Peter Schiff: Gold Price Breaks Record With More To Come

Peter Schiff: Gold Price Breaks Record With More To Come

Via SchiffGold.com,

Gold set a new record on Friday and broke it again over the weekend. The spot price went as high as $2,125 in overseas trading Sunday night. In his podcast, Peter Schiff explained why he thinks this bull run is just getting started and gold will go much higher.

In fact, Peter said he thought these records would be broken “many many times over.”

Gold also closed the month of November at over $2,000 an ounce. It was the first time that gold finished any month above $2k.

Silver also rallied, but not as much.

I think silver is a particularly good buy right here because gold is at a record high and silver would have to double to hit its record high. That tells me that silver is very cheap.”

Gold stocks also rallied, but not to the same extent as the metal. Normally in a bull market, you would see an even bigger rally in mining stocks. But Peter said this is not a typical bull market.

Clearly, it is a bull market, by definition. Gold is at an all-time record high. So, it can’t not be in a bull market when you’re at an all-time record high. Yet gold stocks are not even anywhere close to their all-time record highs. In fact, gold stocks would have to go up another 12% just to hit a 52-week high let alone a record high.”

Peter said this market has been climbing a proverbial “wall of worry.”

It’s like the Rodney Dangerfield bull market. It gets no respect.”

Stock investors still expect gold to fall and they are factoring that into the price of gold stocks.

Nobody has confidence that the price of gold is going to rise. That’s what’s so atypical about this rally because normally gold stocks lead the metal.”

Peter said all of the bearishness reinforces his bullishness.

The question is when will investors realize that gold prices are going much higher? When will the bears throw in the towels and start buying gold and gold mining stocks?

Peter pointed out that $2,000 gold is still way underpriced when adjusted for inflation.

I don’t even know where the price of gold would have to be to hit a high adjusted for the CPI. Probably at least $3,000. … But we are going to get there. But the fact that we’re still so far below that inflation-adjusted high lets you know how cheap gold remains, despite the fact that it’s above $2,000.”

Peter pointed out that the big hedge funds, pension funds, and endowments aren’t invested in gold.

They’re not in this market at all. At some point, they’re going to wake up to this reality.”

Peter said he thinks it will be an “economic awakening.”

I think we’re going to see the economy become much weaker in a way that is easy to discern — when you’re going to see a big pickup in unemployment and a big deceleration in the GDP.”

This might seem unlikely given the 5.2% GDP growth in the third quarter. But Peter pointed out that this growth was primarily driven by government borrowing and spending and consumer borrowing and spending.

When people want to look at the economy and look at the GDP and say, ‘Oh, we had this GDP growth!’ Yeah, but we also had commensurate growth in the national debt. And so now, we have a much bigger debt as a result of this phony economic growth. Because it’s not real economic growth. We just spent borrowed money, and what grew is our debt.”

At some point, we will have to pay the piper for this fake economic growth.

It’s going to be paid with inflation. And that’s how you know the price of gold is going much, much higher the $2,000.”

A lot of people think the Fed has won the inflation fight. The markets are now pricing in a significant chance that the Fed will start cutting interest rates in March. But CPI isn’t anywhere near the 2% target. We’re looking at a more inflationary environment even while there is still significant inflation in the system.

Peter said he thinks gold is going to have an explosive move up before gold starts trading on a more steady but slower upward trajectory.

I think we have to move up quite a bit to shock investors into getting involved in this market. And they will, but at much higher prices, I think.”

Peter said we also need to keep an eye on the dollar. A weakening greenback has helped drive this gold bull rally. Peter said he thinks the drop in the dollar is just getting started.

The dollar is getting ready to go through the floor and that means gold is getting ready to go through the roof.”

In this podcast, Peter also talked about comments Jerome Powell made late last week.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/04/2023 – 10:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/WdEk0MJ Tyler Durden

US Factory Orders Plunged Most Since COVID Lockdowns In October

US Factory Orders Plunged Most Since COVID Lockdowns In October

The chaotic time series of US Factory Orders was expected to swing to a big loss (-3.00% MoM) in October (data released today) after a big jump in September and big drop in July (and a big jump in June!).

However, factory orders tumbled even more than expected, down 3.6% MoM – the biggest drop since the COVID lockdowns (April 2020). September was also revised lower (making October’s decline even worse) from +2.8% MoM to +2.3% MoM…

Source: Bloomberg

The big monthly decline and revisions dragged orders down 2.1% YoY (the biggest drop since Sept 2020).

Core factory orders also dropped (-1.2% Mom), leaving them down 2.2% YoY – the eight month in a row of annual declines…

Source: Bloomberg

The final Durable Goods Orders data for October confirmed the preliminary print plunge down 5.4% MoM.

Finally, we note that it could have been a lot worse as Defense spending shot up 24.7% MoM (as non-defense dropped 15.8% MoM0…

All hail the Military-Industrial Complex.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/04/2023 – 10:11

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/cvLlZ95 Tyler Durden

Asset Rallies At Risk As Liquidity Drop Meets Labor Data Deluge

Asset Rallies At Risk As Liquidity Drop Meets Labor Data Deluge

Authored by Simon White, Bloomberg macro strategist,

There are fertile conditions for volatile markets this week as a raft of labor data is released at the same time as liquidity sees a sizable drop versus last month’s buoyant conditions. With positioning in bonds now very long, yields are at risk of rising, triggering a selloff in stocks.

Focus returns to the US labor market this week as JOLTS, ADP, Challenger layoffs, ISM services employment and payrolls are released.

The jobs market is slowing but the question remains: will it deteriorate fast enough to prompt the Federal Reserve to act even sooner than rates markets are expecting?

This comes at the same time as a non-negligible drop in liquidity and skewed positioning in bonds. The JPMorgan Treasury Survey of active clients is registering an all-time high in net longs.

Liquidity was very supportive for assets last month, with Fed reserves rising almost $200 billion.

The combination of money market funds drawing down on the reverse repo facility and the Treasury drawing down on its account at the Fed (the TGA) led to a jump in reserves despite ongoing quantitative tightening.

But this last week has not been so favorable. The TGA has risen by ~$60 billion, absorbing the same amount of reserves, with the RRP – only falling marginally – therefore not mitigating the TGA’s rise.

In the labor market, indicators with a longer lead (6-12 months) expect payrolls’ annual growth to continue to fall. However, shorter-term leading indicators, e.g. unemployment claims, have recently inflected lower, which would not be consistent with a jobs market that is about to worsen at an accelerating rate.

