‘Hawkish’ Powell Sinks Stocks & Bonds As VIX Curve Re-Inverts

Just when you thought it was all over…

 

Quite a chaotic day across asset-classes today – the most chaotic since the XIV crisis moves…

 

Once Powell had finished his prepared remarks and confidently expressed his expectations for the economy (and rate hikes), stocks tumbled (as rates spiked)…

 

Only The Dow managed to hold on to yesterday’s gains…

 

Nasdaq managed to get back into the green for the month but slipped notably lower all day…

 

DOW stalled at a 75% retracement of its losses…

 

All of which leaves stocks lower for February and unless tomorrow sees a heroic panic-bid in the S&P, will break the unprecedented 15-month win streak… although that hanging-man candle for Feb is stunning…

VIX jumped notably on the day…

 

Having shifted back into contango yesterday for the first time since the crisis, the VIX term structure snapped back into backwardation (inverted) today following Powell’s hawkish comments…

All major US Equity index ‘VIX’ measures are once again higher for the month of Feb…

 

Treasury yields spike today on Powell’s relatively hawkish comments… then rallied back lower in yields as stocks tumbled.

 

Notably 10Y Yields tested the CPI/FOMC highs before fading this afternoon as stocks sank on infrastructure headlines…

 

As Treasury yields spiked during Powell’s testimony, Breakevens slipped lower after recoupling from the early Feb chaos…

 

The entire curve shifted in parallel on Powell but then 2s30s really started to flatten…

 

The Dollar Index spiked during Powell’s testimony, running stops above last week’s FOMC Minutes highs…

 

Commodities all tanked together as the dollar spiked…

 

Nasdaq and Bitcoin recoupled…

 

With Bitcoin stabilizing above $10,000…

 

Finally,  we note that US macro economic surprise data has tumbled to its lowest since October… are stocks about to catch back down?

via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/2CLHBhJ Tyler Durden

News Agencies Sue For External Parkland Massacre Video Footage, Ignore Internal Inconsistencies

Authored by Lexi Morgan via Intellihub.com,

Why would media companies not want to see footage from inside of the school that would presumably show a heavily-cladded gunman wearing full body dress?

Three media companies filed suit in court on Monday, in an effort to obtain security camera footage captured on cameras mounted outside of the Majority Stoneman Douglas High School.

But for some reason nothing was filed to obtain footage from inside the school?

Footage that would presumably show a heavily-cladded shooter wearing full body dress, as reported by both teachers and students who admit there was a scheduled code Red drill on the day of the shooting.

Moreover, as it turns out, at least four officers were told by Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel to stand down and to not enter the school unless they were wearing their body cameras which none of them were.

The School Board of Broward County, the Broward County Sheriff’s Office, Sheriff Scott Israel, and Majority Stoneman Douglas H.S. Superintendent Robert Runcie are all listed as defendants in the lawsuit.

via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/2oBCyLU Tyler Durden

Libor-OIS Blows Out As Libor Rises Above 2% For The First Time In 10 Years

There are those who will breathlessly tell you to ignore all marginal changes in the market, such as the “tiny” move in the VIX from 10 to 15, only to suffer a 96% loss on their inverse VIX ETF when the “tiny” move becomes just a “little bigger” after a short squeeze cascade is triggered because small moves are that much more more acute when starting from a small base. They are also those who will tell you to disregard “modest” moves in the FRA-OIS, the conventional metric for “funding pressures” as we said last week  – after all the move is tiny in the context of “normal times”, yet forget to mention that the Fed’s balance sheet is now $4.4 trillion, or 5x higher than normal accentuating even the smallest rate moves. In fact, these are all the same people who will tell you to ignore all changes in the market, no matter how small, until something breaks and then they tell you it was so obvious the crash was coming.

Meanwhile, we’ll just note that the same Libor-OIS (or its intraday updated cousin, the FRA-OIS) we highlighted less than a week ago  when it was “only” 32.7bps, has blown out by 8 bps in just the past week, and is now over 40bps, the widest since October 2016 and blowing out, a huge move when one considers the hundreds of billions in TRS and other layered swaps levering even one basis point.

