Author: admin

Shark Tank’s Kevin O’Leary Explains Donald Trump’s Success

“I have never in my life seen an economy like this. This is even better than the ’60s. It is phenomenal. And I think [it’s] primarily because of deregulation, not tax reform. My companies in California, in Texas, in Florida, in Illinois…have been set free.”—Kevin O’Leary

For the past 10 years, the reality TV show Shark Tank has entertained and edified millions of viewers by dramatizing how entrepreneurs pitch venture capitalists. And none of the “sharks”—the investors who compete with each other to fund businesses they think will be successful—is more entertaining or edifying than Kevin O’Leary, whose signature insult to unsuccessful contestants—”You’re Dead To Me”—has become a pop culture catchphrase.

But O’Leary isn’t just a small-screen blowhard. Born and raised in Canada, the 65-year-old investor got rich by developing educational and family-oriented computer software in the 1980s and ’90s and holding firm to a gospel of thrift, savings, and reinvestment that he’s outlined in best-selling books such as Cold Hard Truth on Men, Women, and Money. Over the years, he’s diversified his investments into vineyards, storage facilities, and more, and he’s dabbled in politics, too, briefly considering a run in 2017 to head the Conservative Party in Canada. His brash nature earned him easy comparisons to Donald Trump but O’Leary, who lives in Boston, is openly free trade and pro-immigration. He’s long been in favor of marijuana legalization and gay rights and opposed to military interventionism.

Nick Gillespie sat down with O’Leary at FreedomFest, the annual gathering of libertarians in Las Vegas. They talked about why Shark Tank is so popular, why Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is so bad, and whether “democratic socialism” is really a threat to the free market capitalism that O’Leary says makes us richer and happier. They also discussed why O’Leary thinks Donald Trump has been great for the economy despite a personal style so many, including O’Leary himself, find unappealing.

Interview by Nick Gillespie. Edited by Ian Keyser. Intro by Mark McDaniel. Cameras by Jim Epstein and Meredith Bragg.

Some highlights from the conversation (edited for clarity):

Trump “is a great entertainer.”

“Great politicians, great leaders, great CEOs are phenomenal entertainers. Going back to the days of Alexander the Great, Napoleon, and Bismarck, they used to hold council at night, have big dinner parties or sit around the fire with their men and tell stories. They would tell stories of great defeats, great battles, great loves, and that would spread through the troops…and it would capture the hearts and minds of the people. Donald Trump is exactly that. He is a great entertainer.”

The chance Donald Trump “doesn’t get a second term…is zero.”

“The chance [Trump] doesn’t get a second term in my view is zero. And I’ll tell you why. I don’t recall in modern times when going into a second term at full employment, the incumbent of any party has ever lost their mandate ever.”

“Saving baby whales is not what businesses do.”

“I believe that…the DNA of a business is to provide to its constituents. Clearly, customers come number one, number two, employees, somewhere in there are the shareholders…. You who started it, you’re the last. When you try and shift business’s true purpose and say that it’s going to save society, you will fail. Not some of the time, but 100 percent of the time. Saving baby whales is not what businesses do.”

“The role of government is to provide basic services.”
“I think it’s the role of government to provide basic services…. I’m particularly fond of what they do in Switzerland, where they basically have multiple tiers of things like health care and support for those that are poor. What they do is they’ll say, OK, if you’re a wealthy Swiss citizen in Geneva and you want to get an MRI because you want one tomorrow morning at 10 o’clock, you’re going to pay for it. They’re going to take the proceeds of that and they’re going to redeploy it into purchasing more MRI machines so those that aren’t as fortunate can get free MRIs.”

“Everybody’s a socialist when they’re young.”

“I was a socialist when I was 18 years old too. I was left wing. I got my first paycheck and I saw something called tax on it. Everybody’s a socialist when they’re young, until they start working and they start realizing how tough it is out there and they start realizing how much money government wastes when they take half their income and taxes. And that’s when you become a conservative. The older you get, the more realistic you become. And a majority of those people make the transition in their mid-twenties. That’s what happens. I never worry about it.”

 

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

Trump Administration Has Separated 900 More Children From Their Parents, Says ACLU

Over 900 children were separated from their parents between June 28, 2018 and June 29, 2019, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) argues in a lawsuit filed against the Trump administration.

