Month: August 2024

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

We previously discussed the defamation lawsuit against CNN and the curious effort to use Taliban law to dismiss the lawsuit by Navy veteran Zachary Young. The litigation has not been going well for the network and it just lost another key motion to block an effort to depose Jake Tapper. Worse yet, the court appears to have questioned the veracity of the host in a sworn deposition on his lack of knowledge over the financial subject matter of the deposition.

CNN recently lost a recent major ruling when the court found that there was evidence of malice by CNN to support the higher standard needed for defamation. The evidence in the case is remarkably bad for the network after discovery of internal memoranda and emails.

The report at the heart of the case aired on a Nov. 11, 2021, segment on CNN’s “The Lead with Jake Tapper” and was shared on social media and (a different version) on CNN’s website. In the segment, Tapper tells his audience ominously how CNN correspondent Alex Marquardt discovered “Afghans trying to get out of the country face a black market full of promises, demands of exorbitant fees, and no guarantee of safety or success.”

Marquardt piled on in the segment, claiming that “desperate Afghans are being exploited” and need to pay “exorbitant, often impossible amounts” to flee the country. He then named Young and his company as the example of that startling claim.

The damages in the case could be massive but Young had to satisfy the higher New York Times v. Sullivan standard of “actual malice” with a showing of knowing falsehood or a reckless disregard of the truth. Judge Roberts found that “Young sufficiently proffered evidence of actual malice, express malice, and a level of conduct outrageous enough to open the door for him to seek punitive damages.”

The evidence included messages from Marquardt that he wanted to “nail this Zachary Young mfucker” and thought the story would be Young’s “funeral.” After promising to “nail” Young, CNN editor Matthew Philips responded: “gonna hold you to that cowboy!” Likewise, CNN senior editor Fuzz Hogan described Young as “a shit.”

As is often done by media, CNN allegedly gave Young only two hours to respond before the story ran. It is a typical ploy of the press to claim that they waited for a response while giving the target the smallest possible window.

In this case, Young was able to respond in the short time and Marquardt messaged a colleague, “fucking Young just texted.”

The case now appears to have moved into a second discovery period over CNN’s finances. The plaintiff’s counsel wants to depose Tapper. I can certainly understand Tapper’s counsel in trying to block the deposition on finances. I am not sure how much Tapper would know about the finances, but the court clearly did not take well to his declaration.

NewsBusters previously reported, CNN had filed a motion for a protective order in which CNN counsel Allison Lovelady insisted that the Plaintiff only wanted a deposition so they could use it to “harass CNN and Mr. Tapper.”

However, the court shot down the effort and reportedly stated “I kind of have a hard time believing what Mr. Tapper put in that declaration.”  Since that is a sworn declaration made under penalty of perjury, it was a stinging rebuke.

Unlike the earlier depositions, this stage is confined to finances and possible penalties. The defense team clearly believes the deposition is an effort to re-open fact deposition testimony that should be now foreclosed.

There is always a risk to any witness from the added exposure to renewed questioning. However, it is hard to get a protective order on conclusory assurances of no relevant knowledge. The court clearly believes that Tapper could have some relevant information since he holds one of the most lucrative contracts at CNN and is familiar with the corporate finances in relation to his show.

Tapper’s counsel also attempted other “Hail Mary” motions seeking to delay any deposition until rulings on other cases dealing with punitive damages. CNN lost a critical motion in seeking to bar punitive damages. That is, of course, the big ticket item for the network in this type of case. To limit Young to compensatory damages would make any damages manageable for the company, even if a verdict would damage its reputation.

In one tense exchange, the counsel argued over a motion to force Young to appear personally for settlement discussions. His counsel explained that it was difficult for him because of an injury he sustained while in the Navy, which made it difficult to sit for long periods. CNN’s lead counsel Deanna K. Shullman shot back “So do I, your Honor!” “I have to leave the State of Florida to get to Bay County. CNN has to travel from the state of Georgia.”

CNN prevailed on that and one other motion on an extension of time. CNN is trying to delay the January trial date but Young’s counsel has indicated that it wants to stick with that date and has little interest in settlement.

Tapper, however, will now have to appear on the financial questions in the ongoing litigation.