This agrees with what has happened in previous cycles. The median and mean unemployment rate around the end of Fed tightening cycles does not accelerate higher until about a year after the central bank’s last rate hike.

Nonetheless, monthly data is volatile (especially payrolls), and there is every chance of a negative surprise. With liquidity less supportive versus last month, that opens up the likelihood of more volatile markets.

Further, if long positioning in bonds is as extreme as the JPM survey indicates, even weak data could trigger profit taking and thus higher yields, prompting overbought stocks to sell off.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/04/2023 – 09:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/Nqa4RGf Tyler Durden

Key Events This Jobs Week: JOLTS, ADP And Payrolls

Key Events This Jobs Week: JOLTS, ADP And Payrolls

After a week that tracked global PMIs and sliding inflation, and ushered in the Fed’s quiet period with a “fireside chat” bang, this week all roads point to payrolls on Friday with the usual build up via JOLTS (tomorrow) and ADP (Wednesday). Elsewhere in the US, DB’s Jim Reid notes that the Services ISM is out tomorrow (we will also watch the employment sub component ahead of payrolls), and the initial read on inflation expectations in the University of Michigan confidence sentiment release (Friday) will be of note after 5-10yr expectations ticked up to a decade high of 3.2% last month. As a reminder, the Fed are now on a blackout period ahead of next week’s FOMC so some of the big catalyst for moves of late, i.e. Fed speakers, won’t be there.

Around the globe, other highlights include a few important releases in Germany including the trade balance (today), factory orders (Wednesday) and industrial production (Thursday). Industrial production indicators are also due in France and Italy. Retail sales data is out for the Eurozone on Wednesday. In China, the Caixin services PMI (tomorrow) and trade balance figures (Thursday) are the highlights. Tokyo CPI is out just before midnight tonight

From central banks, Lagarde and Guindos speak today with the RBA (tomorrow) and Bank of Canada (Wednesday) expected to hold rates by the consensus although our economist is an outlier and predicts a hike in Australia . For the full week ahead the day-by-day calendar is at the end as usual.

Digging a bit deeper into the US employment picture, DB’s US economists expect headline and private payrolls to come in at +130k with consensus at +180k and +160k respectively. The returning post-strike autoworkers will boost the data by around +30k. Unemployment is expected to hold steady at 3.9% according to consensus, although DB economists see the risks tilted to a 3.8% print. One thing economists look carefully at is the diffusion index that shows the breadth of job gains. It’s currently at 52%, its lowest rate since the pandemic. They show that 70% of the private job gains in the last year come from only two sectors, namely leisure and hospitality and private education and healthcare. Outside of that job creation in the last 12 months is a very lowly 0.7% and just 0.2% over the last 6.

Staying with US labour markets, the JOLTS data tomorrow is also important even if it’s October data. While the hiring and quits rates were at or below their 2019 averages in September, the layoffs and discharges rate remained near historical lows. So that gap is keeping labor markets tight for now. DB’s base case is that the demand for labor eases in the next few months.

Finally, thanks to way too many public companies, Q3 earnings season is still going on – with just a month left until Q4 earnings season begins – thanks to the following stragglers.

Courtesy of DB, here is a day-by-day calendar of events

Monday December 4

  • Data: US October factory orders, Japan November Tokyo CPI, Germany October trade balance
  • Central banks: ECB’s Lagarde and Guindos speak

Tuesday December 5

  • Data: US October JOLTS report, November ISM services, China November Caixin services PMI, UK November official reserves changes, new car registrations, Italy November services PMI, France October industrial production, Eurozone October PPI, Canada November services PMI
  • Central banks: ECB consumer expectations survey, RBA decision

Wednesday December 6

  • Data: US November ADP report, October trade balance, UK November construction PMI, Germany October factory orders, November construction PMI, Eurozone October retail sales, Canada Q3 labor productivity, October international merchandise trade
  • Central banks: BoC decision, BoE financial stability report

Thursday December 7

  • Data: US Q3 household change in net worth, October wholesale trade sales, consumer credit, initial jobless claims, China November trade balance, foreign reserves, Japan October trade balance, current account balance, leading index, labor cash earnings, household spending, coincident index, November bank lending, Italy October retail sales, industrial production, Germany October industrial production, France October trade balance, current account balance, Canada October building permits Central banks: ECB’s Holzmann and Elderson speak
  • Earnings: Broadcom, Lululemon, Dollar General
  • Other: EU-China summit, through December 8

Friday December 8

  • Data: US November jobs report, December University of Michigan survey, Japan November Economy Watchers survey, Canada Q3 capacity utilization rate
  • Central banks: BoE / Ipsos inflation attitudes survey

* * *

Finally, turning to just the US, Goldman writes that the key economic data release this week is the payrolls report on Friday. There are no speaking engagements from Fed officials this week, reflecting the FOMC blackout period.

Monday, December 4

  • 10:00 AM Factory orders, October (GS -2.7%, consensus -3.0%, last +2.8%); Durable goods orders, October final (consensus -5.4%, last -5.4%); Durable goods orders ex-transportation, October final (last flat); Core capital goods orders, October final (last -0.1%); Core capital goods shipments, October final (last flat): We estimate that factory orders declined by 2.7% in October following a 2.8% increase in September. Durable goods orders decreased by 5.4% in the October advance report, and core capital goods orders decreased by 0.1%.

Tuesday, December 5

  • 09:45 AM S&P Global US services PMI, November final (consensus 50.8, last 50.8)
  • 10:00 AM JOLTS job openings, October (GS 9,300k, consensus 9,300k, last 9,553k)
  • 10:00 AM ISM services index, November (GS 52.1, consensus 52.3, last 51.8): We estimate that the ISM services index rebounded 0.3pt to 52.1 in November. Our GSAI and our nonmanufacturing tracker increased in November (+1.8pt to 52.3) but we expect a drag from residual seasonality.