According to the group, families are still being separated at the border, even after the same court issued an injunction against the practice in June of last year. The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court of San Diego on Tuesday, says the federal government has been taking children away from their parents “based on minor criminal history, highly dubious allegations of unfitness, and errors in identifying bona fide parent-child relationships.”

Attorneys for the ACLU argue that the Trump administration has quietly weaponized exceptions for parental criminal records made under the injunction in order to systematically continue family separations. The nonprofit is subsequently requesting that a federal judge issue more concrete guidance on the conditions under which removing a child from his or her parents is permissible.

“It is shocking that the Trump administration continues to take babies from their parents,” Lee Gelernt, the lead attorney on the lawsuit, said in a statement Tuesday. “Over 900 more families join the thousands of others previously torn apart by this cruel and illegal policy. The administration must not be allowed to circumvent the court order over infractions like minor traffic violations.”

The federal government is now circumventing “traditional due process and child custody standards,” the suit says, in order to maintain President Trump’s “zero-tolerance” policy meant to dissuade migrants from crossing the border.

The lawsuit comes amid an onslaught of immigration headaches for the Trump administration. Most recently, media reports widely criticized conditions at border detention facilities, where detainees, including children, are crammed into crowded cages and denied showers and hygiene products. Trump has also implemented the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) program, which requires asylum seekers to stay in Mexico while waiting for their immigration court date. The labor union for federal asylum officers said that, under the directive, migrants now “face persecution because of their race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group.”

The latter measure is closely related to Trump’s zero-tolerance approach. His administration has argued that the practice was required by the 1997 Flores agreement. The terms of that court settlement, they said, mandates a 100 percent prosecution rate for all illegal border crossers. That mandate, in turn, means children are not permitted to stay with their parents in detention centers while their parents await trial.

But as Ilya Somin points out at Reason, “federal officials inevitably have vast discretion in determining which offenses to pursue and to what degree.” Illegal entry is a misdemeanor carrying a sentence less than that of marijuana possession. Even former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who argued for the 100 percent prosecution rate, would find it infeasible and wasteful to prosecute every single person ever found with marijuana.

Ironically, the Flores agreement also dictates that the government “place each detained minor in the least restrictive setting appropriate” and that they be placed with a family member or guardian “without unnecessary delay.” It further says that the government will “treat all minors in its custody with dignity, respect and special concern for their particular vulnerability as minors.” But as Somin says, being separated from your parents—over something as minuscule as a traffic infraction—is hardly a display of dignity.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2SVYQ9P
via IFTTT

America’s Gone Crazy: 79-Year-Old Woman Jailed For Feeding Stray Cats

Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

In order for any society to function smoothly, the vast majority of the people need to behave at least somewhat rationally.  Of course there are always going to be exceptions, and we understand that, but most of us operate under the assumption that most of the people that we are going to encounter in our daily lives are not going to act like nutjobs.  Unfortunately, that may not be a safe assumption any longer.  As our society literally degenerates right in front of our eyes, it seems like someone has opened up the barn doors and let out all the crazies. 

And the truth is that “our leaders” are some of the best examples of this phenomenon.  Just look at some of the winners that we have running for president.  Quite a few of them are far more qualified for the insane asylum than they are for the highest office in the land.  Of course it doesn’t end with our politicians.  All across this country, it seems like people in positions of power can’t think straight any longer.

If you doubt this, just consider what just happened to a 79-year-old woman in Ohio named Nancy Segula.  When her neighbor moved away, he left a couple cats behind, and they became very hungry.  So Segula would feed them and care for them, because she didn’t want them to suffer.  Well, eventually one of her neighbors found out about this, and the animal warden was called…

“It began in 2017 with me feeding stray kitties. I used to have a neighbor that had a couple cats and he moved away so he left them,” Segula said. “I would always feed them and care for them because I was worried about them and I’m a cat lover. Once my neighbors got upset about it, they called the animal warden.”

She got her first citation in 2017.

Segula wasn’t about to abandon the suffering cats, and so she just kept on feeding them, and the neighbors kept calling the animal warden.

Over time, she received a total of four citations.

Unfortunately, the most recent citation required her to appear in court, and when she did a judge sentenced her to 10 days in jail…

Her latest citation required her to appear before Magistrate Jeffrey Short last week. He sentenced her to 10 days in the Cuyahoga County Jail.