Political action committees, or PACs, rake in a lot of money from companies and individuals. In just the first 12 months of the 2024 election cycle, PACs have raised $3.7 billion.

Companies and individuals seeking to support particular political parties or candidates often send their money to PACs, which pool campaign contributions to support or oppose political candidates, parties, or legislative agendas.

In this infographic, Visual Capitalist’s Kayla Zhu shows the top 10 publicly-traded companies by U.S. campaign contributions to company-associated political action committees (PACs) in 2024. The data was collected by Quiver Quantitative and is current as of August 8, 2024.

Republicans Receive More Donations Than Democrats

While the split between donations to Democrat versus Republican PACs was mostly even among the top 10, Republicans received a larger share from almost every set of company PACs.

The only company which had a larger share of Democrat donations was diversified technology and manufacturing company, Honeywell, which also had the highest total of donations to PACs at $3.5 million.

Shipping company UPS had 67% of its contributions to Republican PACs associated with the company, the highest percentage of donations to a particular party.

On the other end, besides Honeywell, Verizon had the next-highest share of donations to Democrat company-associated PACs at 48%.

Defense Companies Among Top Donors

Defense companies were well-represented among the top 10 biggest contributors, including Boeing, Northrop Grumman, L3Harris Technologies, and Lockheed Martin. These companies provide goods or services to military agencies, with the U.S. Department of Defense being a major client.

Another prominent industry among the top campaign contributors are telecommunications and media companies, including Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon Communications.

Both the defense and telecommunications industries are heavily regulated by the U.S. federal government, and often rely on government contracts.

Authored by Jon Sun and Michael Zhuang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

In its latest attempt to challenge the United States’ space dominance and SpaceX’s Starlink, China launched a low-orbit satellite constellation capable of surveilling every corner of the earth.

According to Chinese state media, the first batch of 18 satellites in the constellation dubbed “Qianfan” or “thousand sails” was launched into orbit by state-controlled Shanghai Yuxin Satellite Technology Company on Aug. 6. The entire project is a future network of 14,000 satellites, offering multiple services, including direct-to-device connectivity. Half of those spacecraft will be launched by the end of next year and another half by the end of 2027.

Starlink, owned by the U.S. company SpaceX, has provided Ukraine with internet and communication services, a critical element to sustain the nation in its war with Russia. As of Aug. 2, the network had about 7,000 satellites in orbit, making it the largest low-orbit constellation in the world.

Starlink’s capability had attracted the attention of the U.S. Department of Defense, which contracted SpaceX in 2021 to create a network of satellites known as Starshield to serve America’s defense and intelligence agencies.

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) noticed as well.

In April, the regime’s PLA Daily newspaper, the official newspaper for the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army, accused the United States of “militarizing space.”

Chinese military researchers analyzed various capabilities of Starlink in 2022. They wrote that Starlink poses “potential dangers and challenges” to the CCP. The researchers called on the regime to develop new countermeasures that would include abilities “to disable some Starlink satellites and to disrupt the constellation’s operational system.”

Last year, scientists at the University of Aerospace Engineering, a PLA research university, proposed methods to “suppress” Starlink and Starshield’s communications, including electromagnetic interference and employing high-power microwaves or lasers to damage or destroy specific Starlink satellites.

In addition, Chinese defense journals have analyzed Ukrainian operations and the potential use of American technologies, including Starlink, in a future war against Taiwan, according to a Reuters report in 2023.

Gen. Stephen N. Whiting, head of U.S. Space Command, warned in April that China’s advances in space were “breathtakingly fast.”

CCP’s Space Ambitions and Challenges

The Qianfan Constellation project was not the CCP’s first attempt.

The launch of Starlink satellites in 2019 marked the introduction of a satellite internet system with global coverage that posed a potential threat to China’s internet firewall. Starlink may offer services to China that can bypass the CCP’s current internet censorship. Elon Musk said in 2022 that the Chinese regime requested him not to sell Starlink in China.

The following year, the CCP submitted the “GW”—acronym for Guo Wang or national network—internet constellation plan to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), aiming to launch around 13,000 satellites into low orbit. However, the GW plan was slow and failed to become the first to launch satellites for the CCP.