Then there is Libor: as of today, the benchmark 3M USD Libor has risen above 2% for the first time since December 2008, as financial conditions, if only in the unsecured dollar funding market – which just happens to benchmark trillions in securities – becomes dangerously tight.

Putting the move in context, one week ago, JPMorgan and BofA said they expect 3M Libor to hit 2% by end-1Q; it get there 5 weeks early as the bond vigilantes wake up.

So what is going on? As we explained not once but twice last week, there are fears that repatriation flows will soak up all much of the excess liquidity on the front end as companies rush to delever.

Then there is the recent surge in bill issuance: as Citi wrotes last week, there is evidence that last week’s $200bn surge in T-bill and Treasury issuance “may be contributing to a tightening in $ financial conditions” which represents a negative for credit.

As Citi explained, in addition to the direct effect of the issuance on real yields, when the US Treasury raises money it initially deposits it in the Treasury General Account (TGA) at the Fed. Rather than growing its balance sheet, the Fed effectively sterilizes these deposits with a reduction in private sector banks’ excess reserves. This in turn reduces the capital available to be deployed in markets for cross-currency and other arbitrages, and means there is a direct link between the rise in the TGA and this week’s rise in $ Libor-OIS (chart below, left hand side).

Another adverse effect, one we discussed last week, is that this also feeds through into a more negative €-$ cross-currency basis (shown below), making FX-hedged purchases of US securities more expensive for foreigners. According to Citi estimates, a rise in the TGA to around $350bn ought to add 2-4bp to the basis; however Citi also suspects the effect may prove considerably greater (chart above, right hand side).

As we said last Friday, “the irony is that the tighter the USD-funding conditions get, the wider the FRA/OIS spread will drift, the less global demand for FX-hedged US paper there will be, the higher US Treasury rates rise to prompt demand, until eventually yields push so high that the already stretched correlation between rising yields and stocks finally snaps, leading to an equity correction (or crash), which in turn forces the Fed to ease financial conditions, resetting the cycle all over again.”

Bottom line, in addition to following the 10Y, the USD, and of course the S&P500, add Libor/OIS to your watchlist, especially now that it is on the verge of breaching a 5 years trendling: it may prove the most forward-looking canary in this particular coal mine.

via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/2owmr2Z Tyler Durden

Google Censors Guns, Removes Shopping Results

Authored by Douglas Stewart via Medium.com,

It appears that Google may have silently joined the ranks of one side of the gun control debate.

On February 26, Twitter users LADowd and Xavier Dreyman noticed that results in the most-used search engine in the world were returning nothing in the “Shopping” tab when any query included a gun part, model, or manufacturer.

His first result was for the rather broad term of “rifle scope”. This netted zero results while providing just two sponsored results below the main search. Curiosity must’ve taken over and he continued on looking for “remington razor” which also netted a whopping 0 results. Turns out, the problem was that Remington is most known for firearms.

Twitter users became even more curious. Myself and others decided to test this and any shopping result for anything related to “Remington”, “Glock”, and “Colt” turns up nothing. Twitter user “Stigcicle” found a more concise list that includes censoring “Steyr”, an Australian town has the misfortune of sharing the name with a gun manufacturer. This includes shopping for parts for your Dodge Colt; if you still have one it is likely in need of many parts anyway.

In order to verify, I took a video of the search results to confirm. Sure enough, it returns 0 results.

In the wake of the Marjory Douglas Stoneman shooting that left 17 dead, renewed calls for gun control are center stage. So are the demands for consumers to boycott the NRA; companies that have business relationships are also facing mounting pressure from consumers and activists.

However, Google’s actions in the wake of the this tragedy are not a surprise given the company’s known political stances. What is surprising is the action was taken in silence. In a time when so many are proud to announce their disagreements with the NRA, one cant help but wonder if this is Google’s way of testing the waters. After all, if it backfires, they can easily claim it was the mistake of some unaccountable department with nameless employees. If it wins, they claim victory. It almost looks strategic.

via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/2oBW8aJ Tyler Durden

Massachusetts Salon Owner Says He Wants to Hire More Workers. Licensing Is the Reason He Can’t.

Frank Zona’s family has been in the hairstyling business for more than three generations—since before they arrived in the United States as immigrants from Sicily, where, he jokes, they probably didn’t have a government-issued license.

