

A recent WSJ article noted that investors poured money into bond funds at a record pace in the first half of 2019. It then went on to explain this as a sign that investors might be cautious about the economy.

Sure, that’s probably a fair conclusion during normal times. But not when crazy pills are being served buffet-style by the world’s central banks.

Instead, we have to note that the world now has a whopping $13.7 trillion in negative yielding bonds – meaning record high bond prices – and negative earning IPOs both existing simultaneously.

When investors are cautious, they move money out of stocks and into bonds.  That’s what the journalist was grasping for, but that’s not what’s happening now.  Money is flooding into both stocks and bonds.  It’s concurrently a risk-on and a risk-off environment — which means its actually neither.

It’s a bubble.

A magnificently-deformed time of monetary excesses.

We’re currently witnessing a massive blow-off top that will end in something quite akin to the Dark Ages – a time of systemic breakdown when we’ll be lucky to preserve the pinnacles of our current technological achievements.  But let’s save that idea for later.

To make the “Bubble!” claim more concrete, let me burrow in a bit.  Switzerland’s government bond market will serve nicely as a case in point:

Swiss 50-yr yield falls below 0%, entire Swiss curve now negative

July 25, 2019

(Reuters) – Swiss 50-year borrowing costs fell below 0% on Thursday for first time since August 2016, meaning Switzerland’s entire government bond market now trades with negative yields.

The 50-year yield fell 2.6 basis points to minus 0.014%.

(Source)

Pick any Swiss bond of any maturity and you’ll have to pay the Swiss government for the luxury of lending it money.

In the case of the 50-year bond, you’d pay $1,000 today for the pleasure of having the Swiss government promise to pay you back $993 in the year 2069.

Heck, even if the bond was paying 0% vs. a negative amount, that would mean that your money has no value.  You give an entity your money and they give you back exactly the same amount 50 years later.

But with negative interest rates, you’re getting even less than that back.

I could possibly make sense of that if we knew that the amount of circulating money was going to fall over time, so there were fewer claims against more ‘things’ over time.  That is, deflation.

But we’re in the exact opposite world with global central banks easing like mad at the moment and promising even more.  Rate cuts. And more QE. And making serious comments about maybe buying equities directly.  Or maybe just print up money and distribute it via MMT.  The central banks have promised in word and deed that they’ll do whatever it takes!

Against that backdrop, what can we make of the hundreds and thousands of individual “investors” that are actually buying the Swiss 50-year bond at a negative yield of -0.014%?

If they hold that bond to maturity, they’re going to get less money back than they put in AND the purchasing power of that money is going to be seriously diminished. What sane person would make that deal?

Again, doesn’t anybody notice this?

Crazy Pill #3

By far the largest crazy pill I am taking, a horse-sized one that feels larger than my throat, concerns the serious consequences with society’s addiction to perpetual economic growth.

Edward Abbey said it best:

That’s what we’ve got now.

There’s nothing wrong with growth per se. But if it becomes the mission instead of the strategy, then it’s cancerous and self-destructive.

Virtually nobody in power ever questions the “need” for economic growth.  It’s a universally understood imperative, especially among the banking class.

Despite already having supremely frothy stock prices and negative bond yields that require mega-doses of crazy pills to even contemplate, the world’s central banks are desperately scrambling to justify easing more — to drive stock and bond prices to even frothier heights.

And for what exactly?  What’s so urgent, right here and now, about getting even more growth?

In nature, seasons come and go. The sun rises and sets. But if it were up to the central banks, the sun would stay perched at its mid-summer noon apex forever.  Think of the corn yields!

Maybe we can invent a pill that will banish sleep.  Think of the extra productivity of the resulting 80-hour work week!

Meanwhile, casually scanning the headlines we notice multiplying ecological breakdowns like these:

Individually any one of these might be explained away as a fluke. But collectively? They clearly shout that something is terribly wrong with the natural world resulting from our current monomaniacal pursuit of growth.

The current trajectory of the environmental data is frightening. People either are aware of this, ignorant of it, or in denial about it.  Anybody of my age (mid 50’s) who spent time outside as a kid, or has noticed the recent dearth of insects on the screen door on summer nights, can see with their own eyes how the natural world of insects and migratory birds has been collapsing.

Doesn’t anybody else notice this?