Wednesday, December 6

  • 08:15 AM ADP employment change, November (GS +150k, consensus +120k, last +113k): We estimate a 150k rise in ADP payroll employment in November, reflecting generally stronger Big Data employment indicators.
  • 08:30 AM Nonfarm productivity, Q3 final (GS +4.9%, consensus +4.9%, last 4.7%); Unit labor costs, Q3 final (GS -0.8%, consensus -0.9%, last -0.8%): We expect a 0.2pp upward revision to nonfarm productivity growth to +4.9% (qoq ar) in the final Q3 reading. We expect no revision on net to unit labor costs—compensation per hour divided by output per hour—previously reported at -0.8%.
  • 08:30 AM Trade balance, October (GS -$65.4bn, consensus -$64.2bn, last -$61.5bn)

Thursday, December 7

  • 08:30 AM Initial jobless claims, week ended December 2 (GS 220k, consensus 222k, last 218k); Continuing jobless claims, week ended November 25 (GS 1,930k, consensus 1,910k, last 1,927k): We estimate that initial jobless claims were roughly unchanged at 220k. We estimate that continuing claims edged up to 1,930k, reflecting continued upward pressure from seasonal distortions. We would note that this week’s period for continuing claims coincides with Thanksgiving, which could contribute to additional volatility.
  • 08:30 AM Wholesale inventories, October final (consensus -0.2%, last -0.2%)

Friday, December 8

  • 08:30 AM Nonfarm payroll employment, November (GS +238k, consensus +180k, last +150k); Private payroll employment, November (GS +198k, consensus +160k, last +99k); Average hourly earnings (mom), November (GS +0.25%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.2%); Average hourly earnings (yoy), November (GS +3.92%, consensus +4.0%, last +4.1%); Unemployment rate, November (GS 3.8%, consensus 3.9%, last 3.9%); Labor force participation rate, November (GS 62.7%, consensus 62.7%, last 62.7%): We estimate nonfarm payrolls rose by 238k in November (mom sa), reflecting a 200k underlying gain plus a 38k boost from the return of striking workers. Big Data employment indicators were generally strong in the month, and while initial jobless claims rebounded, they remain at levels consistent with a low pace of layoff activity. We estimate that the unemployment rate declined one tenth to 3.8%, reflecting a rebound in household employment following its sharp drop in October. We assume labor force participation was unchanged at 62.7%. We estimate a 0.25% increase in average hourly earnings (mom sa) that lowers the year-on-year rate by two tenths to 3.9%, reflecting waning wage pressures and neutral calendar effects.
  • 10:00 AM University of Michigan consumer sentiment, December preliminary (GS 62.0, consensus 62.0, last 61.3); University of Michigan 5-10-year inflation expectations, December preliminary (GS 3.0%, consensus 3.0%, last 3.2%): We estimate the University of Michigan consumer sentiment index increased to 62.0 in December. We estimate the report’s measure of long-term inflation expectations declined two tenths to 3.0%, reflecting the further decline in gasoline prices and a sequential reduction in public focus on the Israel-Hamas conflict.

Source: DB, Goldman, BofA

Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/04/2023 – 09:37

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/T1lq9db Tyler Durden

Private Jets to the Climate Conference


Attendees of the Cop28 climate conference in Dubai walking | NATO / Polaris/Newscom

Get out the private jets, it’s climate conference time! Britain’s Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, Foreign Secretary David Cameron, and King Charles III each took their own private jets—as did many other hypocrites world leaders—to attend the Cop28 climate conference in Dubai, where it is apparently an “open secret,” per Politico, that “the top temperature goal is mostly gone.”

“This government’s approach to tackling climate change, as we have set out repeatedly, is not about banning or reducing people from flying,” said a Sunak spokesman. “It is through investing in new technologies of the future, as evidenced by the flight just yesterday using sustainable aviation fuel.”

Innovation is well and good, but the whole world-leaders-coming-in-on-private-planes thing looks a bit bad when the topic at hand is reversing climate change—and when the news is so dismal. “A short trip on a private jet will produce more carbon than the average person emits all year,” noted one Green Party critic.

Methane agreement scorned: That’s not the only bit of controversy that’s come from this year’s Cop28 summit. NBC reports that roughly “50 oil and gas companies worldwide have pledged to shore up leaky methane systems by 2030,” which “could rapidly reduce emissions of the potent gas and forestall some climate change effects.” Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber, the conference’s president and the one who announced this agreement, is the United Arab Emirates’ climate envoy and the CEO of ADNOC, an oil and gas company.

“Every piece of equipment, every component, can leak methane along the supply chain,” scientist Arvind Ravikumar explained to NBC. He said roughly 10 percent of leaks in the supply chain create more than 50 percent of total methane emissions.

By asking oil and gas companies to fix something that’s in their self-interest to fix anyway, the conference attracted criticism from climate activists. “Methane emissions and gas flaring are symptoms of a more than century-long legacy of wasteful, destructive practices that are routine in the oil and gas industry as it pursues massive profits without regard for the consequences,” they wrote in response. “The only safe and effective way to ‘clean up’ fossil fuel pollution is to phase out fossil fuels.”

Kamala Harris promises to throw money at the problem: Our own vice president just pledged $3 billion of U.S. taxpayers’ hard-earned money to the Green Climate Fund. But Congress still has to approve this, and given the spending battles that have led to looming government shutdowns and an ousted speaker, it’s unclear whether this money is Harris’ to spend.

Middle East update: Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen fired at several commercial ships over the weekend, prompting a U.S. Navy destroyer to shoot down three drones, including one that was headed for the U.S.S. Carney warship. “The strikes marked an escalation in a series of maritime attacks in the Mideast linked to the Israel-Hamas war, as multiple vessels found themselves in the crosshairs of a single Houthi assault for the first time in the conflict,” reports the Associated Press.

“A Houthi military spokesman, Yahya Sarea, said in a statement on Sunday that the militia had targeted two Israeli ships in the area of the Bab al-Mandeb strait off southern Yemen, but did not mention the American naval vessel,” per The New York Times. The Houthi militants have said they will keep firing at Israeli ships in the Red and Arabian Seas until the Israeli war in the Gaza Strip is stopped.

Meanwhile in Gaza, the ceasefire has expired and Israel seems to be eyeing an expansion of its military campaign into the south. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) called for mass evacuations from Khan Younis, warning civilians that it is likely to strike there. With an estimated three-quarters of the population of the Gaza Strip displaced, it’s unclear where evacuees ought to take refuge.


Scenes from New York:  

Functional school system we’ve got here!


