Month: February 2020

At a time when coronavirus is spreading across Asia and other parts of the world, Dyson has patented a wearable air purifier that can also be used as headphones, reported Bloomberg.

The patent specifies, that the headphones will filter the air to the user. It noted that “air pollution is an increasing problem, and a variety of air pollutants have known or suspected harmful effects on human health.”

A Dyson spokesman told Bloomberg, in an email response, that the company is “constantly creating disruptive solutions to problems, which means we file a lot of patents. If and when a product is ready, we’ll happily go through it, but until then, we don’t comment on our patents.” 

The “wearable air purifier” was first reported by Bloomberg several years ago. The patent describes how the device works: 

Both earcups contain a motor that’s connected to a fan-like propeller measuring 35-40mm. Each spin at about 12,000 rpm to draw about 1.4 liters of air per second into the headphones through a filter that particles — typically dust and bacteria, although not specified in the patent — cannot penetrate. The filtered air then journeys down each side of the mouthpiece, meeting in the middle, where a perforated air vent jets about 2.4 liters per second of clean oxygen toward the wearer’s mouth. However, there is no reference to a battery, or any illustration where one might fit.

Revelations of the patent come at a time when wearable purifiers could become a big hit in Asia for several reasons: instead of wearing virus masks – people might be able to use wearable air purifiers, but there was no mention in the patent about the device’s effectiveness against airborne diseases. Another reason why the technology could become big in Asia is because air quality is poor.

Last Oct., Dyson ditched its efforts to build an electric car. The company could soon focus on wearable air purifiers. 

President Trump will award Rush Limbaugh with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian award in the country, after the conservative radio icon announced that he has been diagnosed with advanced lung cancer, according to Politico.

Limbaugh, 69, shocked his fans on Monday with the news, telling listeners that his treatment plan means “there are going to be days when I’m not able to be here.”

Limbaugh and Trump are friends, as the two have been seen golfing together on numerous occasions.

A Florida resident himself, Limbaugh has repeatedly been spotted golfing with Trump at the president’s Mar-a-Lago beach club and dining at the clubhouse afterwards.

Trump told network anchors earlier Tuesday that he was saddened by the news of Limbaugh’s diagnosis and had extended a last-minute invitation for him to join the first lady in the gallery at the State of the Union, according to four people familiar with the conversation. The president also said he plans to award the Medal of Freedom to Limbaugh as soon as next week. –Politico

According to the report, Trump was visibly “shaken up” by the news while speaking with reporters, and “kept mentioning that he and Limbaugh saw each other in West Palm Beach, Fla. as recently as December, when the president was in town for an extended holiday stay.”

“He said he told Rush, ‘You look great – like you’ve lost weight,’ but that Limbaugh didn’t say anything at the time about his health,” this person said, Politico reports.

“Rush just signed another four-year contract. He just wants four more years, OK?” said Trump.

Limbaugh said on Monday that he first noticed something was wrong during the second week in January, and was confirmed to be cancer by “two medical institutions” on January 20th.

Authored by Michael Johnston via Evergreen Gavekal blog,

“To expect the unexpected shows a thoroughly modern intellect.”

– Oscar Wilde

“Those who have knowledge, don’t predict. Those who predict, don’t have knowledge.”

– Lao Tzu, 6th Century BC Chinese Poet

A century ago, the Roaring Twenties were an era marked by economic prosperity, technical innovation and societal progress. Following the end of the Great War  (now known as WWI) and “The Forgotten Depression” (which occurred between 1920 and 1921 when GDP plummeted by 24%), the stock market surged for the better part of the decade, jumping 250% through late-September of 1929.

Source: Bloomberg, Evergreen Gavekal

During this period, the first working televisions were invented, the American home became “networked” and connected to the electrical grid and indoor plumbing, the first cross-Atlantic flight was successfully navigated, and the first jukeboxes were introduced. Additionally, urbanization led to more densely populated cities, the widespread adoption of the internal combustion engine led to a proliferation of motor vehicles, and the development of electrical machinery spread to households and the manufacturing sector. This great transformation led to a sharp rise in productivity and fundamentally altered the size and organization of households, workplaces, and the lives of women. Unfortunately, the bustling party came to an abrupt halt on October 28th and October 29th of 1929 – infamously known as Black Monday and Black Tuesday – when the stock market crashed -13.47% and -11.73% respectively. As most are aware, this precipitous decline ushered in the start of the Great Depression, which stands as the longest, deepest, and most widespread depression in modern history.