To me, it’s just a simple statement of fact to say that the economy is a subset of the natural world.  No ecology = no economy.  No oysters in the bay means no oyster fishery.  No soil means no farming.

But the way things are currently configured, within every political and financial institution, along with their compliant media presstitutes, the one and only goal is more GDP growth.

Which means more throughput of ‘stuff’.  Resources + energy = more stuff.

When times get tough and GDP starts looking like it might (gasp!) fall, the State freaks out and floods the world with more money and more credit to cattle-prod the economy back to ‘health’.

The implicit, if not explicit, assumption contained therein is that some sort of salvation, or broad social good, results from perpetual GDP growth.

That was coincidentally true during the 1700’s, 1800’s and most of the 1900’s.  But it’s absolutely not true anymore in the 2000’s. The blind pursuit of growth is now diminishing society’s prospects, not enhancing them. But the keepers of power have not managed to adjust to this new reality.

At least not publicly. Though you should see the number of rich people and high-level government institutions that are preparing for massive disruptions by building world-class bug-out shelters and stocking up years of provisions.

You might consider doing the same. Just in case.

I certainly have.

Conclusion

Being at peace with today’s status quo requires taking crazy pills.  Lots and lots of them.

Such is the nature of late-stage bubbles.

It’s also the nature of civilizations that have run their narrative past the breaking point. Late-empire Romans needed crazy pills to believe in Emperor Caligula. So did the Aztecs when they embraced Cortez.

Towards the end, the leadership of a dwindling civilization isn’t the cause the decline, but reflective of it.  Once the narrative thread no longer makes any sense, having defective leadership is a requirement. It’s something the culture demands in order to keep the perverted status quo going.

This is why I’m strictly apolitical.  It matters not to me whether it would have been Trump or Clinton in the White House.  Either/both would have been similarly defective leaders.  We are badly off the rails at this point, and our political system reflects that.

Similarly, I’m agnostic about who heads the central banks around the world.  Draghi was loathsome, but Lagarde won’t be any better.  Powell certainly speaks more clearly than Greenspan, but he’s literally no different.

Today we have a small cabal of unelected officials, many without any real-world operating experience (such as starting and managing a productive business) setting the prices of not just money, but of every financial asset.  And after they “serve the public” they then rotate into the exact same banks and financial firms that most benefited from their “service.”

How is any of that different from the way the Soviet Union set crop targets and prices?  It’s not.

The bottom line is this:  Nothing will change until the system breaks.

It’s a 100% guarantee that somewhere between here and 2069 interest rates will be either very far north of -0.014% and/or the Swiss franc (and other fiat currency) has become worthless.

It’s a further guarantee that more cities and, possibly entire countries, will run out of fresh water. Agricultural soils will become vastly less productive. And the world will be well past peak oil.

In Part 2: The Antidote To This Insanity, we provide direct steps you can take right now to persevere, and potentially prosper, through what’s ahead. And to be ‘part of the solution’ vs among those still contributing to the catastrophes our culture is creating.

It’s entirely possible that ecosystem collapse will render whole new swaths of the globe uninhabitable to humans.

But, by all means, buy as much Uber and Lyft stock as you want.

But if you do, be sure to chug down a handful of crazy pills first.

Click here to read Part 2 of this report (free executive summary, enrollment required for full access).

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/310Lhca Tyler Durden

Justice GInsburg on Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh

The Washington Post‘s Robert Barnes reports on recent remarks by Justice Ruth Bader GInsburg during her annual “conversation” with Duke Law’s Neil Seigel.  The discussion covered quite a bit of ground, including some of the Court’s more contentious decisions. This bit about the newest justices caught my eye:

Siegel noted that President Gerald Ford had said he had looked for the best legal mind in the country before selecting Stevens in 1975. He suggested that may not be the criterion for more recent court nominations.

But Ginsburg pushed back gently. “I can say that my two newest colleagues are very decent and very smart individuals,” she said, referring to Trump’s choices of Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh.

Later, she invoked the pair when saying “there are a number of cases this term where we didn’t divide along so-called party lines.”

“Keen observers of what the court does will have noticed that I assigned an opinion this term to Justice Kavanaugh and two to Justice Gorsuch.” The chance to assign majority opinions is dictated by seniority, so Ginsburg has the power only when Roberts and the court’s longest-serving justice, Clarence Thomas, are on the other side.