“I couldn’t believe what my mother was telling me. She gets 10 days in the county jail, I couldn’t believe it,” said Dave Pawlowski, her son son. “I’m sure people hear about the things that happen downtown in that jail. And they are going to let my 79-year-old mother go there?”

Seriously?

Is this what our society has become?

Putting a 79-year-old woman in prison for feeding stray cats is stone cold crazy, but this judge in Ohio is actually doing it.

Are we going to start putting all senior citizens that feed cats in prison?  If so, then my parents are in all sorts of trouble, because they have been feeding stray cats for many, many years.

Having compassion for those in need should never be against the law.  In previous articles, I have written about how many major cities in America are now passing laws against feeding the homeless.

Well I am sorry – if I see someone in need and I want to give that person some food, no law is going to stop me from doing so.

Let me switch gears for a moment and share another example of the craziness that is sweeping across America.

Within the last few days, police in Pennsylvania arrested a woman that was caught urinating on the potatoes in her local Wal-Mart.  The following comes directly from the West Mifflin Borough Police Department…

On July 25, 2019 at 08:41 hours a West Mifflin Police Officer responded to Walmart in West Mifflin for a criminal mischief report. The Officer was met by a Walmart Loss Prevention officer who reported the following incident.

The LPO was informed by an employee that on the day before he noticed urine on the floor near the potatoes in the produce area. The LPO then pulled video that depicted a female at approximately 22:10 hours on July 24, 2019 urinating in the potato bins. The LPO then reported the incident to the West Mifflin Police.

The Detectives of the West Mifflin Police Department investigated the incident and were able to identify the actor as Grace Brown and made contact with her. Ms. Brown along with her attorney came to the station where she identified herself as the person urinating on the potatoes.

Who in the world would do such a thing?

Perhaps she really had to go, and perhaps she didn’t realize that Wal-Mart has restrooms.

But it is probably much more likely that this woman was following an extremely disturbing new trend that has emerged on social media.  According to CNN, it originally started with ice cream…

It’s just flat-out gross.

People go into grocery stores, open a container of ice cream at random, lick the top, put it back in the freezer and then just walk away. Oh, and then they put a video of the entire grotesque display on social media for all to see.

The #IceCreamChallenge, as it’s now called, is just one of many social media trends over the past couple of years that has had people (mostly young people) doing questionable things and documenting them online.

But since that time this “challenge” has spread to all sorts of other consumer food products.  The more disgusting someone can be as they defile food, the more views and likes they will get on their social media profiles, and that is apparently the goal.

Of course this is yet another sign that America is degenerating into an “idiocracy”, because you would have to be an idiot to think that defiling food in a grocery store is a good idea, and you would have to be an idiot to be entertained by watching someone else do so.

Needless to say, I am not very optimistic about the future of this country, and I would love to hear someone make a convincing case that we will be able to turn things around any time soon.

Because right now our nation literally appears to be going completely crazy, and it is getting worse with each passing day.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/332FpRg Tyler Durden

Epstein Planned To Seed Human Race With His DNA By Impregnating Scores Of Women In New Mexico

Jailed pedophile Jeffrey Epstein wanted to seed the human race with his DNA by impregnating scores of women at his giant ranch in New Mexico, according to the New York Times. He also wanted his penis and head cryogenically frozen.

Epstein shared his scheme with scientists and other confidants over the years, according to four people who were in on the plan – which “reflected his longstanding fascination with what has become known as transhumanism: the science of improving the human population through technologies like genetic engineering and artificial intelligence,” according to the report. 

“On multiple occasions starting in the early 2000s, Mr. Epstein told scientists and businessmen about his ambitions to use his New Mexico ranch as a base where women would be inseminated with his sperm and would give birth to his babies, according to two award-winning scientists and an adviser to large companies and wealthy individuals, all of whom Mr. Epstein told about it,” according to the report. 

Once, at a dinner at Mr. Epstein’s mansion on Manhattan’s Upper East Side, Mr. Lanier said he talked to a scientist who told him that Mr. Epstein’s goal was to have 20 women at a time impregnated at his 33,000-square-foot Zorro Ranch in a tiny town outside Santa Fe. Mr. Lanier said the scientist identified herself as working at NASA, but he did not remember her name. 