Through the Qianfan Constellation project, the CCP seizes Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) and frequency resources—currently overseen by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) on a “first come, first served” basis—to build its network system. Due to its closer distance to Earth, the LEO is advantageous in imaging, communications, and real-time information sharing on the battlefield.

Si-Fu Ou, a senior fellow and director of the Division of Chinese Politics, Military, and Warfighting Concepts at Taiwan’s Institute for National Defense and Security Research, told The Epoch Times that China’s satellite constellation development is for military purposes.

He said that the CCP’s anti-satellite capabilities are already a reality and will continue to advance. However, given the United States’ current technological and military strength, China’s satellite constellation is unlikely to catch up with the United States in the short term.

Tsungnan Lin, a professor of electrical engineering at National Taiwan University, told The Epoch Times that China’s investments in Qianfan showcase the regime’s ambitions to develop a “Chinese Starlink” despite the country’s current economic downturn. The Chinese economy has been marred by deflation threats, reduced exports, and heavily indebted property markets and local governments.

“This effort aims to showcase its ‘self-sufficiency’ capabilities and to prepare for potential conflicts with the United States,” Lin said.

Xin Ning contributed to the report. 

The days of Carl Icahn taking over airlines and waging proxy battles in expensive suits, in person, are over. These are the days of crypto billionaires and, in the case of JetBlue, activist “apes” who made their money on GameStop.

Vladimir Galkin, born in Moscow, moved to the U.S. at 15 with his mother and sister. He began his career selling computers to Russians and eventually launched HUBX, an online global marketplace for wholesale electronics, in 2017, according to Bloomberg.

Although he remains low-key in Miami where he lives, HUBX, which he co-founded and still controls, generates around $400 million in annual revenue, according to co-founder Derek Wall.

Galkin mentioned that he and his wife traded GameStop shares, inspired by activist investor Ryan Cohen, who revealed a significant stake during the meme stock surge that saw the retailer’s shares skyrocket by 1,600%.

Now, he owns $132 million in JetBlue stock.

Bloomberg wrote that Galkin was buying shares at about $5 each in January. Despite the airline’s challenges, including leadership changes and legal setbacks, Galkin aims to build a 9.9% stake, driven by his belief in its long-term potential. While he’s not pushing for major changes, he’s met with top executives and supports new CEO Joanna Geraghty’s efforts to streamline operations. Galkin also advocates for greater stock ownership by JetBlue’s board members to align their interests with shareholders.

“My investments in public companies are a side hobby. I don’t day trade,” he told Bloomberg. “I’ve had good fortune having followed activist investors
before. They work out great.” 

The article says Galkin isn’t seeking a director role or pushing for major changes, though he has met with two top airline executives. His focus is on long-term capital growth.

While he hasn’t spoken with JetBlue’s new CEO, Joanna Geraghty, her promotion influenced his decision to invest. He has initiated contact with the airline and met with JetBlue’s President Marty St. George and CFO Ursula Hurley.

JetBlue declined to comment on these meetings.

Savanthi Syth, a Raymond James analyst, concluded: “I’m guessing that they are approaching this as they would any other large shareholder — individual or institutional — where you listen to what they have to say and take that into consideration.”

Authored by James Rickards via DailyReckoning.com,

The Aug. 5 mini-crash was a potent reminder to investors that stock markets aren’t a one-way street.

It wasn’t the end of the world. Market indexes down 3.0% in a day is a big deal, but it bears no comparison to October 1929 when the stock market fell 21% over two days or October 1987 when the stock market fell 21% in one day.

What caused the Aug. 5 mini-crash? There are several suspects. The employment report issued on Friday, Aug. 2 showed a decline in job creation and an uptick in the unemployment rate.

Neither move was extreme but it got the markets’ attention. In fact, the Aug. 5 decline actually started on Aug. 2, giving the two-day decline a greater impact.

It’s also the case that late July and early August was when many companies, especially Big Tech, reported their earnings for the quarter ending June 30, and offered their forward guidance.

Hey, AI: Show Me

Many of these reports showed huge expenditures for artificial intelligence (AI) with little or no gains in revenue. That was enough to cause market analysts and investors to reprice the entire sector.

