Author: admin

Trump-Critical Journalists Targeted by Outrage Mobs Armed With Old Tweets

A group “allied with the White House” is allegedly putting together dossiers on hundreds of journalists who are critical of the Trump administration. Much like opposition-research files on rival political candidates, theses dossiers contain potentially scandalous tweets and other statements dug up from journalists’ pasts.

A CNN statement condemned “those working [to] threaten and retaliate against reporters as a means of suppression.”

“Four people familiar with the operation described how it works,” reports The New York Times:

The group has already released information about journalists at CNN, The Washington Post and The New York Times—three outlets that have aggressively investigated Mr. Trump—in response to reporting or commentary that the White House’s allies consider unfair to Mr. Trump and his team or harmful to his re-election prospects.

Operatives have closely examined more than a decade’s worth of public posts and statements by journalists, the people familiar with the operation said. Only a fraction of what the network claims to have uncovered has been made public, the people said, with more to be disclosed as the 2020 election heats up. The research is said to extend to members of journalists’ families who are active in politics, as well as liberal activists and other political opponents of the president.

The idea is to present authentic statements, often in out-of-context or misleading ways.

But before you freak out—or get out the popcorn—keep in mind that the whole project may be mostly bluster.

“It is not possible to independently assess the claims about the quantity or potential significance of the material the pro-Trump network has assembled,” states the Times. “Some involved in the operation have histories of bluster and exaggeration. And those willing to describe its techniques and goals may be trying to intimidate journalists or their employers.”

While Trump family friends and campaign staff have been spreading the oppo research, the White House press office “said that neither the president nor anyone in the White House was involved in or aware of the operation, and that neither the White House nor the Republican National Committee was involved in funding it,” according to the Times.

FREE MINDS

The meaning of sex comes before the U.S. Supreme Court this fall. Quartz explains:

An upcoming high court case, to be argued in October, asks whether transgender employees are protected from discrimination under a federal civil rights statute known as Title VII. The Department of Justice says no. It is siding with a funeral home owner who fired a transgender employee.

But the worker was successfully represented in the lower courts by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), a federal government agency. That puts the federal government in the somewhat awkward position of fighting the person who was originally its client….

The Justice Department insists in a brief filed this month that Title VII, enacted in 1964, doesn’t cover transgender employees because “the ordinary public meaning of sex” at the time of its passage was biological sex as determined by reproductive organs. The legislation was “originally designed to eliminate employment discrimination against racial and other minorities—it was especially clear that the prohibition on discrimination because of ‘sex’ referred to unequal treatment of men and women in the workplace,” the [Justice Department] brief states.

Read the brief here.

FREE MARKETS

No, the White House won’t force companies out of China, say Trump aides. But the fact it needed to be denied is a bad sign.

The denial comes after President Donald Trump on Friday tweeted this:

We don’t need China and, frankly, would be far better off without them. Our great American companies are hereby ordered to immediately start looking for an alternative to China, including bringing your companies HOME.

On Sunday, Trump economic adviser Lawrence Kudlow told CNN it was merely the president making a suggestion:

What he is suggesting to American businesses [is] you ought to think about moving your operations and your supply chains away from China and secondly, we’d like you to come back home.

But Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin told a somewhat different story to Fox News:

I think what he was saying is he’s ordering companies to start looking. He wants to make sure to the extent that we are in an extended trade war, that companies don’t have these issues and move out of China.

More at The Wall Street Journal.

ELECTION 2020

Talk radio host Joe Walsh is officially in: 

QUICK HITS

  • “Trump suggested dropping nuclear bombs into hurricanes to stop them from hitting the U.S.,” reports Axios.
  • He’s baaaaack:

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2ZwfLp2
via IFTTT

“Call Or No Call?” Mnuchin Explains What “Really” Happened

Dow futures slumped 200 points early this morning after China denied a call had taken place with Trump’s team, which as pointed out earlier, juiced US equity futures 700 Dow points off overnight lows.

Trump and Mnuchin quickly sprang into action to try to talk the market back up:

Reporter: “Did you mean to say that there was also a call last night [with China] or was there not actually a call?”

Steve Mnuchin: “There were discussions that went back and forth, and let’s just leave it at that.”

Trump [interrupting]: “Last night. And before last night.”

But one glimpse at Mnuchin’s face (the worst poker player ever) tells you all you need to know about what really happened:

Sure enough, algos which didn’t care if Trump was lying, immediately kneejerked stocks higher:

The issue at hand is 1) Mnuchin wants to shut down the discussion immediately rather than discuss any more details and 2) they appear to reference comments from Chinese vice premier Liu which were made to the Chinese press (confirming no desire to escalate a trade war) as opposed to an actual call overnight.

We give the last word to Jim Cramer, who waltzed onto CNBC’s set this morning and proclaimed:

“You can claim that the president’s a liar, but the futures are up, so I don’t care…”

Indeed Jim, that is all that matters…

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Ny4PBe Tyler Durden

Key Events This Week: No Quiet End To The Summer

With little on the calendar this week, some may expect a quiet last few days to the summer. They will be disappointed.

As the summer holidays start to draw to a close, next week will see a number of key highlights for markets. As DB’s Cair Nicol writes, data releases to watch out for include Euro Area inflation for August, Germany’s Ifo survey, and from the US there’s the second estimate of Q2 GDP and the Conference Board’s consumer confidence indicator. As the Jackson Hole summit concludes we have a number of other central bank speakers, along with a policy decision from the Bank of Korea. This weekend saw a torrid G7 summit in France, while analysts will also pay close attention to the ongoing government formation process in Italy which may result in the anti-establishment Matteo Salvini taking unilateral power.

The G7 summit saw world leaders gather, and allegedly make some progress beyond just scintillating photo ops such as this one…

… and this one…

… with the main theme of France’s G7 Presidency to combat inequality. There was little progress made there. A number of other leaders were present, including European Council President Tusk, Indian Prime Minister Modi and Australian Prime Minister Morrison. Most notably, the G7 has confirmed it is now a farcical organization as it could not even draft a final communique at the end of the summit to which everyone would agree, and follows the previous year’s G7 summit where the summit ended in disagreement between the US and the other nations present.