QUICK HITS

  • DO YOU LOVE ROUNDUP? Then possibly consider donating to Reason‘s Webathon (and writing my name in that sweet, sweet comment section so my superiors know not to fire me next time I say something too spicy). Who knows, maybe you can win a trip to the shooting range with me next year if enough interest is expressed! (Just kidding, New York City doesn’t have those, because the city pols hate fun and freedom.) 
  • Today, the Supreme Court “will weigh whether members of the Sackler family, who owned the company, should be shielded from current and future lawsuits connected with Purdue in exchange for paying about $5.5 billion to address the addiction crisis,” reports Axios.
  • A growing number of Chinese have entered the United States this year through the Darién Gap, exceeded only by Venezuelans, Ecuadoreans and Haitians,” The New York Times reports.
  • Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor died on Friday.
  • “Buy now, pay later” schemes receive heightened scrutiny.
  • Deranged behavior—and vandalism—outside a Jewish-owned restaurant in Philadelphia.
  • Socialized medicine kills: “Canadian woman is diagnosed with cancer, told she has  2 years to live at most, that she is not a candidate for surgery but would she like medical help committing suicide? She declines, comes to the United States, spends a lot of money, and is treated within weeks,” writes Alex Tabarrok at Marginal Revolution.
  • The expansion of grief leave, with no government mandates necessary.
  • A thread that will possibly leave you optimistic about the future of humanity.
  • Lol:

  • Check out the trailer for the show Zach Weissmueller and I are launching. It’s called Just Asking Questions and we’re thrilled to release new episodes to our YouTube every Thursday and to our podcast feed every Friday:

The post Private Jets to the Climate Conference appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/8u4kGKA
via IFTTT

Plaintiff Sues Defendant, Alleging Defendant’s “Niche Is Cancel Culture”

From Couture v. Noshirvan, decided Thursday by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell (M.D. Fla.):

This case stems from a dozen TikTok videos…. [According to the Complaint,] Defendant Noshirvan is a TikTok creator. He makes money through TikTok gifts, tips, and subscription fees. His niche is cancel culture. Noshirvan finds a video of someone messing up. He then edits and reposts the video. In the edited video, Noshirvan overlays himself doxing the person depicted in the video—that is, he provides the person’s name, contact information, employer, and other personal information. He targets the person as an antagonist, in need of accountability. Many of his millions of followers then harass the person. People pay Noshirvan for this doxing service.

That’s what happened here. Someone recorded Plaintiff Jennifer Couture during an argument. And someone then provided that video to Noshirvan and paid his fee. Noshirvan went to work. He edited the video and reposted his version targeting Couture. Many of his followers berated Couture by text and phone call. They found her family, the schools her children attended, and employers and contacted them. Over the next several months, Noshirvan posted twelve videos about Couture. He encouraged his followers to report Couture to Southwest Florida Crimestoppers. And he falsely reported to the Florida Department of Children and Families that Couture had harmed her child.

Noshirvan did not target only Couture. He also targeted Garramone Plastic Surgery (her employer and family). Garramone similarly received calls, texts, emails, and negative online reviews. Garramone responded to a negative review by stating that it was not from a former or current patient. Noshirvan then accused Garramone of slander and questioned why Garramone took out a PPP loan. Noshirvan’s videos forced Garramone to terminate contracts with surgeons who worried about reputational harm. Patients canceled scheduled procedures.

Garramone sued Noshirvan for, among other things, tortious interference with business relations; the court rejected these claims, but left open room for plaintiffs to amend their complaint:

The elements of tortious interference are “(1) the existence of a business relationship … (2) knowledge of the relationship on the part of the defendant; (3) an intentional and unjustified interference with the relationship by the defendant; and (4) damage to the plaintiff as a result of the breach of the relationship.” A plaintiff may allege “tortious interference with present or prospective customers but no cause of action exists for tortious interference with a business’s relationship to the community at large.” …

Garramone does not allege interference with a relationship to the community at large. Rather, Garramone alleges that, due to Noshirvan and his followers’ harassment and false business reviews, it was “forced to prematurely terminate contracts with surgeons, who became fearful of reputational harm by being swept into [Noshirvan’s] net, and many patients terminated scheduled procedure and ended their relationship.” This allegation sufficiently identifies existing business relationships. This allegation, along with other allegations in the complaint, also suffices to allege Noshirvan actually interfered with Garramone’s business relationships.

But Garramone includes only conclusory allegations about Noshirvan’s knowledge of the business relationships. Plaintiffs claim to have facts to support the knowledge element and request that the Court take judicial notice. The Court declines the invitation to take judicial notice of that information and dismisses the tortious interference claim … without prejudice….

The court thus allowed Garramone to file an amended complaint (due Dec. 15), and noted that, if the amended complaint adequately alleges tortious interference, it would also adequately allege civil conspiracy:

Garramone alleges Noshirvan and his followers agreed to engage in tortious interference and committed overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy. For example, the amended complaint includes a screenshot of a conversation between Noshirvan and one of his followers. The follower asks, “so we are now working on reviews for his business right?” and Noshirvan responds “Yes.” The amended complaint also includes screenshots of several fake reviews posted by Noshirvan’s followers. These allegations are enough at this stage….

As to Couture’s civil conspiracy claim, the court held it “needs more work”:

[Couture] does not sufficiently allege an underlying tort [that defendants were allegedly trying to commit against her]. Plaintiffs argue that Florida’s “economic boycott exception” relieves them of the underlying-tort requirement. Under that exception, “if the plaintiff can show some peculiar power of coercion possessed by the conspirators by virtue of their combination, which power an individual would not possess, then conspiracy itself becomes an independent tort.” Whether this narrow exception applies here is unclear. And Plaintiffs have not sufficiently alleged this exception in the amended complaint.

Moreover, the Court should not address the exception now…. Couture may be able to sufficiently allege other underlying torts. For instance, she alleges that Noshirvan participated in campaigns to “damage her business and professional reputation, and to tortiously interfere with the business relationship between Jennifer Couture and her clients.” The amended complaint does not sufficiently develop how damage to Couture’s reputation, perhaps a reference to defamation, or tortious interference serve as underlying torts supporting her conspiracy claim. Nor does Couture sufficiently allege agreement between Noshirvan and his followers or which overt acts were committed in furtherance of the conspiracy. The Court dismisses without prejudice Plaintiff Couture’s conspiracy claim [which means that Couture could try to file an amended complaint making the requisite allegations -EV].

Plaintiffs also sued TikTok and ByteDance, TikTok’s parent corporation, but the court threw out that claim under 47 U.S.C. § 230:

Nor do TikTok’s monetization features transform it into a developer rather than publisher of Noshirvan’s content. Viewing the amended complaint in the light most favorable to Plaintiffs, they allege (at best) that TikTok promotes Noshirvan’s videos generally. Afterall, Noshirvan is an eligible creator, and TikTok makes money from his videos. But Plaintiffs cannot show that TikTok “contribut[ed] materially to the alleged illegality” of the videos at issue here. TikTok’s monetization features turn on the popularity of a video, not its content. And “providing neutral tools to carry out what may be unlawful or illicit [content] does not amount to ‘development'” of that content.