In many ways, the 2010s were as astonishing as the majority of the 1920s in terms of financial prosperity, technological innovation, social development and, yes, rampant speculation. Following the Great Recession in the late 2000s, the stock market surged to close the decade at record-highs (up 385% from its 2009 low point), several blue-chip stocks joined the “trillion-dollar club”, and fringe investments such as Bitcoin led to truly ungodly returns for early speculators adopters (up an eye-popping 8,900,000%).

Technology has also flourished over the past decade, ushering in technological innovations and products that have fundamentally altered the way humans interact and conduct business. In the 2010s, the cloud computing market exploded, billions of devices were connected to the cloud through the Internet of Things (IoT), Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR) revolutionized perceptions of the physical world, advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) created new fascinations and fears around the boundaries of the digital world, and the space race took on new meaning and became a private competition amongst several of the world’s most prominent billionaires. To think that at the turn of the last decade 4G networks didn’t exist, products such as the iPad, Apple Watch, Amazon Alexa, and Oculus hadn’t been released, and applications such as Snapchat, Airbnb, Instagram, Uber and Lyft hadn’t taken off is truly remarkable and underscores just how dynamic the last ten years have been in terms of technological progress.

But, before getting too far ahead of ourselves with the comparisons, it’s worth noting that there were plenty of differences between the economies of the Roaring Twenties and the second decade of the 21st century. One major difference is that the federal government ran a budget surplus every year of the 1920s, whereas the federal government ran a budget deficit every year of the 2010s.

Additionally, total debt and federal government spending were a much smaller percentage of GDP in the 1920s than they were in the 2010s, productivity growth surged in the Roaring Twenties but languished over the past decade, wage growth grew at a significantly faster clip in the Roaring Twenties than in recent memory, and the US population ballooned in the 1920s but has stalled of-late.

Regardless of how you perceive the last decade, and what comparisons you draw to decades-of-past, by many measures the 2010s were one of the most financially, technologically, socially, and politically dynamic decades in human history. As we kickoff the first week of a new decade, one question that many pundits and economic commentators have examined recently is whether we will roll into the 2020s continuing with many of the previous decade’s trends, or whether we are in store for something entirely different. Some have even speculated we could be on the cusp of another Roaring Twenties.

While it is impossible – and downright foolish – to attempt to predict the future, as we turn the page on a very remarkable decade and look towards the period to come, there are several “tipping points” that will have a significant impact on how the next ten years unfold. In the rest of this article, we will dissect seven of these tipping points and their potential consequences.

Tipping Point #1: Fiat or Digital Currency?

Fiat currency is money issued by the government and regulated by a sovereign authority such as a central bank. Fiat currencies (such as the US Dollar, Pound or Euro) derive their value from the forces of supply and demand in the market. One risk facing these currencies is that they become worthless due to hyperinflation as they are not linked to any physical reserve. Venezuela is one prime example of how pumping an endless supply of money into the system has resulted in the devaluing of a fiat currency. While this form of tender is usually stable and controlled, economic recessions over the years have highlighted several deficiencies with fiat money. With the recent rise of cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum, one risk for fiat currency is that during the next recession, central banks will face blowback that could spark an entirely new monetary system based – at least in part – on digital currencies.

Tipping Point #2: Globalism or Nationalism?

While free trade and a globalized economy have been positive for many corporations and developing nations in the 20th and 21st century, the working- and middle-classes of several developed countries have suffered as a result. This has led to a sudden rise in nationalism over the last few years. And, while most industries and national economies have become so intertwined that it is almost impossible to completely reverse course, new policies and trade wars have attempted to curtail the momentum. The US, UK, France, Hungary and Italy are ground zero for this debate, and the result of several upcoming elections will likely dictate whether the 2020s are an era characterized by increasing globalism or narrowing nationalism, with broad implications for both the global economy and local economies.

Tipping Point #3: Automation or Evolution?