This “show me” attitude toward AI drove many huge stocks such as Nvidia and Samsung lower even before the two-day rout on Aug. 2 and 5.

Finally, there’s ample evidence that the economy is now in a recession. There’s something much bigger than the markets behind all of this. It’s the economy. I’ve been warning about a recession for a long time — now it’s here.

Last Friday’s unemployment report was a sign. Still, unemployment is a lagging indicator. It means the recession probably began in June or even May. We won’t know for a few more months when the National Bureau of Economic Research makes its unofficial “official” call.

This recession could be severe based on excess inventories (that need to be dumped) and a host of other technical indicators. A protracted recession is consistent with my forecast for a long, slow grind down in stocks as discussed below.

What Comes Next

Just to be clear, Aug. 5 was not the “big one.” A crash of 25% or more in a compressed period of a few weeks (similar to what we saw in March–April 2020) is always possible, but this correction has a dynamic that suggests it’ll feel for a bottom and then settle down.

The “buy the dip” crowd are still around and they’ll be dipping their toes in the water on a continual basis. That doesn’t mean a sudden rally, but it could mean the market will bounce around the new bottom with those needing cash (or just cautious) getting out and the bottom-feeders getting in.

The timing of crashes is hard to predict, even when you know they’re coming. But the aftermath of a crash is even harder to predict. The real impact of the Aug. 5 mini-crash was the increase in volatility.

In place of steady gains, investors should now expect big up and down days within a larger downward trend.

Worse Than a Crash

We may actually be in for something worse than a crash. We may be in for a long, slow grind to a new bottom that could be down 70% or more from the top (to, say, Dow 12,000).

Investors are familiar with the Dow crash of 21% in 1929 but fewer know that the bottom did not come until June 1932, down over 80% from the 1929 high.

Something similar happened in the 1970s where the Dow was 1,000 in 1969 and 1,000 in 1982. It went nowhere in 13 years (with volatility along the way).

Adjusted for inflation, the 1982 index was worth less than half the 1969 index so in real terms you lost over 50% of your wealth during those 13 years before a new bull market began.

The problem with a 25-year recovery (1929–1954) or a 13-year recovery (1969–1982) is that many people don’t have the time to recover. Be prepared for that sort of outcome.

A Cut Is Coming

Here’s what I recently wrote about the prospect of a Federal Reserve rate cut in September: “The best way out for the Fed is to keep their heads down and do nothing. That’s what I expect the Fed to do absent an extreme market meltdown or a sharp spike in unemployment.”

Well, we’ve just had the meltdown and spike in quick succession so it’s clear the Fed will cut rates in September.

But that’s not a free lunch. My original formulation that the Fed wouldn’t cut was based on the fact that inflation was still too high. That’s still true. So the Fed will be throwing in the towel on inflation in order to calm stock markets.

The Fed may end up with the worst of both worlds — continuing inflation and recession known as “stagflation.”

And don’t hold your breath waiting for the “Fed put.” The Fed put is real, but it only comes out when stock markets are crashing, say, 20% or more in a few weeks or when there’s a bank panic or both.

We’re not there yet. It could happen, but the situation right now is not bad enough for the Fed to intervene apart from a 0.25% cut in September. Don’t look for an intermeeting cut or a 0.50% cut.

As I’ve said before, the Fed doesn’t want you to panic, but they don’t want to appear panicky themselves.

The Politics of a September Rate Cut

A September rate cut puts Powell on a direct collision course with Donald Trump. That’s because the rate cut will come just six weeks ahead of Election Day on Nov. 5.

It’ll probably give the stock market a boost (in many ways the mere expectation of a rate cut has already boosted stocks following the Aug. 5 mini crash).

In turn, this will boost the Democrats’ chances of winning the presidential election. Trump has publicly said that Powell shouldn’t cut rates so close to the election, and to do so should be considered a kind of election interference by the supposedly apolitical Fed.

Powell may be able to justify a rate cut using an economic slowdown and stock market volatility as cover. But if Trump wins the election, there may be a high price for Powell and the Fed to pay for this political rate cut.

In the first place, all seats on the Fed Board of Governors are selected by the president. Trump could nominate allies like Judy Shelton, Larry Kudlow and Monica Crowley to fill those seats.