TikTok’s knowledge of Noshirvan does not change this analysis…. At bottom, TikTok’s role in the alleged wrongdoing was publishing Noshirvan’s content. So Section 230 bars Plaintiffs’ claims. See McCall v. Zotos (11th Cir. 2023) (“Lawsuits seeking to hold a service provider like Amazon liable for its exercise of a publisher’s traditional editorial functions—such as deciding whether to publish, withdraw, postpone, or alter content—are barred.”)….

The post Plaintiff Sues Defendant, Alleging Defendant's "Niche Is Cancel Culture" appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/bsN1QhM
via IFTTT

“The Responsibility To Not Report”: Irish Journalist Defends Suppressing Stories For The Public Good

“The Responsibility To Not Report”: Irish Journalist Defends Suppressing Stories For The Public Good

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

We have been discussing the latest Irish law to crackdown on free speech.  Yet, even with the criminalization of speech, there is apparently still the danger of citizens reading or hearing facts from reporters that are best kept from them. Thus, Kitty Holland, a correspondent with the Irish Timesis defending the media’s decision to suppress stories that would “incite hatred” and undermine journalistic viewpoints.

The comments came in a BBC interview regarding the victim impact statement of the boyfriend of Ashling Murphy, who was murdered in 2022 by an immigrant. 

Ryan Casey stated in part:

It just sickens me to the core that someone can come to this country, be fully supported in terms of social housing, social welfare, and free medical care for over 10 years… over 10 years… never hold down a legitimate job, and never once contribute to society in any way shape or form… can commit such a horrendous evil act of incomprehensible violence on such a beautiful, loving and talented person who in fact, worked for the state, educating the next generation and represented everything that is good about Irish society.

I feel like this country is no longer the country that Ashling and I grew up in, and Ireland has officially lost its innocence when a crime of this magnitude can be perpetrated in broad daylight. This country needs to wake up. This time, things have got to change, we have to once and for all start putting the safety of not only Irish people — but everybody in this country who works hard, pays taxes, raises families and overall contributes to society — first.

We don’t want to see any other family in this country go through what we have gone through and are continuing to go through. I myself have a little sister and honestly, just the thought of her walking the streets of any village, town or city in this country alone makes me physically sick and quite frankly absolutely terrifies me as this country is simply not safe anymore!

This time, if real change does not happen, if the safety of people living in this country is further ignored, I’m afraid our country is heading down a very dangerous path and you can be certain that we will not be the last family to be in this position.

The host asked:

“Those were very interesting comments, weren’t they?”

Holland disagreed and said that they had to be suppressed in the best interests of the public:

“I think elements of them were not good,. They were incitement to hatred, and I think that’s why the media left out aspects of them. I think they were right to not include [Casey’s full comments in news reports]. I don’t think that they were helpful, and this is the kind of thing that the far right latches on to.”

What was striking was the ease with which Holland moves directly into the suppression of a story as the guardian of the public good. Some news is simply “not helpful” so the media should not allow the public to be exposed to it.

Holland previously won the Journalist of the Year, News Reporter of the Year, and the Overall winner of the Justice Media Awards.

Holland’s view is consistent with many in the media in the United States today.

I have long been a critic of what I called “advocacy journalism” as it began to emerge in journalism schools. These schools encourage students to use their “lived expertise” and to “leave[] neutrality behind.” Instead, of neutrality, they are pushing “solidarity [as] ‘a commitment to social justice that translates into action.’”

For example, we previously discussed the release of the results of interviews with over 75 media leaders by former executive editor for The Washington Post Leonard Downie Jr. and former CBS News President Andrew Heyward. They concluded that objectivity is now considered reactionary and even harmful. Emilio Garcia-Ruiz, editor-in-chief at the San Francisco Chronicle said it plainly: “Objectivity has got to go.”

Saying that “Objectivity has got to go” is, of course, liberating. You can dispense with the necessities of neutrality and balance. You can cater to your “base” like columnists and opinion writers. Sharing the opposing view is now dismissed as “bothsidesism.” Done. No need to give credence to opposing views. It is a familiar reality for those of us in higher education, which has been increasingly intolerant of opposing or dissenting views.

Downie recounted how news leaders today

“believe that pursuing objectivity can lead to false balance or misleading “bothsidesism” in covering stories about race, the treatment of women, LGBTQ+ rights, income inequality, climate change and many other subjects. And, in today’s diversifying newsrooms, they feel it negates many of their own identities, life experiences and cultural contexts, keeping them from pursuing truth in their work.”

There was a time when all journalists shared a common “identity” as professionals who were able to separate their own bias and values from the reporting of the news.

Now, objectivity is virtually synonymous with prejudice. Kathleen Carroll, former executive editor at the Associated Press declared “It’s objective by whose standard? … That standard seems to be White, educated, and fairly wealthy.”

In an interview with The Stanford Daily, Stanford journalism professor, Ted Glasser, insisted that journalism needed to “free itself from this notion of objectivity to develop a sense of social justice.” He rejected the notion that journalism is based on objectivity and said that he views “journalists as activists because journalism at its best — and indeed history at its best — is all about morality.”  Thus, “Journalists need to be overt and candid advocates for social justice, and it’s hard to do that under the constraints of objectivity.”

Lauren Wolfe, the fired freelance editor for the New York Times, has not only gone public to defend her pro-Biden tweet but published a piece titled I’m a Biased Journalist and I’m Okay With That.” 

Former New York Times writer (and now Howard University Journalism Professor) Nikole Hannah-Jones is a leading voice for advocacy journalism.

Indeed, Hannah-Jones has declared all journalism is activism.”

At the same time, outlets like National Public Radio have abandoned the rule that journalists should not engage in public protests.

NPR declared that it would allow employees to participate in political protests when the editors believe the causes advance the “freedom and dignity of human beings.” So it remained up to the editors if a reporter could join a pro-life protest (unlikely) or a pro-gun control protest (very likely).

Likewise, American politicians (including Barack Obama) have called upon the media to actively frame news to shape public opinion.  This includes support for the widespread censorship of opposing views on social media.