According to Mr. Lanier, the NASA scientist said Mr. Epstein had based his idea for a baby ranch on accounts of the Repository for Germinal Choice, which was to be stocked with the sperm of Nobel laureates who wanted to strengthen the human gene pool. (Only one Nobel Prize winner has acknowledged contributing sperm to it. The repository discontinued operations in 1999.) 

Mr. Lanier, the virtual-reality creator and author, said he had the impression that Mr. Epstein was using the dinner parties — where some guests were attractive women with impressive academic credentials — to screen candidates to bear Mr. Epstein’s children. –New York Times

Epstein, charged in July with sexual trafficking of girls as young as 14, was a prolific liar and manipulator according to the Times, which notes that the ‘serial illusionist’ lied about his clients’ identities, his net worth, his financial prowess, and other personal achievements – all in an effort to worm his way into the upper echelons of society. 

As the Times goes on to note, even after his 2008 conviction on charges of soliciting prostitution from a minor, Epstein was able to ingratiate himself with the scientific community, attracting a “glittering array of prominent scientists.”

They included the Nobel Prize-winning physicist Murray Gell-Mann, who discovered the quark; the theoretical physicist and best-selling author Stephen Hawking; the paleontologist and evolutionary biologist Stephen J. Gould; Oliver Sacks, the neurologist and best-selling author; George M. Church, a molecular engineer who has worked to identify genes that could be altered to create superior humans; and the M.I.T. theoretical physicist Frank Wilczek, a Nobel laureate. –New York Times

Scientists had regular parties at Epstein’s Manhattan mansion, drinking Dom Pérignon and other expensive libations. The wealthy financier also hosted buffet lunchest at Harvard’s Program for Evolutionary Dynamics – to which he contributed $6.5 million in order to get it off the ground. 

Harvard cognitive psychologist Steven Pinker says he was invited to “salons and coffee klatsches” at which Epstein would ‘hold court.’ 

While some of Mr. Pinker’s peers hailed Mr. Epstein as brilliant, Mr. Pinker described him as an “intellectual impostor.”

“He would abruptly change the subject, A.D.D.-style, dismiss an observation with an adolescent wisecrack,” Mr. Pinker said.

Another scientist cultivated by Mr. Epstein, Jaron Lanier, a prolific author who is a founding father of virtual reality, said that Mr. Epstein’s ideas did not amount to science, in that they did not lend themselves to rigorous proof. Mr. Lanier said Mr. Epstein had once hypothesized that atoms behaved like investors in a marketplace.

Mr. Lanier said he had declined any funding from Mr. Epstein and that he had met with him only once after Mr. Epstein’s 2008 guilty plea. –New York Times

One scientist who was aware of Epstein’s eugenics plan said he was told about it at a 2001 dinner at Epstein’s townhouse, while another scientist recalls hearing about it at a 2006 conference hosted by Epstein in St. Thomas in the Virgin Islands – just a short distance from his infamous ‘pedo island.’ 

Cryogenics

One transhumanist interviewed by the Times notes that Epstein had discussed his interest in cryogenics – the preservation of human bodies via freezing in order to be revived in the future. Epstein said he wanted his head and penis to be frozen.

Southern Trust Company, Mr. Epstein’s Virgin Island-incorporated business, disclosed in a local filing that it was engaged in DNA analysis. Calls to Southern Trust, which sponsored a science and math fair for school children in the Virgin Islands in 2014, were not returned.

In 2011, a charity established by Mr. Epstein gave $20,000 to the Worldwide Transhumanist Association, which now operates under the name Humanity Plus. The group’s website says that its goal is “to deeply influence a new generation of thinkers who dare to envision humanity’s next steps.” –New York Times

Read the rest of the Times report here. 

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

Market Throws Tantrum At Powell’s “Mid-Cycle Adjustment”

Powell over-promised and under-delivered to a market that will “take a mile when given an inch”…

“His comment about an ‘adjustment’ probably means that those looking for an aggressive easing cycle over the next six to nine months are not going to see it. What it means is that there was a divergence between what investors were saying and what they were pricing in.

Investors wanted Powell to say that he’s cutting, but they really wanted to see the Fed embarking on a rate-cutting cycle. The consensus belief on what the Fed would do was correct. It’s just that the markets pricing in an aggressive cycle of rate cuts were way off.” – Matt Maley, equity strategist at Miller Tabak + Co.