In terms of data releases next week, Monday kicks things off with August’s Ifo survey from Germany, which printed at a new low since the start of 2013. In July, the business climate measure fell to 95.8, and the consensus is expecting a further deterioration to 95.1. The final print was even worse: 94.3.

With the preliminary reading for Q2 GDP in Germany showing a 0.1% contraction, it’ll be worth keeping an eye on whether the Ifo readings do decline further or whether there are any signs of stabilisation. Also with Germany, on Thursday we’ll get the preliminary CPI reading for August, with harmonised inflation expected to rise to 1.2%, from July’s 1.1%, which was the  lowest since November 2016.

The other main readings from Europe this week are August’s inflation print, which is expected to come in at 1.0%, in what would be the lowest figure since 2016. There are now less than 3 weeks until the next ECB meeting, so it’ll be worth  paying attention. Market expectations of inflation also remain subdued, with five-year forward five-year inflation swaps at 1.2650% at time of writing, some way below the ECB’s target of “below, but close to, 2%”. Also of note are the European Commission’s confidence indicators for August. In July, the economic sentiment reading fell to its lowest level since March 2016, at 102.7, and a further decline to 102.4 is expected.

Turning to the US, one of the main data highlights will be the second estimate of Q2 GDP on Thursday, with expectations for a 2.0% annualised qoq reading, a tenth below the advance estimate of 2.1%. There’ll also be the Conference Board’s  consumer confidence reading, which rebounded to an 8-month high in July of 135.7. With the market expecting further rate cuts from the Fed, it’ll be interesting to see whether this rebound is sustained. The consensus expectation is for a decline  to 130.0.

With central banks, the annual Jackson Hole conference in Wyoming continues, ending on Saturday. Following Fed Chair Powell’s and Bank of England Governor Carney’s speeches today, Saturday will see remarks from the Reserve Bank of  Australia’s Governor Lowe. Later on in the week, Tuesday has the ECB’s Vice President de Guindos and the BoE’s Tenreyro speak, Wednesday has Richmond Fed President Barkin and San Francisco Fed President Daly, and Thursday sees the BoJ’s Suzuki. The Bank of Korea will be making their latest policy decision as well on Friday, where the consensus expectation is  for the Base Rate to remain at 1.50%, following the decision last month to cut rates by 25bps.

Finally, other things to watch out for include the continued process of government formation in Italy, which is expected to continue well into the week. The anti-establishment Five Star Movement and the centre-left Democratic Party will be discussing whether a government can be formed that would keep the League’s Matteo Salvini out of power. Monday is a bank holiday in the UK, making dismal market liquidity even more terrible.

Summary of key events in the week ahead:

  • Monday: It’s a light start to the week with Spain’s July PPI and Germany’s August IFO survey due in the morning. In the US, there’s July’s Chicago Fed national activity index, preliminary July durable and capital good orders, and August’s Dallas Fed manufacturing activity index.
  • Tuesday: Data releases for the day include Japan’s July services PPI, China’s July industrial profits, Germany’s final Q2 GDP and France’s August confidence indicators. Meanwhile in the US, we get Q2 house price index, June FHFA house price index and S&P CoreLogic house price index along with August Richmond Fed manufacturing index and Conference board  confidence indicators.
  • Wednesday: It’s another light day for data with releases of note being Germany’s September GfK consumer confidence, the Euro Area’s M3 money supply and in the US, we have the latest weekly mortgage applications. Aside from the data, the Fed’s Barkin and Daly are due to speak.
  • Thursday: It’s a busy day for data with releases including preliminary August CPI in Spain and Germany, France’s final Q2 GDP and July consumer spending, the Euro Area’s August confidence indicators and Germany’s August unemployment report. In the US, we are due to get July advance goods trade balance, retail inventories, wholesale inventories and pending home sales along with the latest weekly initial and continuing claims data. The BoJ’s Suzuki will also speak overnight.
  • Friday: It’s another busy day for data with key releases of note being preliminary August CPI in France, Italy and the Euro Area, along with July’s core PCE in the US. We are also due to get Japan’s July retail sales and industrial production, France’s July PPI, Italy’s final Q2 GDP and the Euro Area’s July unemployment rate along with the UK’s August GfK consumer confidence and July consumer credit, mortgage approvals and money supply data. In the US, we are due to get July  personal income and spending data along with August MNI Chicago PMI and final University of Michigan survey.

Finally, looking only at the US, Goldman notes that the key economic data releases this week are the durable goods report on Monday, the second vintage of Q2 GDP on Thursday and the PCE report on Friday. There are two scheduled speaking engagements from Fed officials this week, both on Wednesday.

Monday, August 26

  • 8:30 AM Durable goods orders, July preliminary (GS +1.2%, consensus +1.0%, last +1.9%); Durable goods orders ex-transportation, July preliminary (GS flat, consensus flat, last +1.0%); Core capital goods orders, July preliminary (GS -0.1%, consensus flat, last +1.5%); Core capital goods shipments, July preliminary (GS -0.1%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.3%): We expect durable goods orders rose by 1.2% in July, mostly reflecting an increase in Boeing aircraft orders. We also estimate slight declines in the core capex measures reflecting weakness in global manufacturing and regional surveys.

Tuesday, August 27

  • 09:00 AM S&P/Case-Shiller 20-city home price index, June (GS +0.2%, consensus +0.1%, last +0.1%); We estimate the S&P/Case-Shiller 20-city home price index increased 0.2% in June, following a 0.1% gain in May. Our forecast reflects the modest appreciation in other home price indices such as the CoreLogic house price index in June.
  • 09:00 AM FHFA house price index, June (consensus +0.2%, last +0.1%)
  • 10:00 AM Richmond Fed manufacturing index, August (consensus -4, last -12)
  • 10:00 AM Conference Board consumer confidence, August (GS 128.0, consensus 129.0, last 135.7): We estimate that the Conference Board consumer confidence index declined by 7.7pt to 128.0 in August, retracing most of its July increase and reflecting lower stock prices and weakness in other confidence measures.