Barnes also reports that Justice Ginsburg made no comment on the sexual assault allegations that arose during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings, but did note (as she has before) that Justice Kavanaugh “made history” by being the first justice to hire all female clerks for a single term. As a consequence, Barnes notes, this past term was the first time ever there were more female clerks than male clerks at the Court.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2yiiZxw
via IFTTT

French ‘Flyboard’ Inventor Crashes Into English Channel During Record Attempt

This week a French inventor known for earlier impressing French President Emmanuel Macron — when his ‘Flyboard Air vehicle’, a fast and highly maneuverable jet-powered hoverboard, was successfully tested at a military ceremony marking Bastille Day — attempted to fly across the English channel on his high tech device

Franky Zapata made the attempt Thursday, taking off via his jet-pack at around 9am local time from Sangatte in France, with a goal to complete the 22-mile journey in 20 minutes; however, he plunged into the sea, ending the short flight, when he tried to land on a platform set up at the midway point for necessary refueling. 

The 40-year old was uninjured by the fall, which he attributed to the flyboard not being able to compensate for the choppy waves underneath, but the device itself will have to undergo repairs. 

“When I got closer to the platform, the boat took a wave and it hit the foot of the machine and broke it,” Zapata told reporters Thursday.

 “I could see the British borders,” he added, as he was only 11-miles from finishing the record setting flight set to end at St Margaret’s Bay, England. 

Assuming the necessary repairs can be made, he said he will attempt a second crossing of the  channel “as soon as next week.” Zapata was filmed early Thursday taking off from a French beach and disappearing into the horizon.

“When you fly with your body, even your hands affect the direction you want to go in. You feel the turbulence and the air through your fingers,” Zapata told CNN. “It’s like becoming a bird. But it’s also very hard. I have to fight against the wind with my legs so there’s pain too. It’s not as peaceful as it looks.”

Thursday’s flight coincided with the anniversary of French aviator Louis Bleriot’s famous first-ever flight across the channel in 1909.

Image source: AP

The large, bulky skateboard looking flying platform is powered by five small engines fueled by kerosene.

His initial plans for a “mid-air” refueling over the channel involving small amounts of kerosene was stymied by French authorities, so he was forced to make one large refueling stop on a platform in British waters, which is where he fell. 

French President Macron had previously said he was “proud” of Zapata’s “modern and innovative” invention which marks a high tech contribution to the future of the French army. 

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

British Doctors Forced To Tell Women Not to Put Ice Lollies In Their Vaginas To Cool Down

Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit.news,

In the UK, heat waves tend to bring out even more stupid behavior that that which is already rampant.

Amidst record temperatures across the country, doctors are now telling young women not to put ice lollies in their vaginas to cool them down.

Yes, really.

“My advice would be to avoid any foreign bodies in the vagina for risk of infection,” said gynaecologist Dr Shree Datta.

“I would suggest loose cotton underwear and avoiding tight clothing to prevent any irritation and dermatitis developing.”

That sage advice was echoed by Dr Sarah Welsh, the co-founder of HANX condom brand, who cautioned women that putting ice lollies in their private parts could alter the natural pH of the vagina and cause further problems if the object was to break up inside.

“There are many things that should never go near a vagina and ice lollies are up there,” said Welsh.

“The ice can stick to the delicate skin of the vagina and cause real trauma and damage.”

Why such advice should even be necessary is too depressing to consider.

*  *  *

There is a war on free speech. Without your support, my voice will be silenced. Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/315qxQB Tyler Durden

World’s Central Banks End Pact That Limited Selling Of Gold

In a surprising announcement on Friday morning, the European Central Bank said the 21 signatories of the 4th Central Bank Gold Agreement (CBGA) “no longer see the need for formal agreement” as the market has developed and matured, and as a result the signatories “decided not to renew the Agreement upon its expiry in September 2019.”

For readers unfamiliar, the first CBGA was signed in 1999 to coordinate planned gold sales by the various central banks. When it was introduced, the ECB notes that “the Agreement contributed to balanced conditions in the gold market by providing transparency regarding the intentions of the signatories. It was renewed three times in 2004, 2009 and 2014, gradually moving towards less stringent terms.”