“The catalyst for sell-on-the-news was that phrase. He made it explicit — basically, that’s what that phrase means. An insurance cut implied ‘Hey, it’s just an insurance policy. It’s a one-time premium and we’re done.’ And then he made it explicit with that sentence and the market figured it out.”  – Charlie Smith, founding partner and chief investment officer at Fort Pitt Capital Group in Pittsburgh.

And the result… (Is Powell the lady on the rope or Stallone trying to save us all?)

This should help..

China ends the month mixed with tech-heavy ChiNext performing well but the broader Shanghai Comp in the red…

 

European stocks were also mixed with UK’s FTSE best (as the pound collapsed) and Spain and Germany weakest…

 

US stocks were all positive on the month with Small Caps worst and Nasdaq best (even with today’s ugliness)…

Bonds and the dollar held gains as stocks and gold sank post-Powell…

This is the 10th time out of 12 press conferences that Powell has done that stocks have tanked – not great!!

 

VIX spiked up to 16.5 intraday, dipped and then pushed back above 15 into the close…

 

 

Thanks to today’s turmoil in the bond market, 30Y Yields ended the month lower and the short-end higher in yields…

 

The yield curve (3m10Y) very briefly un-inverted but tumbled on the day – staying back inverted…

And the 2s30s curve crashed most since Brexit (June 2016)…

 

The dollar surged 2.5% in July – its biggest monthly gain since Nov 2016 (Trump election)

 

Cable crashed over 4% in July – its worst month since Oct 2016 – with the lowest monthly close since 1985

 

Bitcoin bounced back above $10,000…

But cryptos have been ugly on the month…

 

Commodities were broadly lower today as the dollar spiked but Silver massively outperformed for the month…

 

Silver surged back above $16 intra-month – its best month since Dec 2018…

 

And this was silver’s best month relative to gold since Brexit (June 2016)

 

Finally… Trump demanded a rate-cut – gets one but the dollar soars and stocks tank – who will be blamed for that?

And what happens next?

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2YANH3u Tyler Durden

Former Presidential Adviser: Free Healthcare For Illegals Would End America

Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit.news,

An adviser to two presidents warns that if the United States gives free health care to illegal aliens, as some Democratic candidates advocate, it would be “the end of the country as it now exists.”

Doug Wead is a New York Times bestselling author and is credited for coining the term “compassionate conservative.”

He predicts that Democrats are likely to back away from more extreme proposals as the election draws nearer, but that if illegal immigrants were ever to be given free healthcare, it would be coffin nails for America.

“If the United States becomes the first nation on Earth to offer free healthcare to anyone who enters its borders, even illegally, it would result in massive immigration and the end of the country as it now exists,” said Wead.

Despite nearly 60 per cent of Americans opposing free healthcare for illegal aliens, presidential candidate Bernie Sanders once again advocated the policy during last night’s debate in Detroit.

“I happen to believe that when I talk about health care as a human right, that applies to all people in this country,” said Sanders.

*  *  *

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

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/315te4v Tyler Durden

A Stunned Wall Street Reacts To Powell

If one had to summarize Powell’s press conference, in which he was so dazed and confused after facing a barrage of questions forcing him to explain just why he is cutting rates now when in the Fed’s own words the US economy is doing great and “confidence is rebounding”, and just what a mere 25bps “insurance” cut will achieve that it was painfully uncomfortable to watch, it was with the following two quotes:

  • POWELL: THIS ISN’T THE START OF A LONG SERIES OF RATE CUTS

… but

  • POWELL: I DIDN’T SAY IT’S JUST ONE RATE CUT

And as markets shook, stunned by Powell’s revelation that today’s rate cut was just a “mid-cycle adjustment”, with the Dow Jones plunging briefly by over 400 points as hopes for an easing cycle were promptly dashed, Wall Street analysts sent out their hot takes of what Powell just did and said. Courtesy of Bloomberg here are some of the most notable responses, besides today’s winner from Chris Rupkey of course:

Delores Rubin, a senior equity trader at Deutsche Bank Wealth Management

“The market was fine with the statement, but as seems to be the case, the press conference reveals details that do not sit well with the market. The response that this is a mid-cycle adjustment and not part of a longer term accommodative stance has raised concerns. The market has really talked itself into a need for lower rates. Obviously the FOMC still feels strongly the economy is resilient.”