Wednesday, August 28

  • 12:20 PM Richmond Fed President Barkin (FOMC non-voter) speaks: Richmond Fed President Thomas Barkin will give a speech to the West Virginia Chamber of Commerce. Audience Q&A is expected.
  • 05:30 PM San Francisco Fed President Daly (FOMC non-voter) speaks: San Francisco Fed President Daly will speak on inflation targeting at a conference in Wellington, New Zealand. Audience Q&A is expected.

Thursday, August 29

  • 08:30 AM GDP (second), Q2 (GS +1.9%, consensus +2.0%, last +2.1%); Personal consumption, Q2 (GS +4.2%, consensus +4.3%, last +4.3%): We expect a two-tenths downward revision in the second estimate of Q2 GDP to +1.9% reflecting expected downward revisions to personal consumption, inventory investment, and government spending.
  • 08:30 AM Advance goods trade balance, July (GS -$75.5bn, consensus -$74.6bn, last -$74.2bn): We estimate that the goods trade deficit rebounded to $75.5bn in July, following an increase in inbound container traffic and a decline in outbound traffic. July was the first full month that List 3 imports ($200bn) from China were subject to a higher 25% tariff rate (from 10% previously).
  • 08:30 AM Wholesale inventories, July preliminary (consensus +0.2%, last flat): Retail inventories, July (consensus +0.2%, last -0.3%)
  • 08:30 AM Initial jobless claims, week ended August 24 (GS 215k, consensus 215k, last 209k): Continuing jobless claims, week ended August 17 (last 1,674k): We estimate jobless claims rebounded by 6k to 215k in the week ended August 24 after declining by 12k in the prior week.
  • 10:00 AM Pending home sales, July (GS -0.5%, consensus flat, last +2.8%): We estimate that pending home sales declined 0.5% in July based on regional home sales data, following a 2.8% increase in June. We have found pending home sales to be a useful leading indicator of existing home sales with a one- to two-month lag.

Friday, August 30

  • 08:30 AM Personal income, July (GS +0.2%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.4%); Personal spending, July (GS +0.6%, consensus +0.5%, last +0.3%); PCE price index, July (GS +0.20%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.12%); Core PCE price index, July (GS +0.16%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.247%); PCE price index (yoy), July (GS +1.39%, consensus +1.4%, last +1.35%); Core PCE price index (yoy), July (GS +1.59%, consensus +1.6%, last +1.60%): Based on details in the PPI, CPI, and import price reports, we forecast that the core PCE index rose 0.16% month-over-month in July, or 1.59% from a year ago. Additionally, we expect that the headline PCE index increased 0.20% in July, or 1.39% from a year earlier. We expect a 0.2% increase in personal income in July and a 0.6% increase in personal spending.
  • 09:45 AM Chicago PMI, August (GS 47.0, consensus 47.9, last 44.4); We estimate that the Chicago PMI rebounded somewhat but remained in contractionary territory in August, as weak global manufacturing growth likely continues to weigh on the index.
  • 10:00 AM University of Michigan consumer sentiment, August final (GS 92.6, consensus 92.3, last 92.1): We expect the University of Michigan consumer sentiment to edge higher from the preliminary estimate for August, which declined 6.3pt likely reflecting a drag from trade war escalation and stock market volatility. The report’s measure of 5- to 10-year inflation expectations edged up by one tenth to 2.6% in the preliminary report for August.

Source: Deutsche Bank, BofA, Goldman

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/33Vs3ad Tyler Durden

America’s Debt Burden Will Fuel The Next “Last” Crisis

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

Just recently, Rex Nutting penned an opinion piece for MarketWatch entitled “Consumer Debt Is Not A Ticking Time Bomb.” His primary point is that low per-capita debt ratios and debt-to-dpi ratios show the consumer is quite healthy and won’t be the primary subject of the next crisis. To wit:

“However, most Americans are better off now than they were 10-years ago, or even a few years ago. The finances of American households are strong. 

But, that’s not what a lot of people think. More than a decade after a massive credit orgy by households brought down the U.S. and global economies, lots of people are convinced that households are still borrowing so much money that it will inevitably crash the economy.

Those critics see a consumer debt bomb growing again. But they are wrong.”

I do agree with Rex on his point that the U.S. consumer won’t be the sole cause of the next crisis. It will be a combination of household and corporate debt combined with underfunded pensions, which will collide in the next crisis.

However, there is a household debt problem which is hidden by the way governmental statistics are calculated.

Indebted To The American Dream

The idea of “maintaining a certain standard of living” has become a foundation in our society today.Americans, in general, have come to believe they are “entitled” to a certain type of house, car, and general lifestyle which includes NOT just the basic necessities of living such as food, running water, and electricity, but also the latest mobile phone, computer, and high-speed internet connection. (Really, what would be the point of living if you didn’t have access to Facebook every two minutes?)

But, like most economic data, you have to dig behind the numbers to reveal the true story.

So let’s do that, shall we?

Every quarter the Federal Reserve Bank of New York releases its quarterly survey of the composition and balances of consumer debt. (Note that consumers are at record debt levels and roughly $1 Trillion more than in 2008.)

One of the more interesting points made to support the bullish narrative was that record levels of debt is irrelevant because of the rise in disposable personal incomes. The following chart was given as evidence to support that claim.

Looks pretty good, as long as you don’t scratch too deeply.

To begin with, the calculation of disposable personal income (which is income less taxes) is largely a guess, and very inaccurate, due to the variability of income taxes paid by households.

More importantly, the measure is heavily skewed by the top 20% of income earners, needless to say, the top 5%. As shown in the chart below, those in the top 20% have seen substantially larger median wage growth versus the bottom 80%.