The fourth CBGA, which expires on 26 September 2019, was signed by the ECB, the Nationale Bank van België/Banque Nationale de Belgique, the Deutsche Bundesbank, Eesti Pank, the Central Bank of Ireland, the Bank of Greece, the Banco de España, the Banque de France, the Banca d’Italia, the Central Bank of Cyprus, Latvijas Banka, Lietuvos bankas, the Banque centrale du Luxembourg, the Central Bank of Malta, De Nederlandsche Bank, the Oesterreichische Nationalbank, the Banco de Portugal, Banka Slovenije, Národná banka Slovenska, Suomen Pankki – Finlands Bank, Sveriges Riksbank and the Swiss National Bank.

The simplest reason why the agreement is no longer needed, is that whereas central banks used to sell gold in the 1990s and early 2000s, most famously the UK’s sale of 401 tonnes of gold of its total 715 tonne holdings under Gordon Brown, broadly seen as one of the “worst investment decisions of all time“, currently they are buying at an unprecedented pace, and in 2018, central bank gold demand was the highest in the “modern” era, or since Nixon closed the gold window in 1971.

More recent data shows that gold buying by central banks in 2019 has persisted and remains the highest in years, with no central bank buying more than Russia, which after dumping most of its US Treasury holdings in 2018, has continued to aggressively convert its foreign reserves into the precious metal.

RS

As a result of a shift in official institutional sentiment from selling to buying, the original agreement which was designed to coordinate primarily selling intentions in order to avoid flooding the market has become an anachronism. Indeed, as the following chart from the ECB shows, there have been virtually no gold sales under the CBGA this decade.

Still, as Bloomberg’s Pimm Fox notes, just because they did not sell any gold recently, does not mean they won’t in the future. Fox notes that among the CBGA signatories are Banca d’Italia and Banque de France, each of which holds more than 2,400 metric tons of the precious metal and are faced with deteriorating finances. Well, as the OECD reported recently, Italy’s deficit would rise to 2.5% of GDP this year while the economy shrinks 0.2%. Italy’s public debt will hit a record 133.8% of GDP this year and climb to 134.8% in 2020, according to the OECD. In France, the government has reduced its GDP growth forecast for 2019 to 1.4% from 1.6% and is on course for a budget deficit higher than 3% of GDP. The country’s public debt is more than 98% of GDP.

His conclusion: “when the bills come due, politicians may start looking at something that rhymes with sold.”

Perhaps, but on the other hand, states such as Russia and China will be more than happy to buy up whatever gold France and Italy have to sell.

Meanwhile, following the report, gold jumped to intraday highs, but to Fox, the jump could be a short-lived move if some of the abovementioned central banks begin selling their holdings to help support cash-strapped economies.

Then again, with global bonds yields now negative across virtually all of Europe, it would take nothing short of a crisis, or the ECB losing all its credibility overnight, for Italy or France to be unable to sell bonds in the current environment. Of course, if and when bond yields soar and central banks finally lose control of the bond market, it is distinctly possible that Italy will have no choice but to sell its gold. The good news – if only for gold bugs – is that when that happens, demand for gold from every other source – will be so high thanks to the scramble out of fiat and into hard currency, that any marginal sales will hardly be noticed as the price of gold explodes just in time for the global hyperinflation episode.

In any case, keep an eye on the gold market on September 26: that when the CBGA will officially conclude.

The full ECB statement ending the CBGA is below (link)

As market matures central banks conclude that a formal gold agreement is no longer necessary

  • Signatories of the fourth Central Bank Gold Agreement no longer see need for formal agreement as market has developed and matured

  • Signatory central banks confirm gold remains an important element of global monetary reserves and none of them currently has plans to sell significant amounts of gold

The European Central Bank (ECB) and 21 other central banks that are signatories of the Central Bank Gold Agreement (CBGA) have decided not to renew the Agreement upon its expiry in September 2019.

The first CBGA was signed in 1999 to coordinate the planned gold sales by the various central banks. When it was introduced, the Agreement contributed to balanced conditions in the gold market by providing transparency regarding the intentions of the signatories. It was renewed three times in 2004, 2009 and 2014, gradually moving towards less stringent terms.

Since 1999 the global gold market has developed considerably in terms of maturity, liquidity and investor base. The gold price has increased around five-fold over the same period. The signatories have not sold significant amounts of gold for nearly a decade, and central banks and other official institutions in general have become net buyers of gold.