Zhiwei Ren, Penn Mutual Asset Management portfolio manager.

“The market pricing is for 3 more cuts for the next one year. He is pushing back that market pricing. He says this is a mid-cycle rate cut, which means it is 1-2 cuts and done…he is not giving the market what it wants — three cuts for next year. He basically said ‘At the beginning of the year, we were pricing a few hikes and turned patient — no rate hike, no cut — and now we’re cutting 25 bps. We think that’s accommodative enough.’ he didn’t say they need to cut more. That’s a big surprise to me and the market.”

Max Gokhman, the head of asset allocation for Pacific Life Fund Advisors.

“Two possible reasons. One is that the market thinks an ‘adjustment’ is a one-and-done thing. I doubt that’s the case, especially because there was also language in the statement about the ‘future path’ of rates being a subject of future data. To be clear, I’m not saying the market isn’t worried that it’s one-and-done — that’s just not how I’m seeing it. The second reason is perhaps the market thinks that when Powell says “mid-cycle” he is giving credence to the (ahem) fact that business cycles have a beginning, middle and… END. Most likely the first reason is what moved prices though.”

Charlie Smith, founding partner and chief investment officer at Fort Pitt Capital Group in Pittsburgh.

“The catalyst for sell-on-the-news was that phrase. He made it explicit — basically, that’s what that phrase means. An insurance cut implied ‘Hey, it’s just an insurance policy. It’s a one-time premium and we’re done.’ And then he made it explicit with that sentence and the market figured it out.”

Matt Maley, equity strategist at Miller Tabak + Co.

“His comment about an ‘adjustment’ probably means that those looking for an aggressive easing cycle over the next six to nine months are not going to see it. What it means is that there was a divergence between what investors were saying and what they were pricing in. Investors wanted Powell to say that he’s cutting, but they really wanted to see the Fed embarking on a rate-cutting cycle. The consensus belief on what the Fed would do was correct. It’s just that the markets pricing in an aggressive cycle of rate cuts were way off.”

And now, we wait for Trump to tweet his reaction to his demands for a rate cut… when what he got was a stock plunge and a dollar surge.

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

Bin Laden’s Son – An ‘Emerging Al Qaeda Leader’ – Reported Dead

Hours after Reuters reported that the Saudi Binladin Group is looking to restructure between $20 and $30 billion in debt, the infamous construction family was hit with the news that son and potential successor of al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden is dead, according to NBC News, citing three US officials regarding intelligence obtained by the United States. 

It is unclear whether the US played a role in the death of Hamza bin Laden, who was approximately 30-years-old. 

Hamza bin Laden is believed to have been born around 1989. His father moved to Afghanistan in 1996 and declared war against the U.S. Hamza went with him and appeared in al Qaeda propaganda videos. As leader of al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden oversaw operations against Western targets that culminated in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on New York’s World Trade Center and on the Pentagon. –NBC News

In February, the State Department announced a reward of up to $1 million for information on Hamza’s whereabouts – describing the younger bin Laden on Twitter as “an emerging al Qaeda leader” who “has threatened attacks against the United States and allies.” 

Meanwhile, the Binladin Group is reportedly seeking a financial adviser to restructure their debt – after the Saudi government took a roughly 1/3 stake in the conglomerate after family members were swept up in an anti-graft campaign launched by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman. 

The company, which has dominated the construction sector for years, is crucial to the kingdom’s plans for tourism and infrastructure projects aimed at diversifying the economy away from oil revenues by 2030.

The Binladin Group has sent a request for proposals to a select group of international advisers over the past few weeks to reorganize the debt of the whole group, said the five sources, speaking anonymously because the matter is private. –Reuters

The debt restructuring is likely to concern Saudi banks and other creditors, who had been expecting the Saudi finance ministry to provide the group with government loans. 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2K5Sdz1 Tyler Durden

Stocks, Yield Curve Collapse As Powell Signals “Not Start Of Easing Cycle”

Well that upset the market…

Given the market’s expectations for 4 rate cuts and more if it really wants, Fed Chair Powell just stole the jam out of the market’s donut by saying this was a “mid-cycle adjustment” confirming that this is “not the start of an easing cycle.”

Stocks tumbled….

This presser marks the 10th time out of 12 that S&P has dropped during Powell presser. Not a great record. 