According to PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), AI, robotics and other forms of smart automation have the potential to contribute up to $15 trillion to global GDP by 2030. This windfall will generate demand for many new jobs, however, it also has the potential to displace many existing occupations (see chart below).

Source: PwC

Less educated workers will be most vulnerable to these changes and will be at risk of having manual and routine tasks replaced by machines. If projections for widespread automation live up to the hype, it will force workers to adjust, retrain, and seek education in STEM subjects (science, technology, engineering, math) to keep pace with the evolving job market. The question becomes, will workers evolve quickly enough or will job automation outpace re-education? The answer to this question will likely have a significant impact on key economic metrics such as the unemployment rate and wage growth over the next decade.

Tipping Point #4: Data Privacy or Transparency?

Having a digital presence has evolved rapidly over the past decade. Just 10 years ago, it meant having a mobile phone number, email address and maybe a Facebook page. Now, many people’s digital presence extends to their smart watch, tablet, virtual assistant, car, Twitter account, LinkedIn page, Instagram, and much more. Security around data is currently at a premium, exacerbated by countless leaks and hacks that have distributed private information into the public sphere. In our increasingly connected world, the battle to determine what information should remain private verses public – and how to go about doing so – will likely intensify in the 2020s as areas such as the Internet of Things explode. It’s hard to imagine that the trend to collect information everywhere is going anywhere but towards a radically more open world. However, as privacy is shattered in the process, it is possible a wary populace takes action to curb seemingly unchecked data collection practices.

Tipping Point #5: Demographic Explosion or Slowdown?

It is projected there will be 8.5 billion people living on the planet by 2030 – up from 7.3 billion in 2015. The fastest growing demographic amongst this populace are those 65 years or older, which will make up a remarkable 1 billion people by 2030. Due to longer anticipated life expectancies, rising healthcare costs, and financial insecurity, a much larger percentage of this group is expected to continue working past what has been the traditional retirement age and into their “golden years” (which may end up decidedly tarnished for millions of them). Advances in technology and medicine are key contributors to longer life-expectancy; however, longer, healthier and happier lives could end up reserved for those at the top of the economic pyramid, rather than the majority who fall into the middle class – potentially exacerbating an already fragile co-existence between classes. While most high-income countries continue to extend life expectancy, a troubling trend has emerged in the United States. In 2010 US life expectancy plateaued and in 2014 began reversing, dropping for consecutive years. This is despite the US spending more on health care per capita than any other country in the world. In fact, the US expends a stunning 2% more of GDP on healthcare than any other leading country. This amounts to about $500 billion of “excess” healthcare costs with life expectancies actually below peer nations. A recent study points to drug overdoses, suicides, alcohol-related illnesses and obesity as the main perpetrators of this alarming trend. Furthermore, while most global estimates point to longer life-expectancy and a rapidly growing population, a continuation of this trend may put pressures on the environment that could slow or change the expected outcome.

Tipping Point #6: Climate Crisis or Control?

Speaking of the environment, one of the most pertinent topics of this era is whether we are heading down a one-way path towards climate disaster. Like many matters, politics will likely dictate various local and international responses to the issue. Wherever you stand on the topic, this will undoubtably be one of the most important and fiery matters over the next decade, with potential ramifications for everything from the auto industry, to the oil and gas industry, to the renewable energy industry, to the agriculture industry.

Tipping Point #7: Urbanization or Ruralization?

It is estimated that nearly two-thirds of the ballooning global population will live in cities by 2030, creating large mega-cities, as well as small- and medium-sized metropolises. However, there are several countervailing forces that could tip the scales away from mass urbanization – chief among them are the changing nature of work. Several studies show that telecommuting and remote work are on the rise with over 53% of professionals working remotely for at least half of the work week. As several factors, such as the cost of living, have applied pressure on living in large cities, a rise in remote jobs have allowed workers to live further away from the workplace. In fact, as the Wall Street Journal reported, millennials aged 25 to 39 are continuing to trade big city life for suburban life, pointing to potentially waning – rather than roaring – urban growth. 

The more we learn about how the Iowa Democratic Party handled the 2020 Iowa Caucus, the more we suspect that this massive malfunction wasn’t simply an accident.