It’s not clear Trump could fire Jay Powell (it’s possible but it has never been done before so the matter could be litigated) but Powell’s term as chair is up on May 15, 2026, so Trump could replace him relatively early in his second term.

Would Trump Neuter the Fed?

Trump could also seek legislation (assuming Republicans control both Houses of Congress) that could reduce Fed powers and their autonomy.

This could include repealing the “dual mandate” that requires the Fed to target unemployment and inflation at the same time (impossible to do but the Fed goes through the motions).

This would return the Fed to its original purpose of sound money and lender of last resort. So there’s a lot at stake if Powell goes ahead with his political rate cut.

If Trump wins and Republicans take both houses of Congress, we could be dealing with a neutered Fed.

That might be negative if the Fed were truly apolitical — the Fed should be independent of politics.

But since the Fed isn’t apolitical, a neutered Fed would be good for the economy and the American people overall.

By Bas van Geffen, senior macro strategist at Rabobank

Just two weeks have passed since the sharp deterioration in the US employment report sparked a sharp sell-off, but concerns seem to have faded: we’re back on track for Goldilocks. And, Bloomberg reports, the “carry trade that blew up markets” is finding new appeal. Have we collectively forgotten what happened only two weeks ago?

[ZH… spoiler alert yes, as we noted 3 days ago]

Someone tell the USDJPY the carry trade is 100% back on

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 13, 2024

In any case, the emergency and outsized rate cuts that were being priced in have made way for a cutting cycle that looks a lot more plausible. Yesterday’s US data helped to further erase some of the market-implied odds of big rate cuts.

Both initial and continuing jobless claims dropped again, easing concerns that the labor market is deteriorating as rapidly as the latest non-farm payrolls suggested. Of course, there are several potential caveats to these statistics. Migration has plagued labour market data for some time now, leading to discrepancies between indicators of labor market tightness. That may be no different with the jobless claims: immigrants may not qualify for unemployment insurance, and so, if they are laid off, this may not be captured in the jobless claims.

Despite these caveats, markets are taking the glass half full view on the claims data. The market-implied probability of a 50bp Fed cut in September -rather than a regular 25bp reduction- dropped from 40% to around 30%. But rate repricing was seen along the curve, with the 2 year Treasury yield up 14bp on the day and the 10 year yield 8bp higher.

That positive approach may be further supported by stronger-than-expected July retail sales. Last month, US consumers spent more than anticipated. Retail sales rose 1% on the month. So the consumer may be a bit more resilient than expected, even if the underlying trend indicates some weakening. Particularly, households held back on big discretionary spending and mostly bought essentials. The largest chunk of the increase in retail sales came from cars. Excluding that category, groceries made up for the biggest part of the increase in sales. Without cars, gas, and groceries, retail sales slowed to 0.3% m/m, after a 0.9% increase in the prior month.

So the bigger picture of a slowing, but not crashing, US economy appears to be re-established. Interestingly, money market participants do continue to price a steeper cutting cycle in the US (-95bp through December) than in Europe (-64bp). Even so, the market-implied probability of a rate cut at each of the three remaining ECB meetings remains elevated in our view.

Although the ECB had adopted “a slightly more cautious outlook for productivity growth” in its June projections, productivity per employee still falls short of their assumptions. Data published by the ECB yesterday show that labour productivity declined by 0.4% y/y in Q2; falling short of the -0.3% embedded in the staff projections.

Following the July policy meeting ECB President Lagarde stated that “We believe [domestic prices] are largely determined by what I call the WPP, which for me is the wage, the profit and the productivity.” She continued that the central bank expects productivity to improve gradually, as a pick-up in consumption forces hoarded employees to respond to the increased demand for goods and services. That should lead to lower costs per unit of output.

The sluggish recovery so far should raise some concerns that labor productivity may not rise as quickly or as high as the ECB expects it to. The central bank projects productivity gains of about 1% in both 2025 and 2026. That is substantially above the 0.5% average annual productivity increase since 2000, even if hoarded and currently sidelined employees are brought in to actually do more work. Should productivity fall short of these estimates, inflation could remain sticky for longer than the ECB expects.