The Holland interview shows how matter-of-fact the cause of censorship has become for reporters.  The immediate question is not whether it was news to report (which it certainly was), but whether the news would further the cause or narrative of the media.

There has always been media bias, but it is now openly acknowledged and embraced by reporters. They view themselves now as the guardians protecting citizens from harmful information or news that they cannot put into the proper perspective. Information is treated like sugary drinks under the Big Gulp laws, you are better off having others decide what is healthy for you to consume . . . or to know.

Here is the full victim impact statement.

 ‘I lost so much more than my girlfriend. I’ve lost mypartner in life, my closest friend, my best friend’

Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/04/2023 – 09:15

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/bTKjDLN Tyler Durden

#TheyLied Case Filed by Elected Official Over Allegations of Sexual Assault Can Go Forward

From Anderson v. Senthilnathan (Colo. Ct. App.), decided Sept. 28, in an opinion by Judge Katharine Lum, joined by Judges Jerry Jones and Steve Bernard:

At various times in 2021, while Anderson served as an elected Director on the Board of Education for Denver Public Schools (DPS), [Defendants] BLM [Black Lives Matter 5280, a chapter of the national Black Lives Matter] and [BLM co-founder] Brown, Brooks-Fleming, and Senthilnathan published separate statements alleging that Anderson had sexually assaulted one or more people. Each of the defendants was familiar with Anderson through participation in community politics.

An investigation [by ILG Legal Services] commissioned by DPS was unable to substantiate the allegations of sexual assault raised by Brooks-Fleming and by a third party who had allegedly reported her assault to BLM. The results of the investigation were released before Senthilnathan made her statements.

Anderson sued for defamation and related claims, and the court held that Anderson had sufficiently alleged falsehood and actual malice as to defendants Brooks-Fleming and Senthilnathan that the case could go forward:

[The ILG] report revealed inconsistencies in Brooks-Fleming’s own account of the events underlying her allegations that Anderson committed sexual assault or other sexual misconduct against sixty-two DPS students.

ILG interviewed Brooks-Fleming one day after she gave her testimony and follow-up statement. According to the ILG report, Brooks-Fleming claimed that the first two sexual assault victims, both of whom had injuries, came to her in August and September of 2020. Yet, in October 2020, Brooks-Fleming praised Anderson on social media as a “brave and worthy role model.” And while Brooks-Fleming claimed that by the end of October 2020, she received sixty-two reports of sexual assault and sexual misconduct by Anderson, she invited Anderson to speak at a political event for DPS in November 2020. Then, five days after Brooks-Fleming’s testimony and follow-up statement, she posted the following to social media: “I NEVER SAID HUS [sic] NAME I NEVER SAID HIS NAME I NEVER SAID HIS NAME — TOLD YALL I WAS ON HIS SIDE [three skull emojis].”

The report also detailed how Brooks-Fleming then changed “a number of details” in her chronology in a written statement provided after her initial interview. According to the revised chronology, Brooks-Fleming “received most of the allegations after she publicly praised [Anderson] and asked him to speak at an event to benefit homeless youth.” The ILG report noted that the discrepancies in the timeline were not minor and indicated a “serious disassociation between [Brooks-Fleming’s] actions and her allegations.”

In addition to the ILG report, Anderson submitted an affidavit attesting (1) “at no point in my entire life have I ever sexually assaulted anyone or engaged in conduct that could reasonably be interpreted as sexual assault”; (2) “there is no truth whatsoever to [Brooks-Fleming’s] claims regarding me sexually assaulting or sexually abusing students”; and (3) “I received messages, speaking requests and touching tributes from [Brooks-Fleming] during the time that she alleges she was receiving complaints of sexual abuse against me.”

Brooks-Fleming submitted no affidavits or other evidence supporting her position. She directs us to a social media post in the record that might tend to corroborate that one victim reached out to her for assistance. She also argues that she did not allege that Anderson sexually assaulted all sixty-two victims but that some of the victims were subjected only to unwanted touching. She implies that the ILG report corroborates her allegations because it found that Anderson “made unwelcome sexual comments and advances, and/or engaged in unwelcome sexual contact.” But this finding was in reference to Anderson’s behavior toward members of the Never-Again Colorado Board of Directors, not toward DPS students.

In any event, we cannot weigh the evidence or determine credibility at this stage. And on review of the parties’ submissions, we cannot conclude, as a matter of law, that a reasonable juror presented with such evidence would not be able to find by clear and convincing evidence that (1) Brooks-Fleming’s statement was false and (2) she knew the statement was false or in fact entertained serious doubts as to its truth when she made it. We therefore conclude that Anderson proffered sufficient evidence of falsity and actual malice to survive Brooks-Fleming’s anti-SLAPP motion as to her follow-up statement….

As to Senthilnathan,

Anderson alleged that (1) he never committed sexual assault; and (2) he, through counsel, requested that Senthilnathan remove the defamatory posts, but she declined to do so. See Golden Bear Distrib. Sys. of Tex., Inc. v. Chase Revel, Inc. (5th Cir. 1983) (evidence of refusal by publisher to retract a statement after it has been shown to be both false and defamatory may be relevant to the issue of actual malice in certain circumstances), abrogation on other grounds recognized in Hiller v. Mfrs. Prod. Rsch. Grp. of N. Am., Inc. (5th Cir. 1995); Abdelsayed v. Narumanchi (Conn. App. 1995) (a refusal to retract an accusation of plagiarism after an investigation concluded plagiarism was not committed might be relevant to showing recklessness at the time of publication).

We also note that Senthilnathan’s statement reflects hostility toward Anderson for reasons seemingly unrelated to the assault allegations. She describes him as toxic, egoistic, arrogant, manipulative, obsessive, and narcissistic. Her statement expresses anger or frustration that, in her view, Anderson “put down many young people for his rise” and “chose to endorse a white man over DPS candidate Jorge Hernandez Arjona because he didn’t want his ‘Youngest Black Elected Official’ position being taken away from him.” See L.S.S. v. S.A.P. (Colo. App. 2022) (“[E]vidence of the defendant’s ‘anger and hostility toward the plaintiff’ may serve as circumstantial evidence of actual malice ‘to the extent that it reflects on the subjective attitude of the publisher.'”).