First, as we reported earlier, the New York Times revealed that the IowaReporterApp (as it was called) was supposed to allow precinct captains to seamlessly report their results to party officials in Des Moines. Instead, the app failed to relay accurate data from the precincts, leading to a chaotic result further muddied by Pete Buttigieg’s decision to declare himself the winner, demonstrating some ace media manipulation and earning him the nickname “Pete the Cheat” among bitter Sanders supporters who are probably jealous that they didn’t think of that first.

The Iowa Dems have promised to release partial results after 5 pm ET, though the Biden campaign is already working hard to make sure that doesn’t happen.

But the more we learn about the rollout of IowaReporterApp, the more we suspect that this wasn’t an accident, but rather a deliberate attempt to scuttle a primary that most polls showed would be won by the insurgent socialist Bernie Sanders. It’s difficult to overstate the party leadership’s antipathy for Sanders.

Which is why this report from Vice caught our eye. Between Vice and the NYT, reporters’ conversations with precinct captains suggest that the flaws with the app were apparent even earlier than the state party would admit. Multiple Iowa Democratic county chairs said they had struggled to use the app, which they were forced to download from the TestFairy as it was still unfinished on the day of the caucus. Alternatively, when they tried using the phone system that has been used to record caucus results for decades, the lines seemed to be perpetually busy. 

One precinct captain said they were kept on hold for more than an hour relatively early in the evening, at a time when the line should have been dead, or at least relatively inactive.

Here’s another unsettling detail from the NYT story: Shadow, the sketchy, Buttigieg and Biden-linked company that developed the app, has also been contracted to develop projects for the Nevada Democratic Party (which will hold the next caucus after a handful of earlier primaries), as well as by multiple presidential campaigns (including Buttigieg and Biden). Shadow’s involvement in building the app was kept secret by Democratic officials for reasons that weren’t immediately obvious to us.

But the most damning detail from the Vice report comes from the head of a pro-transparency group who said he warned the DNC weeks ago that the app would fail – but the Dems went ahead and used it anyway, despite the fact that it was virtually guaranteed to fail.

Cybersecurity and voting experts said they were not surprised the app failed, and that the rollout of the app was so haphazard and irresponsible that its failure was a “predictable outcome.”

“We were really concerned about the fact there was so much opacity. I said over and over again trust is the product of transparency times communication. The DNC steadfastly refused to offer any transparency. It was hard to know what to expect except the worst,” Gregory Miller, cofounder of the Open Source Election Technology Institute, which publicly warned the IDP against using the app weeks ago, told Motherboard. “I don’t want to say I told you so, but…”

And even if nobody had specifically told the Iowa Dems that the Shadow-built app, which was rushed to be completed in under two months, best practices should have precluded its use, according to another cyber security expert. Matt Blaze, a professor of computer science and law at Georgetown, told the NYT that introducing apps like this in the middle of a complicated electoral process is seriously unwise. Most experts in the field should have understood that relying on Shadow’s app was a marked departure from best practices.

Any type of app or program that relies on using a cellphone network to deliver results is vulnerable to problems both on the app and on the phones being used to run it, he said.

“The consensus of all experts who have been thinking about this is unequivocal,” Mr. Blaze added. “Internet and mobile voting should not be used at this time in civil elections.”

Any technology, he said, should be tested and retested by the broader cybersecurity community before being publicly introduced, to test for anything ranging from a small bug to a major vulnerability.

“I think the most important rule of thumb in introducing technology into voting is be extremely conservative,” he said.

Shadow has reportedly released a statement apologizing for the errors, though some claimed that the twitter account that published the statement is a fake.

But even if they were genuinely contrite, the fact that they released the app through the TestFairy testing platform, which is typically used for apps that are still being beta tested, suggests an almost galling level of negligence.

Another cybersecurity expert quoted by Vice put it even more colorfully: he said the Dems had “opened a can of whupass on themselves” by robbing their primary process of whatever shreds of credibility remained after 2016.

“When you’re vetting an app for something like this, you need to do load testing, regression testing, pen testing,” Miller said. “It’s not just the app, it’s the deployment process. No one should ever deploy an app like this and have a popup that says this isn’t safe for your phone.”