(Note: all data used below is from the Census Bureau and the IRS.)

Furthermore, disposable and discretionary incomes are two very different animals.

Discretionary income is what is left of disposable incomes after you pay for all of the mandatory spending like rent, food, utilities, health care premiums, insurance, etc.

From this view, the “cost of living” has risen much more dramatically than incomes. According to Pew Research:

“In fact, despite some ups and downs over the past several decades, today’s real average wage (that is, the wage after accounting for inflation) has about the same purchasing power it did 40 years ago. And what wage gains there have been have mostly flowed to the highest-paid tier of workers.”

But the problem isn’t just the cost of living due to inflation, but the “real” cost of raising a family in the U.S. has grown incredibly more expensive with surging food, energy, health, and housing costs.

  • Researchers at Purdue University recently studied data culled from across the globe and found that in the U.S., $132,000 was found to be the optimal income for “feeling” happy for raising a family of four. 

  • Gallup also surveyed to find out what the “average” family required to support a family of four in the U.S. (Forget about being happy, we are talking about “just getting by.”) That number turned out to be $58.000.

So, while the “median” income has broken out to highs, the reality for the vast majority of Americans is there has been little improvement. Here are some stats from the survey data which was NOT reported:

  • $306,139 – the difference between the annual income for the Top 5% versus the Bottom 80%.

  • $148,504 – the difference between the annual income for the Top 5% and the Top 20%.

  • $157,635 – the difference between the annual income for the Top 20% and the Bottom 80%.

If you are in the Top 20% of income earners, congratulations.

If not, it is a bit of a different story.

Assuming a “family of four” needs an income of $58,000 a year to just “make it,” such becomes problematic for the bottom 80% of the population whose wage growth falls far short of what is required to support the standard of living, much less to obtain “happiness.” 

This is why the “gap” between the “standard of living” and real disposable incomes is more clearly shown below. Beginning in 1990, incomes alone were no longer able to meet the standard of living so consumers turned to debt to fill the “gap.” However, following the “financial crisis,” even the combined levels of income and debt no longer fill the gap. Currently, there is almost a $3200 annual deficit that cannot be filled.

Record levels of consumer debt is a problem. There is simply a limit to how much “debt” each household can carry even at historically low interest rates.

Data Skew

While Rex’s analysis is not incorrect, the data he is using in his assumptions is being skewed by the “wealth and income” gap in the top 20% of the population. This was a point put forth in a study from Chicago Booth Review:

“The data set reveals since 1980 a ‘sharp divergence in the growth experienced by the bottom 50 percent versus the rest of the economy,’ the researchers write. The average pretax income of the bottom 50 percent of US adults has stagnated since 1980, while the share of income of US adults in the bottom half of the distribution collapsed from 20 percent in 1980 to 12 percent in 2014. In a mirror-image move, the top 1 percent commanded 12 percent of income in 1980 but 20 percent in 2014. The top 1 percent of US adults now earns on average 81 times more than the bottom 50 percent of adults; in 1981, they earned 27 times what the lower half earned.“

Given this information, it should not be surprising that personal consumption expenditures, which make up roughly 70% of the economic equation, have had to be supported by surging debt levels to offset the lack wage growth in the bottom 80% of the economy.

More importantly, despite economic reports of rising employment, low jobless claims, surging corporate profitability and continuing economic expansion, the percentage of government transfer payments (social benefits) as compared to disposable incomes have surged to the highest level on record.

This anomaly was also noted in the study:

“Government transfer payments have ‘offset only a small fraction of the increase in pre-tax inequality,’ Piketty, Saez, and Zucman conclude—and those payments fail to bridge the gap for the bottom 50 percent because they go mostly to the middle class and the elderly. Pretax income of the middle class (adults between the median and the 90th percentile) has grown 40 percent since 1980, ‘faster than what tax and survey data suggest, due in particular to the rise of tax-exempt fringe benefits,’ the researchers write. ‘For the working-age population, post-tax bottom 50 percent income has hardly increased at all since 1980.’”

Here is the point that Rex missed. There is a vast difference between the level of indebtedness (per household) for those in the bottom 80%, versus those in the top 20%. 

Of course, the only saving grace for many American households is that artificially low interest rates have reduced the average debt service levels. Unfortunately, those in the bottom 80% are still having a large chunk of their median disposable income eaten up by debt payments. This reduces discretionary spending capacity even further.

 

The problem is quite clear. With interest rates already at historic lows, the consumer already heavily leveraged, and wage growth stagnant, the capability to increase consumption to foster higher rates of economic growth is limited.

With respect to those who say “the debt doesn’t matter,” I respectfully argue that you looking at a very skewed view of the world driven by those at the top.

The Next Crisis Will Be The Last

For the Federal Reserve, the next “financial crisis” is already in the works. All it takes now is a significant decline in asset prices to spark a cascade of events that even monetary interventions may be unable to stem.

However, to Rex’s credit, households WILL NOT be the sole catalyst of the next crisis.

The real crisis comes when there is a “run on pensions.” With a large number of pensioners already eligible for their pension, the next decline in the markets will likely spur the “fear” that benefits will be lost entirely. The combined run on the system, which is grossly underfunded, at a time when asset prices are dropping  will cause a debacle of mass proportions. As noted above, it is going to require a massive government bailout to resolve it.

But, consumers will “contribute their fair share.” Consumers are once again heavily leveraged with sub-prime auto loans, mortgages, and student debt. When the recession hits, the reduction in employment will further damage what remains of personal savings and consumption ability. The downturn will increase the strain on an already burdened government welfare system as an insufficient number of individuals paying into the scheme is being absorbed by a swelling pool of aging baby-boomers now forced to draw on it. Yes, more Government funding will be required to solve that problem as well. 

As debts and deficits swell in coming years, the negative impact to economic growth will continue. At some point, there will be a realization of the real crisis. It isn’t a crash in the financial markets that is the real problem, but the ongoing structural shift in the economy that is depressing the living standards of the average American family. There has indeed been a redistribution of wealth in America since the turn of the century. Unfortunately, it has been in the wrong direction as the U.S. has created its own class of royalty and serfdom.