The signatories confirm that gold remains an important element of global monetary reserves, as it continues to provide asset diversification benefits and none of them currently has plans to sell significant amounts of gold.

The fourth CBGA, which expires on 26 September 2019, was signed by the ECB, the Nationale Bank van België/Banque Nationale de Belgique, the Deutsche Bundesbank, Eesti Pank, the Central Bank of Ireland, the Bank of Greece, the Banco de España, the Banque de France, the Banca d’Italia, the Central Bank of Cyprus, Latvijas Banka, Lietuvos bankas, the Banque centrale du Luxembourg, the Central Bank of Malta, De Nederlandsche Bank, the Oesterreichische Nationalbank, the Banco de Portugal, Banka Slovenije, Národná banka Slovenska, Suomen Pankki – Finlands Bank, Sveriges Riksbank and the Swiss National Bank.

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

Overbearing Regulations Are Slowly Killing Restaurants

Last month, Eater’s New York vertical published an excellent and damning investigation into the city’s awful food-safety inspection regime. The article details some of the ways restaurants of all types are forced to game the system in order to pass muster with the city’s notoriously overzealous health department. Many of these examples are farcical, including one centered on a covert, all-hands message that “Beyoncé is here,” one unnamed restaurant’s code language that warns employees of the arrival of a health inspector.

These businesses aren’t necessarily in gross violation of the health code—they’re simply reacting to a system that feels broken,” writes Saxon Baird.

Overbearing, broken restaurant regulations aren’t just a thing in New York City. They’re hurting restaurants across America. And while a few cities and states are chipping away at bad rules they now have on the books, many others are busy adopting bad new ones.

With low profit margins and high failure rates, running a restaurant is already a risky endeavor. That’s why restaurant owners find it so onerous when additional regulations eat into those profit margins and raise the risk of failure.

That fact doesn’t stop lawmakers around the country from piling on restaurateurs nevertheless. Chicago lawmakers, for example, are considering a new ordinance that would limit flexibility in scheduling workers’ hours. In a great editorial last week, the Chicago Tribune urged the city to back off, noting the rules don’t make sense and would hit restaurants and restaurant workers particularly hard.

The Tribune reports the new rules would impose restrictions on flexible schedules for hourly workers (and even, in an apparent nod to the snowballing Bernie Sanders’ campaign labor scandal, many salaried workers). Many of these workers, the Tribune notes, “prefer getting called on short notice to work [and] actually like a more fluid schedule—and extra hours.” The editors, lamenting the fact that “employers find Chicago an increasingly hostile place to do business,” close with this argument: “City Hall should not be interfering in shift changes at…Taco Bell.

Chicago and New York City are as blue as blue gets. Certainly, red-state lawmakers would never interfere with businesses, right?

Well, sure. Unless, say, you’re a restaurateur in Mississippi who wants to allow your customers to let their dog chill next to them on your patio while they eat.

After the Clarion-Ledger published an article last week directing diners in and around Jackson to a list of dozens of dog-friendly restaurants, the state’s health department turned scold.

“After the story came out, [the state health department] contacted the Clarion-Ledger and said any restaurant that allows pets on the patio is violating the Mississippi Food Code,” the Clarion-Ledger reported in a follow-up piece.

State health officials say the ban has been on the books since at least the mid-2000s. They claim they’ll only enforce the rule if complaints arise. The health department’s overbearing communiqué to the Clarion-Ledger virtually assures that will happen.

Whom should decide if, say, dogs may sit with their owners outside a restaurant? Shouldn’t it be the restaurant owner herself?

Thankfully, not every new restaurant law or regulation stinks. New rules designed to allow restaurants to limit waste—one in California, the other in North Carolina—highlight the possibilities of deregulation. The new North Carolina law allows restaurants to reuse cleaned oyster shells—as, say, a serving dish for ceviche. The California law, meanwhile, allows diners to bring to-go containers to restaurants and allows festivals and food stalls to provide reusable cutlery.

These are but a few examples of good and bad restaurant rules currently making the news. Others include legislation around restaurant worker pay in Connecticut, proposed alcohol deregulation in North Carolina that would benefit restaurants, a court ruling in a case that centered on whether a California law requires an employer to buy some employees’ shoes, a new law that allows Illinois residents to use SNAP (food stamp) benefits to buy fast food, and a proposed law in Michigan “that would ban the ban of plastic bags ban,” which has the support of the state restaurant association.