The miss in Q2 may not be significant enough to force an upward revision in the inflation forecasts at this juncture (productivity growth was marginally higher than the ECB projected in Q1). But if it does lead to a somewhat higher inflation projection, that could paint an awkward backdrop to a September rate cut: it would be the second time that the ECB lowers its policy rates while its inflation forecast is revised up. The ECB is not a prisoner to these forecasts, but it would raise questions about its data dependence – unless the ECB has suddenly turned much more pessimistic on the growth outlook.

Our bottom line: whether it materially alters the September forecasts or not, these productivity figures warrant caution about the inflation outlook and an additional rate cut in October still seems like a pretty big gamble.

A top aide to Russian President Vladimir Putin has accused the United States of lying when it says it had no foreknowledge of the Ukrainian offensive into Kursk, which has now surpassed ten days and forced over 120,000 civilians to evacuate.

“The US leadership’s claims of non-involvement in Kiev’s actions in Kursk Region do not correspond to reality… Without their participation and direct support, Kiev would not have ventured into Russian territory,” advisor and former Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev told Izvestia in a fresh interview. He went so far as to accuse NATO intelligence agencies in assisting directly.

Following similar White House statements claiming the US was in the dark about the daring cross-border operation, a Pentagon official on Wednesday asserted, “We didn’t get any advanced notification.”

“What the Ukrainians were able to do was operational security, and that is something that I think we should be giving credit for. It definitely surprised the Russians,” the defense official said.

But Patrushev, who now oversees Russia’s global maritime strategy, said that it was the West which “put the criminal junta at the head of Ukraine,” and it remains that “NATO countries have supplied Kiev with weapons, military instructors, and continuous intelligence while controlling the actions of neo-Nazis.”

He continued with his accusations, according to RT’s translation:

“This criminal action stems from anticipation of the imminent collapse of the neo-Nazi Kiev regime,… the residents of Ukraine are suffering for the sake of American interests, as the US has turned the country into a military anti-Russian project.”

Putin said last week in the wake of the attack, and as it became clear that Ukraine forces actually held some territory in Kursk, that the possibility for peace talks with Kiev are now completely off.

 Patrushev explained further, “Washington’s efforts have created all the prerequisites for Ukraine to lose its sovereignty and part of its territories, including those coveted by some American allies.”

A Thursday New York Times report declared that this operation has embarrassed Putin and exposed weaknesses. And US officials further say that the fight is about to get a lot dirtier and more risky, in expectation of future sabotage and cross-border campaigns. 

“American officials say Ukraine will have to build on the operation, with other daring operations that can push back against Russia’s sense that its victory is inevitable,” wrote the NY Times. “Whether that will include more cross-border incursions, secret sabotage missions or other yet-to-be-planned operations remains to be seen.”

While you’re memeing about towns and villages in Kursk being evacuated, try to remember that this is what that often means on the ground: pic.twitter.com/qBk0cfSea4

— Kevin Rothrock (@KevinRothrock) August 16, 2024

These future operations might involve use of US-supplied equipment, just like with the current Kurks mission: “The lack of warning to Kyiv’s foremost Western ally took on even greater meaning when it became clear that Ukraine was using American-supplied vehicles, arms and munitions to help carry out the bold ground operation into Russia,” the report continues.

UMich sentiment survey shows that preliminary August data shows a small rebound in consumer confidence, driven entirely by hope, as Current Conditions tumbled to its lowest since Dec 2022…

Source: Bloomberg

Inflation expectations were flat in the flash August data.

Source: Bloomberg

Buying conditions continue to plunge overall with homes and durables at record lows while vehicles ticked up extremely modestly off record lows…

Source: Bloomberg

Finally, August saw confidence rebound for Democrats but tumble further for Republicans as Biden was ousted…

Source: Bloomberg

The survey shows that 41% of consumers believe that Harris is the better candidate for the economy, while 38% chose Trump.

In comparison, between May and July, Trump had a 5 point advantage over Biden on the economy.

Overall, Surveys of Consumers Director Joanne Hsu notes, expectations strengthened for both personal finances and the five-year economic outlook, which reached its highest reading in four months, consistent with the fact that election developments can influence future expectations but are unlikely to alter current assessments.