While Senthilnathan’s video statement vaguely references victims that “reached out to her,” she provided no affidavits, even from herself, or any other evidence supporting her position. Thus, unlike BLM and Brown, there isn’t any evidence in the record suggesting that she actually received reports of sexual assault or that the assaults in fact took place. Although the burden rests with Anderson to show a reasonable likelihood of success, we still must assess “whether the allegations and defenses are such that it is reasonably likely that a jury would find for the plaintiff.” And we evaluate the evidence put forward by a defendant to determine if it defeats the plaintiff’s claim as a matter of law….

The court concluded, though, that BLM and Brown’s statements weren’t defamatory, because they accurately stated only that allegations were made about Anderson, not that BLM and Brown were endorsing those allegations. And the court also concluded that Brooks-Fleming’s statement made to the legislature was absolutely immune from liability, and focused only on Brooks-Fleming follow-up statements made outside her testimony.

There’s a lot more in the opinion (which is quite long, and which I only briefly excerpt here). Issa Israel represents Anderson.

The post #TheyLied Case Filed by Elected Official Over Allegations of Sexual Assault Can Go Forward appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/aiuQWZ4
via IFTTT

Help Fight Disinformation About Disinformation: Donate to Reason


An illustration of the Statue of Liberty | Lex Villena

It’s not every day you have the opportunity to help fund one of the 10 “riskiest” online news outlets.*

Earlier this year, Reason was absurdly tagged by the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), a British organization that aims to steer advertisers away from disreputable websites, as a dangerous disseminator of disinformation. To add insult to injury, the index was published by a group that receives funding from the U.S. State Department through the National Endowment for Democracy. In other words, your tax dollars helped pay for it.

The GDI slapped Reason with its “high-risk” label without pointing to a single error or inaccuracy in our reporting, much less intentional disinformation, while inaccurately characterizing our byline and corrections policies. Senior Editor Robby Soave scored a mini scoop a few days later when he discovered that best-selling author Anne Applebaum, listed as a member of the group’s board, actually had no affiliation with it, suggesting that they might want to get their own house in order. 

(Elon Musk called the absurd labeling and mistreatment of Reason “very concerning” in a February tweet, and no matter what else you think about the letter-X-obsessed billionaire, he’s absolutely right about that.)

Since Reason enjoys a perfect rating from a competing, and more widely used, rating siteNewsGuard—the whole thing might simply be good for a laugh if the GDI wasn’t a shocking misuse of government funds and an attempted end run around the First Amendment. Reason is one of the smartest, well-edited libertarian-oriented publications and has been for decades,” explained HotAir’s Ed Morrissey. “I sometimes disagree with their arguments and positions, but I have never read anything that counts as ‘disinformation’ or dishonesty. If your risk list gives high marks to BuzzFeed for credibility and freaks out at Reason, you’ve gone way off the rails.” 

Reason has a proud tradition of busting hoaxes, questioning orthodoxy, and asking uncomfortable questions about dominant narratives. Our investigative cover story on the Facebook Files further exposed the government’s role in ineptly policing what it declared “disinformation.” 

As journalist Matt Taibbi said: “Even before the news media business went fully off the rails in recent years, Reason always stood out as a publication unafraid to take unconventional stances or report on controversial issues.” 

After a much-covered blast at a Gaza hospital, for example, NBC’s Ben Collins uncritically accepted and helped circulate inaccurate claims made by Palestinian authorities. The 2023 Walter Cronkite Award winner and superstar on the disinformation beat morally condemned those who delayed in reporting casualty numbers that were later found to be wildly exaggerated. Reason pushed back, with Soave pointing out why Collins (and others) were wrong.

In a tweet endorsing Reason‘s coverage, FiveThirtyEight‘s Nate Silver pointed out that Collins has an “unfortunate little habit of constantly spreading disinformation that confirms his political priors.” Reporter Josh Barro agreed: “‘Disinformation reporter’ is a ridiculous construct to begin with—all reporters are supposed to be in the business of reporting facts, but they hold themselves out as special arbiters over the others, and always for the same ideological agenda.” 

Guided by our mission, Reason produces careful, thoughtful, and engaging journalism. We strive to be fair and honest. We correct our mistakes. And we are often the only ones asking questions that mainstream outlets are all too happy to ignore. Every day, Reason journalists reenter the fray to check panics with information and analysis, take the powerful to task for their abuses and failures, and make the case for the ideas of liberty. 

If that’s dangerous, then we’re dangerous. Donate to support Reason, a danger to disinformation panicmongers (and purveyors) everywhere. 

*(Disinformation alert: Technically you do have the opportunity to support Reason every day. But if you do it today, your money will be doubled thanks to a generous donor. So now’s the moment to give!)

The post Help Fight Disinformation About Disinformation: Donate to <em>Reason</em> appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/VF6YQOA
via IFTTT

Blain: Gold, Always Believe In Gold!

Blain: Gold, Always Believe In Gold!

Authored by Bill Blain via MorningPorridge.com,

‘In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value.’

Gold has hit new record dollar levels – reflecting not just current uncertainty, but also the de-dollarisation narrative and it’s attractions as an inflation and market hedge, and long-term value. It’s worth keeping an eye on.

This morning there is so much to write about.

  • I could opine on the blind optimism of both bond and equity investors about the Fed et al swiftly easing rates (down 1.25 percentage points via 5 cuts next year in the US, apparently), to the naysayers in the Central Banks who say they remain on vigilant watch, ready to hike further at any sign of re-kindled inflation.

  • This week’s employment data will give important clues on the heat of the US economy. Many analysts reckon it will be strong!

  • There is a simply superb graphic by James Eagle “Megatechs go kaboom” I urge everyone to take a look at – the big 7 Megatechs: Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Nvidia and Tesla are collectively up 83% this year. In contrast, the remaining “S&P 493” has posted a 4.1% gain. Worth thinking about….

  • What does the near-but-avoided-for-now collapse of Evergrande mean for China investments?

  • I could comment on the threats emerging from increased stalemate around the globe. Ukraine’s multiple travails: the stalled summer offensive, weapons and money from the west under threat, manpower shortages and growing internal dissent towards Zelensky spell trouble. Israel is trapping itself in a Gaza quagmire with the strategic direction of the war secondary to Netanyahu’s blundering political survival imperative. Could these conflicts further destabilise markets?

  • Or, maybe I should be looking at 2024 elections and the risks of political surprises roiling markets in the run up to UK and US elections?

Instead…. Let’s talk about Gold…  This morning’s quote is classic Alan Greenspan, Fed Chair from 1987-2006.