The good news is that it can all be solved by the issuance of more debt.

The bad news comes when there are no buyers willing to continue to fund fiscal irresponsibility.

The next “crisis,” will be the “great reset” which will also make it the “last crisis.”

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/329ojQF Tyler Durden

Core Durable Goods Orders Disappoint As Shipments Slump Most In 3 Years

Despite a headline beat (juiced by huge and volatile surges in defense and non-defense aircraft orders), core durable goods orders disappointed and capital goods shipments (ex-Air) slumped by the most since Oct 2016.

Durable Goods Orders rose 2.1% MoM (well above the 1.2% rise expected) and YoY, durable goods rebounded into the positive…

Source: Bloomberg

Much of the surprise was driven by gains in aircraft orders:

  • nondefense aircraft and parts new orders +47.8%

  • defense aircraft and parts new orders +34.4%

But core durable goods orders disappointed (falling 0.4% MoM against expectations of no change)…

Source: Bloomberg

And moreover, shipments (ex-Air) fell by 0.7% MoM – the biggest drop since Oct 2016…

Source: Bloomberg

The slump in sales of equipment suggests American businesses remained cautious about capital spending ahead of this month’s escalation of the U.S.-China trade war.

The report compares with recent data that signal further cracks in the manufacturing sector. Markit’s PMI posted its first contraction since 2009, and the Kansas City Fed’s factory gauge shrank.

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

Professor Forced to Resign Because He Supports Antifa

In yet another example of campuses prioritizing nebulous safety concerns over free speech, a community college has pushed a professor to resign for stating his alignment with antifa.

“I affirm that I am antifa,” Jeff Klinzman, an adjunct professor of English literature at Kirkwood Community College in Iowa, told local reporters last week after some of his controversial social media posts came to the public’s attention.

In response to a tweet from President Donald Trump calling antifa “gutless Radical Left Wack Jobs who go around hitting (only non-fighters) people over the heads with baseball bats,” Klinzman had written, “Yeah, I know who I’d clock with a bat…” on Iowa Antifa’s Facebook page.

On Friday, Kirkwood announced that Klinzman had resigned. While the college did not immediately respond to a request for comment, the official statement certainly makes it sound like this was a forced resignation:

The school has stated that the professor was not removed due to his views or his right to express them. Kirkwood says their decision is based solely on their commitment to harboring a safe learning environment for our students, faculty and staff.

The college has also stated: “However, when the expression of views by him or any member of our community is perceived as placing public safety in jeopardy, or hampers our ability to deliver on our mission, we will always do what is necessary in service to our students’ pursuit of a higher education.”

This is a troubling confession. “When the expression of views by him or any member of our community is perceived as placing public safety in jeopardy,” college officials believe they must take action, even if that perception is wrong, as it was in this case. Neither Klinzman’s support for antifa nor his stated interest in hitting someone (implied to be Trump) with a bat represents any actual threat.

Antifa is an illiberal movement that doesn’t believe in extending free speech rights to its opponents, and thus it’s always somewhat ironic to watch this perspective used against them and other far-left anti-free-speech folk. Nevertheless, even those who do not recognize free speech as a right should still enjoy its benefits. Getting rid of Klinzman was a serious mistake, and a powerful example of what happens when administrators interpret a mandate to protect students’ safety as an excuse to censor provoctive speech.

For more about antifa, order my new book, Panic Attack: Young Radicals in the Age of Trump, which contains a chapter about the movement’s tactics, goals, and belief system.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2U2GS6h
via IFTTT

Professor Forced to Resign Because He Supports Antifa

In yet another example of campuses prioritizing nebulous safety concerns over free speech, a community college has pushed a professor to resign for stating his alignment with antifa.

“I affirm that I am antifa,” Jeff Klinzman, an adjunct professor of English literature at Kirkwood Community College in Iowa, told local reporters last week after some of his controversial social media posts came to the public’s attention.

In response to a tweet from President Donald Trump calling antifa “gutless Radical Left Wack Jobs who go around hitting (only non-fighters) people over the heads with baseball bats,” Klinzman had written, “Yeah, I know who I’d clock with a bat…” on Iowa Antifa’s Facebook page.

On Friday, Kirkwood announced that Klinzman had resigned. While the college did not immediately respond to a request for comment, the official statement certainly makes it sound like this was a forced resignation:

The school has stated that the professor was not removed due to his views or his right to express them. Kirkwood says their decision is based solely on their commitment to harboring a safe learning environment for our students, faculty and staff.

The college has also stated: “However, when the expression of views by him or any member of our community is perceived as placing public safety in jeopardy, or hampers our ability to deliver on our mission, we will always do what is necessary in service to our students’ pursuit of a higher education.”

This is a troubling confession. “When the expression of views by him or any member of our community is perceived as placing public safety in jeopardy,” college officials believe they must take action, even if that perception is wrong, as it was in this case. Neither Klinzman’s support for antifa nor his stated interest in hitting someone (implied to be Trump) with a bat represents any actual threat.

Antifa is an illiberal movement that doesn’t believe in extending free speech rights to its opponents, and thus it’s always somewhat ironic to watch this perspective used against them and other far-left anti-free-speech folk. Nevertheless, even those who do not recognize free speech as a right should still enjoy its benefits. Getting rid of Klinzman was a serious mistake, and a powerful example of what happens when administrators interpret a mandate to protect students’ safety as an excuse to censor provoctive speech.

For more about antifa, order my new book, Panic Attack: Young Radicals in the Age of Trump, which contains a chapter about the movement’s tactics, goals, and belief system.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2U2GS6h
via IFTTT

Tesla Scrambles To Hike Prices In China, Blames Yuan Weakness

Tesla plans on once again raising prices in China – marking yet another shift in pricing strategy overseas. Changes to pricing overseas (in the case of earlier this year, a barrage of price cuts as demand waned) have occurred so often and without rhyme or reason that they even spurred protests from Chinese consumers earlier this year. In early August, we reported that Tesla had changed its mind and was looking to raise prices on Chinese consumers as a result of what it called “Yuan-related uncertainty”. 