We wonder how long that exuberance will last?

With the election right around the corner and the average American choking on inflation, Vice President Kamala Harris has unveiled several galaxy brain policies aimed at “lowering costs for American families,” which she and her teleprompter will present at a Friday speech in North Carolina – just days before the Democratic National Convention in Chicago.

While we know about Harris stealing Donald Trump’s plan to eliminate taxes on tips (after she was the tie-breaking vote on legislation to supercharge IRS enforcement), the proposals also include;

• Communist price controls to crack down on ‘corporate price-gouging in the food and grocery industries.’

(Except…)

Here’s your “price gouging” narrative: average costs paid by businesses have risen just as much as costs charged to consumers – if businesses are being “greedy,” they’re doing it all wrong… pic.twitter.com/ALiw72MXSf

— E.J. Antoni, Ph.D. (@RealEJAntoni) August 14, 2024

• A $25,000 subsidy for first-time home buyers, under which those who have a two-year history of on-time rent payments would be eligible for “down-payment support.”

• A cap on prescription drug costs and the elimination of medical debt for millions of Americans

• Child tax credit that would provide $6,000 per child to families for the first year of a baby’s life (after JD Vance suggested an increase from $2,000 per child to $5,000)

Other items include efforts aimed at lowering the cost of rent and helping renters who are struggling financially, according to NBC News. She will also propose plans to stop data firms from driving up lease rates, as well as stopping Wall Street firms from buying and flipping homes in bulk.

As part of the rollout, Harris will call on Congress to pass the Preventing the Algorithmic Facilitation of Rental Housing Cartels Act, a bill introduced by Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Peter Welch, D-Vt., that they said would prevent corporate landlords from using private equity-backed price-setting tools to raise rents dramatically in communities across the country.

Harris will also call on Congress to pass the Stop Predatory Investing Act, a bill introduced by Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, and several other Democratic senators. The bill is designed to stop communities from being taken advantage of by Wall Street investors and distant landlords. The bill would curtail those practices by removing key tax benefits for major investors who acquire large numbers of single-family rental homes.  

Harris will also call for the construction of three million new housing units via construction tax incentives – as well as a $40 billion proposal for local governments to build or preserve affordable housing units. We’re sure that won’t be a giant cash grab.

Cleaning Up Their Mess?

As even the Washington Post notes – “Harris has thus far surrounded herself with many former aides to Biden, and her team had made some overtures to business leaders that they hoped reflected a more centrist approach. But the policy positions she embraced Friday suggest she will continue, if not deepen, the party’s transformation under Biden, who pushed for more aggressive government intervention in the economy on industrial, labor and antitrust policies.”

Meanwhile, according to a Gallup survey taken earlier this year, just 21% of Americans say it’s a good time to buy a house – while just days ago, July’s inflation reading showed that shelter prices jumped 0.4% from the previous month. According to Fed Chairman Jerome Powell, it might take ‘several years’ for the pandemic-era rent increases to abate.

Trump Responds

During a Thursday news conference at his New Jersey golf resort, the former president denounced the package as Venezuela-style communism.

“This announcement is an admission that her economic policies have totally failed and caused really a catastrophe for our country, and beyond that, a catastrophe in the world,” said Trump.

President Trump calls Kamala’s price controls “the Maduro Plan”

“This announcement is an admission that her economic policies have totally failed.”
pic.twitter.com/LlnkwVgnGo

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) August 15, 2024

People have questions…

won’t that just increase the price of all homes by $25,000 while also increasing the deficit https://t.co/F4VgpA1e1K

— Whole Mars Catalog (@WholeMarsBlog) August 16, 2024

for those asking:

3. wage controls.
4. nationalization
5. “but real communism has never been tried before” https://t.co/u123tz9R2B

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 16, 2024

Kamala Harris promises to cut inflation by spending and printing more money, reducing competition, and attacking businesses.

It worked nowhere never.

Welcome to US “peronism”

— Daniel Lacalle (@dlacalle_IA) August 16, 2024

pic.twitter.com/hgKz02UcRr

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 16, 2024

And for the icing on the cake – the Washington Post is now framing it as a “populist policy agenda,” a word whose starter pack we thought came with a tiki torch and khakis (reeee).