The yellow metal has hit a new record dollar high of $2111. Traditionally it’s the ultimate safe-haven investment, and thrives in time of uncertainty. However, it’s also on a tear because of expectations of US rate cuts, the weaker dollar making it cheaper for non-dollar buyers. The FT points out rising gold reserves at non-aligned and BRICS nations have been rising – as these nations have sold US treasuries, they’ve bought gold instead. (Much of what follows is based on an article I wrote for Property Chronicle earlier this year. Great magazine – try it out!)

Gold: Why Gold? Its intrinsically useless – but, oh, so beautiful. Everyone wants some – and not without reason. Whatever we think about history and value, or the returns on other “safe-haven” assets, there remain very good reasons to include Gold as part of a diversified asset portfolio.

Let’s get the “desirability” and emotional aspects out the way. I am told a significant influence on the price of gold is the weather – a good monsoon in India means farmers buy more bangles for their daughters weddings from the gold souks. It is beautiful. It is lustrous. It is unblemished. It is Gold. Always believe in… Gold! There will always be demand for gold for personal adornment – which is pretty much irrelevant when it comes to its proposition as an investment asset.

As an investment in its own right gold performs well; over the last 50 years Gold prices have risen over 3000%, compared to a 3500% gain in the S&P500. However, in periods of financial instability gold outperforms stocks – notably over the past 20-years even though the prices of financial assets were artificially juiced by the effects of zero interest rates! In terms of risk, companies come and go, but Gold is forever. If the world remains unstable – and no reason to think it won’t – then gold should be front and centre on your radar – no matter how archaic you consider it.

Goldbugs always start by telling you what a superb store of value the yellow metal is in times of financial uncertainty. Certainly, the world has seldom felt financially less certain than it does today;

  • Burgeoning national debt quantums have called into question the long-term sustainability of sovereign debt loads. If major nations really are going to default on their debt – then gold’s role as a safe-haven can only increase. (Personally, I think the risks of debt default are over-exaggerated, but there are good reasons to be concerned.)

  • Geopolitical crises have destabilised supply chains, and threaten further recessionary shocks and energy inflation spikes. Such threats feel to be multiplying. Gold prices hedge against inflation while cash is just cash and offers zero upside.

  • Electorates across the democratic West appear to have lost trust in politics in the face of populism and rising authoritarianism. Rising political risks to bond markets, currencies, commodities and growth, raise the need for decorrelated safe-haven investments. Gold as an asset looks less correlated than any alternatives.

  • Markets are struggling to maintain still sky-high valuations established during the zero-interest QE interregnum in today “normalised” interest rate environment. In a falling market, gold may struggle, but it won’t default, be invaded or be wiped away be a natural disaster. It will remain … gold. Indestructible!

Goldphobes claim gold is no longer what gold once was. 80 years ago, Allied Airmen around the globe had Gold Sovereigns stitched into the linings of their flight suits to facilitate escape if shot-down – everyone, everywhere, knew hard gold was the ultimate store of wealth and value and exchangeable everywhere and anywhere. In the Middle ages Viking wealth was defined by the gold armbands warriors wore – they would hew off lumps to pay for goods, again secure in the knowledge of its value. Gold worked because it was easily accepted as a medium of exchange.

That is no longer true.

Escaping airmen in dodgy countries will be asked by dodgy smugglers to pay in equally dodgy crypto. In a world where retail outlets will only accept electronic cash via card or mobile device, you are unlikely to find a grog shop willing to carefully weigh your shavings of gold to calculate the weight of gold equivalent to a pint based on the current price. (To be fair, there are even fewer pubs willing to accept a bearer Treasury bond.) In terms of a medium of exchange, gold has become somewhat hypothetical – which has been happening for decades since nations came off the Gold Standard.

As a result, gold in the form of easily traded gold linked investments and Exchange Traded Funds (EFTs) linked to the Gold price is now the simplest way to hold gold exposure. That is not risk free. You will have counterparty risk. Gold purists (ahem) say this is dangerous – having direct physical control of specie is the only truly safe way to own gold. I take the pragmatic view that if my Blackrock Gold ETF defaults, events will mean that redeeming my gold vouchers will be among the last of my immediate worries.

(And if I held physical gold – would it have been destroyed by the atomic fire, or would it have slowed me down escaping from the rampaging victims of a zombie plague? (These are just two of the low probability real gold scenarios I’ve stress tested. Honest…))

As for sovereign bonds such as US Treasuries or UK Gilts, I have a very simple approach to their value as safe haven assets. What is the likelihood is they will repay in full? High. And what is the risk of inflation? High. Gold is a good inflation hedge, but the downside of any Sovereign Financial Nation is that they own the keys to the money printing presses. That means all a government has to do to repay debt is press print to repay outstanding debt. That leaves the nation exposed to consequences including rising inflation by increasing the money supply, and a collapse in its currency (from money printing and inflation), and a negative shift in its terms of trade, further destabilising the economy.

Bonds are never completely free of risk. There is a simple way to consider such risks – the Virtuous Sovereign Trinity: that a nation with a stable currency, a sustainable bond market, and political competency will tend to do well and be able to keep the trinity in balance. If one part fails – as we saw dramatically demonstrated during the brief but too long Liz Truss premiership when her brash political naivety spiked the Gilts market – then the result is chaos.

IF there is one particular risk to Sovereign Bond markets to be aware of, it’s the US 2024 Elections. This morning Donald Trump is leading the polls in five of the key swing states. If he wins the consensus is for a serious re-appraisal of the US Treasury market and the US dollar by global investors. Although there is no other as liquid safe-haven asset and global trade is de facto dollarised – the risks of the US Virtuous Sovereign Trinity being upended by vengeful Trump should not be underestimated. It’s would undoubtably boost the price of gold if US treasury investors decide gold looks a better option!

Finally, let’s consider the pretender to the safe-haven market; Cryptocurrencies, and Bitcoin in particular, claim to be digital gold. Bollchocks. They are not. They are constructs of pointlessness. They claim to be a store of value – they are not, witness the enormous volatility in prices. They claim to be freely exchangeable – they are not, they are subject to ongoing concerns on legality, traceability and the safety of trade  execution. They claim to a means of exchange – or as a very funny TV ad put it’s as a chap tries to buy some apples from a scruffy roadside stall: “which cryptocurrency would you like settle this transaction in?” 

Many years ago I offered £100 to any reader of my daily Morning Porridge market commentary who could explain to me one thing cryptocurrency can do (legally) better that isn’t already done? I am still waiting…

Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/04/2023 – 08:35

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/wiUmbAp Tyler Durden