Now, those price hikes look as thought they are set to happen far quicker than originally anticipated, according to Bloomberg. Tesla is expected to hike prices in China as soon as August 30, in response to the trade war escalation of the past week. The hikes had been originally planned for September. 

The bigger question is how long after the price hike will Tesla announce yet another price cut as it sees demand for its product go up in smoke… a different kind of smoke from that generated by its spontaneously combusting solar panels.

Last week saw a significant escalation in the trade war when China threatened to increase tariffs on U.S. made cars to as much as 50% in response to President Trump’s latest round of tariffs on Chinese goods. And as trade war escalated, the Yuan has tumbled, reducing the value of any earnings that Tesla brings back from China and then converts to U.S. dollars. On Monday, the Yuan fell to 11 year lows against the dollar. 

Tesla imports all of the cars that it sells in China, but is currently in the process of building a factory in Shanghai that aims to help the company minimize the impact of the ongoing trade war and associated tariffs (even though it has bizarrely been slashing capex guidancein advance of this massive money pit).

As of now, the company imports its Model S, Model X and Model 3 vehicles into China from the U.S. Tesla has agreed to buy batteries from South Korea’s LG Chem Ltd. for when it begins production at its new China plant. 

While Teslas still remain popular in China, local brands have a head start on the company and can also ride the tailwind of government incentives, while Tesla must face the headwind of import tariffs. 

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

Trump Proposes To Hold Next G-7 Summit At His Miami Golf Resort

As Donald Trump kisses and makes up with his European counterparts – including German Chancellor Angela Merkel…

… at this year’s G-7 Summit in Biarritz, the president has proposed something that will likely send his political opponents into yet another raging fit.

Trump suggested that next year’s summit – which the US is slated to host – be held in Miami, at Trump’s Doral golf resort. Of course, there are drawbacks to holding the event at Doral. Miami in the summer is extremely warm. And let’s not overlook the deluge of complaints about the president’s conflict of interest.

When looking around the Miami, Trump said his club was the best option: “We haven’t found anything that could even come close to competing” with Doral, Trump said.

Trump cited the advantages of a global summit in Miami, telling Merkel ahead of their meeting this morning that she would be just a three-minute helicopter ride from the airport to the site.

But the risks of once again running afoul of ethics watchdogs could put the kibosh on the whole thing. Trump is already facing multiple lawsuits over his continued involvement with some of his private businesses, such as the Trump International Hotel in Washington. And of course, hosting an international summit on one of his properties could open him up to a slew of new accusations about mixing his business and official duties.

That said, Doral has the capacity to host an event like the G-7 annual summit. The gold club’s website boasts that it’s only eight miles away from the Miami airport. It’s 800 acres, boasts four golf courses and 643 rooms, plus more than 100,000 square feet of event space – including the Donald J. Trump Grand Ballroom.

In separate news, Trump said that it was “certainly possible” that he could invite Russian President Vladimir Putin to next year’s summit meeting, which would revert the G-7 back to the G-8. Russia was booted from the group a few years back after the CIA-assisted presidential coup in Ukraine backfired. Trump said ahead of his Sunday morning breakfast meeting with UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson that the notion of inviting Putin to next year’s meeting had certainly been discussed, he said.

“We did discuss it,” he said. “We had a very good discussion on Russia and President Putin, and a lively discussion, but, really, a good one,” he said. “And it’s certainly possible. It’s certainly possible. We’ll see.”

This isn’t the first time that Trump has said that Russia should be reinstated to the group, according to the Hill.  “We talk about Russia because I’ve been to numerous G-7 meetings,” Trump said last week during a meeting with Romanian President Klaus Iohannis. “I think it’s much more appropriate to have Russia in. So, I could certainly see it being the G-8 again. And if somebody would make that motion, I would certainly be disposed to think about it very favorably.”

Of course, the EU has expressed strong opposition to the notion of inviting Russia back.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2ZoI7ha Tyler Durden

Lawyer Loses Bid To Redact Opinion Labeling Him a “Copyright Troll”

From McDermott v. Monday Monday, LLC, written by District Judge Denise Cote, issued last Fall, though I just came across it while researching a related copyright case:

On February 22, 2018, this Court denied the defendant’s motion for attorney’s fees in this case. McDermott v. Monday Monday (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 22, 2018) (“February 22 Opinion”). Over a month later, plaintiff’s counsel filed a motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60 objecting to the use of the term “copyright troll” in the February 22 Opinion to describe plaintiff’s counsel. He requests that the term be “redacted” from the February 22 Opinion. The request is denied….

Plaintiff’s counsel, Richard Liebowitz, has filed over 700 cases in this district since 2016 asserting claims of copyright [infringement]. The instant action was among their number. In this action, the plaintiff sued an Idaho limited liability company based on the assertion that it had displayed the plaintiff’s copyrighted photograph on its website. The defendant was served on November 30. Despite his obligation to do so, Mr. Liebowitz did not file on ECF either an affidavit reflecting service of the complaint or proof that he had served the initial pretrial conference notice on the defendant.

Moreover, despite the assertion in the complaint that the defendant “transacts business in New York,” it appears that the defendant does not do so. On January 17, the defendant moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. Before opposition to the motion was due, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed his suit. That same day, the defendant sought attorney’s fees and costs. In his opposition to the motion for attorney’s fees and costs, Mr. Liebowitz did not suggest that he had any non-frivolous reason to believe that there was personal jurisdiction over the defendant in this district. For the reasons described in the February 22 Opinion, the Court in an exercise of its discretion denied the defendant’s motion and declined to award fees against Mr. Liebowitz “on this occasion.” The February 22 Opinion warned that should Mr. Liebowitz file any other action in this district against a defendant over whom there is no non-frivolous basis to find that there is personal jurisdiction, “the outcome may be different.”