“Everyone from bots to Republicans literally devoured this scene and sowed a lot of seeds of confusion and chaos. You don’t deliver an app days before the event and call it good. Not with this much riding on this,” Miller said. “In a system, in a world where we are questioning every aspect of elections and whether they can be trusted, why would you do anything to fuel a disinformation attack, and that’s exactly what the Democrats have done. They’ve opened a can of whupass on themselves.”

At this point, even if they release partial results Tuesday night, the malfunction will have already robbed Bernie Sanders of the front-runner momentum he would have gained had he won the contest, as numerous polls suggested he would.

The whole fiasco suggests the DNC still hasn’t learned the lesson from 2016. And with the Dems looking more incompetent than ever, some are already trying to revive the Trump-Russia tampering narrative. But after everything this country and its people have witnessed over the past three years, do they really expect people to believe that?

Here we go

Dems are blaming Dems stealing the election from Bernie on…Trump https://t.co/VIhCiPQ7lR

— John Cardillo (@johncardillo) February 4, 2020

Authored by Chris Hamilton via Econimica blog,

What is happening in China is really scary, both for those currently at risk and for the rest of us due to the lack of transparency.  Whether this is contained or metastasizes seems to really be in the balance, at this time.  The last time the world faced a global pandemic of epic proportions was the 1918/1919 Spanish flu.  While not of the Black Plague proportions, (which wiped out approx. 1/3rd of Europe’s population in a five year span as well as much of Eurasia), the Spanish flu influenza outbreak was horrific.  Obviously, the world population was far smaller at the time (less than 2 billion) and the world was far less interconnected by high speed transportation and open borders, that now exist.  Still, approximately 500 million were infected with Spanish flu (a quarter of the worlds population) and somewhere between 50 to 100 million perished due to the illness (between 3% to 5% of earths population). 

At present, if “just” 1% were to perish globally due to the Coronavirus, this would mean something like 75 million lost.  A similar outcome to that of the Spanish flu would mean something like the loss of 200 to 400 million persons…and a similar outcome to that of the Black Plague taking 1/3 of earths population is too macabre to even fathom.

This is dark stuff and hopefully nothing of previous pandemic proportions takes place, but seems important to roll-out the historical record to see how serious this could become.  Also very noteworthy of the Spanish flu, the bullseye of those killed was among the childbearing population, so the outsized impact on the under 65 year-old population was atypical.

Speaking of the Spanish flu, I wanted to show the impact that the 1918-1919 deaths had on US population growth and compare the inversely moving US debt to GDP ratio.  In the chart below, the yellow line is the annual growth of the US under 65 year-old population versus US debt to GDP (blue columns in periods of flat or declining debt to GDP, red columns in periods of rising debt to GDP).  The two are clearly inversely correlated…debt, once used for warfare, is now being substituted for decelerating population growth and declining potential for economic activity (absent more debt/lower interest rates).

Looking at the annual US population growth, the deceleration from 1790 to present isn’t hard to see, but the sharp collapse in growth due to influenza at the end of WWI takes a little closer look.  However, after the influenza was contained by 1920’ish, the under 65 year-old growth rate immediately recovered to trend growth before continuing its deceleration.

It just so happens that 2019 and 1918/1919 had something very important in common, they were the only years in US history with population decline among the under 65 year-old population.  As per the Census, (HERE), while the total US population grew by 1.55 million (0.48%) in 2019, all the net population growth came among the 65+ year-old population (which grew about 1.625 million). This means that in 2019, the under 65 year-old population declined by about 70 thousand.  The only time this ever occurred previously in US history was at the height of a global pandemic.  Yet, there was no pandemic in 2019…just a population unwilling to enter into parenthood at record proportions and immigration rates about half of what they were during the previous decade.  Of course, if a pandemic were to hit now with an under 65 year-old annual growth rate already below anything the US has ever experienced, the population declines would naturally be unlike anything the US has ever seen.

The rationale for the continued declining fertility rates and births appears to be the continued growth of federal debt well in advance of economic activity.  The mounting $23+ trillion in federal debt (and quadruple that in unfunded liabilities) will never be repaid and can’t honestly be serviced at anything but Federal Reserve dictated minimal interest rates.  Thus, the Fed continues to rig the interest rates, which rigs stocks and commodities…and the outcome is unnaturally high asset appreciation…which rewards elderly and institutional asset holders and punishes young, poor, and those absent assets.  Young and poor are suffering from costs of living rising far faster than incomes.  Marriage are being put off and the undertaking of childrearing is a choice that can simply be avoided with widely available birth control.  Simply put, it is the Federal Reserve coping mechanisms that are causing record low fertility rates as young adults are financially unable/unwilling to undertake children.  The Fed is preserving the present for the elderly and institutions at the expense of the young and poor present and future.