And the yield curve crashed…

And the dollar surged to its highest since My 2017…

Stocks down and dollar up – Trump won’t be happy!!

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

Senator Harris “Wins” The ‘Free Stuff’ Contest… Taxpayers Lose

Authored by John Stossel, op-ed vbia Townhall.com,

Never before have presidential candidates offered voters so much “free” stuff.

Kamala Harris wants you to “collect up to $500 a month.”

Elizabeth Warren says, “We need to go tenfold in our research and development in green energy.”

No one has tracked the cost of all of the promises. So my video team did!

Who will spend the most?

Here are the new spending proposals from the five most popular (according to ElectionBettingOdds.com) candidates.

In my latest video, we break it down by category, education spending first:

Joe Biden wants to “triple the amount of money we spend for Title I schools” ($32 billion) create “universal pre-K” ($26 billion), provide “free community college” ($6 billion per year) and double the number of psychologists and social workers in schools ($14 billion) — $78 billion total. 

That’s a lot, but much less than what Kamala Harris would spend.

She too wants to “make community college free” ($6 billion), but she’d add debt-free “four-year public college” ($80.1 billion), “increase government’s investment in childcare” dramatically ($60 billion) and “give the average public school teacher a $13,000 raise” ($31.5 billion) for a total of $177 billion.

Pete Buttigieg rarely says what his proposals would cost, but he at least seems to want to spend less than Harris.

He touts “free college for low- and middle-income students” and would give teachers more money. Assuming his plan is like Harris’, that brings his education total to $87 billion.

Elizabeth Warren would spend much more.

“You’ll be debt-free!” she tells students. Taxpayers, unfortunately, will be deeper in debt, since she would “forgive” most existing student debt and make public college tuition-free ($125 billion).

She also wants a “Universal Child Care and Early Learning Act” ($70 billion).

These big-ticket items put her in the first place so far.

But wait! Bernie Sanders would spend even more.

He’d completely “eliminate student debt,” “make public colleges and universities tuition-free” and provide universal daycare and pre-K. That totals $280 billion, so Sanders “wins” in education spending.

I assumed the self-described socialist would be the biggest spender, but he’s got lots of competition!

Let’s look at health care spending.

Harris, Sanders and Warren all propose “Medicare for All,” including for people here illegally.

Sanders goes further, saying, “Under our plan, people go to any doctor they want.” He admits it will cost between $3 trillion and $4 trillion per year, about what the government now spends on everything. How will he pay for that? Well, somehow the rich will pay. Or Martians. Somebody.

Sanders, Harris, and Warren all said they’d ban private health insurance — although Harris now says she’d let private companies sell “Medicare plans” that “adhere to strict Medicare requirements on costs and benefits.” She also claims her “Medicare for All” will be cheaper than Sanders’ version, but as of now, there is no independently calculated cost.

When it comes to the environment, all Democratic candidates but Biden say they support the Green New Deal, which Republicans say would cost $93 trillion. For our ranking, I went with the lowest estimate we could find: An economist who likes the idea says it will cost around $500 billion a year.

Welfare? Harris would increase benefits and have the government pay your rent if it’s over 30% of your income ($94 billion), and Friday she offered $75 billion to black colleges and minority entrepreneurs.

Warren wants to spend more ($50 billion) on housing.

Sanders would increase food stamps for kids ($10.8 billion), boost Social Security benefits ($19 billion) and guarantee everyone a government job ($158 billion), for a total of $187.8 billion.

President Donald Trump, who says America will never be a socialist country, hasn’t been a responsible spender either.

Since he took office, spending increased about $500 billion per year. Trump did propose some cuts, but when Congress ignored his cuts and increased spending, he signed the bills anyway.

Now he says he’d spend even more: $200 billion a year for infrastructure, $8.6 billion for the border wall construction, $1.6 billion for more NASA funding and on and on, for a total of $267 billion.

We can’t afford it! The federal government is already $22 trillion in debt — $150,000 per taxpayer.

While Trump’s $267 billion is bad, the Democrats’ plans are worse. We counted $297 billion proposed by Biden, $690 billion from Buttigieg, $3.8 trillion from Warren, $4 trillion from Sanders and $4.3 trillion from Harris. That would double what the entire federal government spends now.

Senator Harris “wins” the free stuff contest.

Taxpayers lose.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2GECB3d Tyler Durden