Despite the exercise of restraint in declining to impose sanctions against Mr. Liebowitz, Mr. Liebowitz has brought this motion. He objects to the description in the February 22 Opinion of Mr. Liebowitz as a known copyright troll, and requests that the February 22 Opinion with that term “redacted.” …

Even if it were appropriate to consider this request for a “redaction” under Rule 60, Mr. Liebowitz has failed to explain what the refiling of the February 22 Opinion with a redaction would accomplish. He has also failed to demonstrate that any modification to or redaction of the February 22 Opinion is warranted. His litigation strategy in this district fits squarely within the definition of a copyright troll.

The February 22 Opinion defined a copyright troll as follows:

“In common parlance, copyright trolls are more focused on the business of litigation than on selling a product or service or licensing their copyrights to third parties to sell a product or service. A copyright troll plays a numbers game in which it targets hundreds or thousands of defendants seeking quick settlements priced just low enough that it is less expensive for the defendant to pay the troll rather than defend the claim.”

In the over 700 cases Mr. Liebowitz has filed since 2016, over 500 of those have been voluntarily dismissed, settled, or otherwise disposed of before any merits-based litigation. In most cases, the cases are closed within three months of the complaint filing. In some instances, cases were dismissed because Mr. Liebowitz failed to prosecute his clients’ claims. See, e.g., Vincheski v. University of Minnesota et al., 16cv4590 (KBF), ECF No. 19 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 9, 2016) (terminating the action after plaintiff failed to amend her complaint pursuant to a court order directing plaintiff to amend her complaint due to deficiencies in the dismissed original complaint). In other cases, judges have noted Mr. Liebowitz’s unorthodox litigation practices. See, e.g., Cuffaro v. Nylon Media, Inc., 18cv1391 (GHW), ECF No. 11 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 11, 2018) (noting that plaintiff, in a sworn affidavit in support of a default judgment, misstated key dates and urging “counsel for plaintiff to use greater caution and to avoid such clear errors when making submissions to the Court”); Kmonicek v. Daily Burn, Inc., 17cv497 (KPF), ECF No. 23 (S.D.N.Y. June 15, 2017) (“The Court is surprised to have received the above request [for an extension to file a stipulation of dismissal], which was not at all foreshadowed during yesterday’s telephone conference. And the Court is hesitant to grant the parties’ third extension request in order to accommodate what appear to be ministerial concerns not touching on the substance of the parties’ settlement.”) (emphasis in original) (each extension in the case was requested by Mr. Liebowitz).

A number of Mr. Liebowitz’s cases have been dismissed from the bench as frivolous. See, e.g., Cruz v. Am. Broad. Cos., 17cv8794 (LAK), 2017 WL 5665657, at n.11 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 17, 2017) (Judge Kaplan noted that he “awarded over $121,000 in attorney’s fees against a client of Mr. Liebowitz in three other, related copyright infringement cases that were dismissed from the bench.) (citing Kanongataa v. Am. Broad. Cos., 16cv7392 (LAK), 2017 WL 4776981, at (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 4, 2017) ). Multiple courts, on their own initiative, have ordered Mr. Liebowitz to show cause why he should not be required to post security for costs as a condition of proceeding further with an action. See, e.g., Pereira v. Kendall Jenner, Inc., 17cv6945 (RA), ECF No. 24 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 4, 2018) (Mr. Liebowitz voluntarily dismissed the case before responding to Judge Abrams’s Show Cause Order.); Cruz v. Am. Broad. Cos., 17cv8794 (LAK), 2017 WL 5665657, (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 17, 2017) (Mr. Liebowitz informed the court that the parties had settled the case before responding to Judge Kaplan’s Show Cause Order.); Leibowitz v. Galore Media, Inc., 18cv2626 (RA) (HBP), 2018 WL 4519208 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 20, 2018) (denying motion for reconsideration of order to post security for costs); see also Tabak v. Idle Media, Inc., 17cv8285 (AT), ECF No. 5 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 31, 2017) (Judge Torres ordered Mr. Liebowitz to show cause why the action should not be transferred. Mr. Liebowitz voluntarily dismissed the case before responding to the Order to Show Cause.); Reynolds v. Intermarkets, Inc., 17cv8795 (AT), ECF No. 4 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 14, 2017) (same). Mr. Liebowitz has been admonished for repeating arguments that “have no basis in law.” Terry v. Masterpiece Advertising Design, 17cv8240 (NRB), 2018 WL 3104091 at (S.D.N.Y. June 21, 2018). Mr. Liebowitz has also been sanctioned for failing to comply with court orders and for failing to produce materials during discovery. Romanowicz v. Alister & Paine, Inc., 17cv8937 (PAE) (KHP), ECF No. 24 (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2018) (ordering Mr. Liebowitz to pay $200 to the Clerk of Court as a consequence of his failure to comply with an Order directing him to file an affidavit of service of a Default Judgment); Ferdman v. CBS Interactive, Inc., 17cv1317 (PGG), 2018 WL 4572241 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 21, 2018) (discovery sanctions). Mr. Liebowitz has filed nearly 200 cases in this district in 2018 alone, often times filing multiple cases on the same day.

Nevertheless, Mr. Liebowitz argues that his conduct does not comport with the definition of term “copyright troll” because copyright trolls engage in a narrower type of behavior: specifically, multi-defendant John Doe litigation brought by the copyright holders of pornographic material. This argument is unavailing.