Restaurants get by on the slimmest of profit margins and are constantly at risk of failing. Instead of jumping on the regulatory bandwagon, lawmakers around the country should resist that urge and instead reduce the spiraling barrage of regulations that restaurateurs around the country face. Restaurateurs—and voters who like to dine out—will thank them.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/31084F2
via IFTTT

Overbearing Regulations Are Slowly Killing Restaurants

Last month, Eater’s New York vertical published an excellent and damning investigation into the city’s awful food-safety inspection regime. The article details some of the ways restaurants of all types are forced to game the system in order to pass muster with the city’s notoriously overzealous health department. Many of these examples are farcical, including one centered on a covert, all-hands message that “Beyoncé is here,” one unnamed restaurant’s code language that warns employees of the arrival of a health inspector.

These businesses aren’t necessarily in gross violation of the health code—they’re simply reacting to a system that feels broken,” writes Saxon Baird.

Overbearing, broken restaurant regulations aren’t just a thing in New York City. They’re hurting restaurants across America. And while a few cities and states are chipping away at bad rules they now have on the books, many others are busy adopting bad new ones.

With low profit margins and high failure rates, running a restaurant is already a risky endeavor. That’s why restaurant owners find it so onerous when additional regulations eat into those profit margins and raise the risk of failure.

That fact doesn’t stop lawmakers around the country from piling on restaurateurs nevertheless. Chicago lawmakers, for example, are considering a new ordinance that would limit flexibility in scheduling workers’ hours. In a great editorial last week, the Chicago Tribune urged the city to back off, noting the rules don’t make sense and would hit restaurants and restaurant workers particularly hard.

The Tribune reports the new rules would impose restrictions on flexible schedules for hourly workers (and even, in an apparent nod to the snowballing Bernie Sanders’ campaign labor scandal, many salaried workers). Many of these workers, the Tribune notes, “prefer getting called on short notice to work [and] actually like a more fluid schedule—and extra hours.” The editors, lamenting the fact that “employers find Chicago an increasingly hostile place to do business,” close with this argument: “City Hall should not be interfering in shift changes at…Taco Bell.

Chicago and New York City are as blue as blue gets. Certainly, red-state lawmakers would never interfere with businesses, right?

Well, sure. Unless, say, you’re a restaurateur in Mississippi who wants to allow your customers to let their dog chill next to them on your patio while they eat.

After the Clarion-Ledger published an article last week directing diners in and around Jackson to a list of dozens of dog-friendly restaurants, the state’s health department turned scold.

“After the story came out, [the state health department] contacted the Clarion-Ledger and said any restaurant that allows pets on the patio is violating the Mississippi Food Code,” the Clarion-Ledger reported in a follow-up piece.

State health officials say the ban has been on the books since at least the mid-2000s. They claim they’ll only enforce the rule if complaints arise. The health department’s overbearing communiqué to the Clarion-Ledger virtually assures that will happen.

Whom should decide if, say, dogs may sit with their owners outside a restaurant? Shouldn’t it be the restaurant owner herself?

Thankfully, not every new restaurant law or regulation stinks. New rules designed to allow restaurants to limit waste—one in California, the other in North Carolina—highlight the possibilities of deregulation. The new North Carolina law allows restaurants to reuse cleaned oyster shells—as, say, a serving dish for ceviche. The California law, meanwhile, allows diners to bring to-go containers to restaurants and allows festivals and food stalls to provide reusable cutlery.

These are but a few examples of good and bad restaurant rules currently making the news. Others include legislation around restaurant worker pay in Connecticut, proposed alcohol deregulation in North Carolina that would benefit restaurants, a court ruling in a case that centered on whether a California law requires an employer to buy some employees’ shoes, a new law that allows Illinois residents to use SNAP (food stamp) benefits to buy fast food, and a proposed law in Michigan “that would ban the ban of plastic bags ban,” which has the support of the state restaurant association.

Restaurants get by on the slimmest of profit margins and are constantly at risk of failing. Instead of jumping on the regulatory bandwagon, lawmakers around the country should resist that urge and instead reduce the spiraling barrage of regulations that restaurateurs around the country face. Restaurateurs—and voters who like to dine out—will thank them.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/31084F2
via IFTTT