Clearly, a pandemic at this point in time would send the US in deep depopulation and likely send the Fed into QE++++ to avoid a free market determining asset prices.  The result of pandemic, and Fed induced costs of living continuing to skyrocket above incomes, would surely have further downward impact on US births (already down 12% since 2007…detailed HERE).

And what of the global picture and America’s ability to import growth via immigration?  The chart below shows the annual change in the global under 40 year-old population (excluding Africa…I exclude Africa due to low relative rates of emigration, low rates of income/savings/credit, low rates of consumption).  Blue columns are annual change in millions and red line is annual change as a percentage of world population, X-Africa).  1986 was peak annual growth of +53 million under 40 year-olds (a 1.2% increase).

It just so happens that in 2020, the growth of the global population (x-Africa) capable of present and future childbearing has ceased.  Female fertility rates beyond 40 years-old plummet and females are sterile by 45 to 50 years-old.  From this point on, every year there will be fewer persons capable of childbearing and obviously fewer children indefinitely (both x-Africa).  To this point, global annual births, excluding Africa, have been declining since 1989 and are down at least 15% from that ’89 peak…and perhaps as much as -20%, once all data for 2019 is available).

While the worlds over 40 year-old population may be facing overpopulation, the global under 40 year-old population (x-Africa or the part of the world that consumes 97% of everything) has begun depopulation.  And all this prior to any loss of life due to a potential pandemic.

US and global population data from US Census and UN World Population Prospects 2019…

Former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg won Monday’s Iowa caucus with 26.9% of the state delegates, followed by Sens. Bernie Sanders in second (25.1%) and Elizabeth Warren in third (18.3%) according to Iowa Democratic Party (IDP) Chair Troy Price, after 62% of statewide precincts were finally counted.

Former Vice President Joe Biden, the Democratic ‘frontrunner’ if you believe national polls, came in fourth at an embarrassing 15.6%.

That said, Sanders won the popular vote with 27,088 vs. Buttigieg’s 23,666.

The results follow an embarrassing delay in reporting the Iowa caucus results was caused by a broken app developed by ex-Clinton and Obama staffers and bankrolled by a billionaire Buttigieg-backer, the IDP released ‘the majority of the results’ from Monday night’s mayhem.

After the controversial app from Shadow, Inc. failed miserably – preventing caucus site leaders from uploading the results at their locations, attempts were made to phone them in – only to wait on hold for more than an hour. One caucus chairman of a precinct in Story County was hung up on as he attempted to report their results.

“Well, Wolf, I have been on hold for more than an hour with the Iowa Democratic Party,” precinct captain Shawn Sebastian told CNN‘s Wolf Blitzer, adding “They hung up on me. They hung up on me.”

Oh my god@shawnsebastian, a Story County precinct captain, had been on hold with the Iowa Democratic Party for over an hour trying to report results.

CNN had him on to talk about the process. While on air, he got off hold.

Before he could get back to the call, IA Dems hung up pic.twitter.com/oIs7dC5buq

— jordan (@JordanUhl) February 4, 2020

The chaos was met by anger from the candidates’ campaigns – except Buttigieg, who declared victory and got out of dodge.

Former Vice President Joe Biden – who appears to have suffered a massive defeat based on preliminary estimates – effectively threatened to sue the IDP if they released the results before his campaign could see them. Bernie Sanders, meanwhile, reportedly sent 5 lawyers to meet with party officials after he sent operatives to polling locations to gather independent counts.

I am now hearing that the Sanders campaign sent workers to every caucus to record the live results.

The DNC was unaware of this. When their early tallies did not match the recorded results from campaign workers, his campaign had 5 lawyers contact the DNC. Now they’re meeting.

— 🌹 Salem Snow For Congress (@Salem4Congress) February 4, 2020

Meanwhile, Buttigieg has made significant gains at online betting site PredictIt, who is now within striking distance of Biden.