First, simply because the term is also invoked in another type of case does not preclude its application here. Second, the article that Mr. Liebowitz cites for the proposition that the term applies to enforcers of copyrights in pornography explains that such practices are just “a particular kind of copyright trolling.” Matthew Sag, Copyright Trolling, An Empirical Study, 100 Iowa L. Rev. 1105, 1108 (2015) (emphasis added). The article, and courts that cite it, define the “essence of trolling” as something broader: “seeking quick settlements priced just low enough that it is less expensive for the defendant to pay the troll rather than defend the claim.” Id.; see also Creazioni Artistiche Musicali, S.r.l. v. Carlin America, Inc., 14cv9270 (RJS), 2017 WL 3393850, at (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2017). As evidenced by the astonishing volume of filings coupled with an astonishing rate of voluntary dismissals and quick settlements in Mr. Liebowitz’s cases in this district, it is undisputable that Mr. Liebowitz is a copyright troll.

This Court has generally shown Mr. Liebowitz leniency, despite his questionable tactics. In this case, the Court declined twice to award the defendant attorney’s fees. In another, the Court imposed a bond on Mr. Liebowitz’s client in an amount that was less than a tenth of the request made by the defendant. See Reynolds v. Hearst, 17cv6720 (DLC), 2018 WL 1229840 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 5, 2018). In yet another, the Court modified sanctions imposed on Mr. Liebowitz to “more directly address the deficiencies in [his] performance … and deter their repetition.” Steeger v. JMS Cleaning Services, LLC, 17cv8013 (DLC), 2018 WL 1363497, at (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 15, 2018).

In this case, the February 22 Opinion used an apt term to describe Mr. Liebowitz’s copyright litigation practice. He has not shown that doing so has burdened him with any undue and extreme hardship. Press coverage that accurately summarizes the status and outcomes of Mr. Liebowitz’s cases in this District does not present an undue and extreme hardship….

You can read Mr. Liebowitz’s side of the story in his motion; here’s an excerpt from the Introduction:

Liebowitz Law Firm, PLLC has filed more than 600 Cases in SDNY and EDNY since January 2016. But the firm also represents over 350 clients, thousands of copyright registrations, and tens of thousands of copyrighted works. The number of lawsuits filed by the firm primarily shows that: (a) violation of the Copyright Act via unauthorized use of photographic materials is an epidemic; (b) the Liebowitz Law Firm is vindicating the public interest by ensuring that a proper licensing market exists for the work of photographers; and (c) individual photographers are retaining Liebowitz Law Firm to file federal lawsuits because there is no other means for them to enforce their rights, particularly given the Congressional failure to establish a Copyright Court to help streamline these types of claims.

In response to Liebowitz Law Firm’s good faith efforts to enforce the Copyright Act on behalf of individual working-class photographers, the District Court has labeled Richard Liebowitz, the firm’s principal and founder, a “copyright troll.” The term “troll,” when applied to an actual human being, is never used as a compliment. It is meant to defame, degrade, and stereotype a person as a villain. It is intended to invoke wide-ranging negative connotations that suggest harassment, abusive practices, depraved motivations and even illegality. Once a person labels another as a “troll,” certain truths become self-evident, the most obvious being that any actions taken by the so-called “troll” will be perceived through the lens of that negative stereotype, and any judgments rendered will inevitably function to confirm that hostile perception.

On February 22, 2018, the District Court entered an order in which it became the first and only court to sua sponte label Plaintiff’s counsel, Richard P. Liebowitz, a “copyright ‘troll.’” See McDermott v. Monday Monday, LLC, No. 17CV9230 (DLC), 2018 WL 1033240, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 22, 2018) (“Plaintiff’s counsel, Richard Liebowitz, is a known copyright ‘troll,’ filing over 500 cases in this district alone in the past twenty-four months.”) On its face, the Court affixed this derogatory label to Mr. Liebowitz for no other reason than the number of cases his law firm has filed during the last two years. The District Court did not explain why it was “known” that Mr. Liebowitz was a “troll,” or where the Court obtained such knowledge. Despite filing over 600 cases in two years, no other judicial officer in any case in any district had ever stereotyped Mr. Liebowitz or his firm as a “troll”. Then, less than a week later, on February 28, 2018, the District Court invoked the “troll” label again to describe Mr. Liebowitz. This time, it was to impose a punitive monetary sanction of $10,000 against the attorney. See Steeger v. JMS Cleaning Servs. LLC, No. 17CV8013(DLC), 2018 WL 1136113, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 28, 2018) (beginning its decision: “Paul Steeger filed this copyright action. He is represented by Richard Liebowitz, who has been labelled a copyright “troll.””) Significantly, the District Court did not expressly state in Steeger that the “troll” label, as applied to Mr. Liebowitz, was originated by the District Court itself. Finally, on March 5, 2018, the District Court once again invoked the negative stereotype, gratuitously labeling Mr. Liebowitz a “copyright troll” for no other reason than to justify an adverse ruling against his client-photographer Ray Reynolds. See Reynolds v. Hearst Communications, Inc., No. 17CV6720(DLC), 2018 WL 1229840, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 5, 2018) (“Mr. Liebowitz has filed over 500 cases in this district in the past twenty-four months. He has been labelled a copyright ‘troll'”).

In less than two weeks, the District Court issued three adverse rulings which unjustifiably characterized Mr. Liebowitz as a “copyright troll.” The District Court could have issued the same decisions without invoking such a broad-sweeping, defamatory stereotype. As grounds for redaction, Liebowitz respectfully submits that the District Court erred by using that term to describe Mr. Liebowitz and, by extension, his law firm and its 350+ clients. Because the term “copyright troll” has been ostensibly used by the Court as a legal term of art, the Court’s usage may be appropriately challenged as a mistake of law under Rule 60(b)(1). In the alternative, if the term “copyright troll” is not a legal term of art, but has merely been invoked to disparage and defame Liebowitz Law Firm for representing a large number of working-class photographers, then the District Court should redact such invective under Rule 60(b)(6) as it works “an extreme and undue hardship” on Liebowitz’s ability to enforce the Copyright Act in furtherance of the public interest.

Accordingly, because the District Court’s use of the term “troll” is a plainly erroneous mistake-of-law and highly prejudicial to Liebowitz Law Form and the Authors it represents, the Court’s order should be amended to redact the term “copyright troll” from the decision.

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