As the owner of a collection of hair salons in the Boston area, Zona employs about 75 people. He’d like to hire more. Licensing requirements, he says, are the main reason why he can’t.

If people want to work in Zona’s salons, in virtually any capacity, they must first obtain a cosmetologist license from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. That’s true even for positions that don’t have anything to do with cutting, coloring, or styling hair. Even shampooing or blow-drying hair, or being a stylist’s assistant—the types of entry-level jobs that allow someone to test out the profession before deciding whether to work in it—must be filled only by licensed professionals.

“There’s only one way into the industry,” Zona told a U.S. House subcommittee at a hearing today: “through a school program leading to a license.”

In Massachusetts, that equates to a 1,000-hour training program, at a cost of more than $12,000.

These one-size-fits-all licensing rules make it harder to find new employees. They also contribute to high turnover in the profession, Zona says, because newly minted cosmetologists who never had a chance to try an entry-level job before getting a license often leave the profession because it’s different from what they expected. That’s not good for businesses, which want a stable workforce, and it’s even worse for those workers who wasted thousands of dollars and months of their lives.

Perhaps more so than in any other profession, onerous licensing rules for cosmetologists and hair stylists have to come to symbolize both how absurd government licensing schemes can be and how difficult it can be to repeal or even amend them.

In Arizona, for example, state lawmakers are considering a proposal to exempt blow-drying from the state’s cosmetology licensing regime. The argument for the bill is much the same as what Zona laid out in his testimony today: that entry-level jobs posing no health or safety risk to the general public should not be subject to onerous licensing requirements.

“It limits job opportunities. It’s a barrier to newcomers in the industry, and it increases the cost of the service. None of which helps the public,” says state Rep. Michelle Ugenti-Rita (R-Scottsdale), who sponsored the proposal.

But the bill has been attacked by the head of the Arizona State Board of Cosmetology and by licensed cosmetologists, who claim that simply letting unlicensed individuals use a blow dryer could trigger a “health crisis.” More honest critics express concern that the bill would allow unlicensed workers “to take a lot of work from us” by tearing down protectionist rules.

“In many ways, occupational licensing has become one of the major labor policy issues facing today’s workforce,” Jarrett Dieterle, director of commercial freedom policy for the R Street Institute, a free market think tank, told the House subcommittee today. “One out of four Americans needs a government license to work, and the average license requires almost a year of educational training, passing an exam, and paying over $250 in fees.”

Those burdens can fall harder on low-income individuals who might not have the time or money to afford 1,000 hours or more in training classes for a job that they might already know how to do, Dieterle says.

To that end, a number of states have already trimmed licensing requirements for hair-braiding or exempted it entirely from the cosmetology licensing regime. Arizona did that in 2011, over a similar outcry from its cosmetology board and from licensed professionals. There and elsewhere, looser licensing rules have not triggered a public health crisis.

“There is relatively little evidence to show that occupational licensing has actually improved the quality of delivered services in many fields, although it has been shown to increase prices and limit economic output,” Morris Kleiner, a University of Minnesota labor economist who has studied licensing, told the subcommittee today.

While Zona says he believes licensing laws do serve some purpose, he’d like to see low-level jobs excluded from the one-size-fits-all requirements.

“It can be a tool to get people in,” he says, “instead of keeping people out.”

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2ouu7CU
via IFTTT

Silicon Valley Joins War On Cash: Tim Cook Seeks “Elimination Of Money”

Apple CEO Tim Cook has one big hope for the future – that he lives to see the end of money.

“…I’m hoping that I’m still going to be alive to see the elimination of money.”

Speaking at a meeting for Apple shareholders in Cupertino, California earlier this month, Cook made it clear that he is firmly on the side of the war-on-cash establishment.

“Because why would you have this stuff! Why go through all the expense of printing this stuff and then some people steal it, and you’ve got to worry about counterfeits and all these things,” he continued.

As Apple’s CEO talked about the downsides of cash, BI reported that he became more animated, revealing his real passion about the topic…

“We can provide a solution for the customer that’s simpler, more convenient, you don’t carry around a wallet with a bunch of cards in it, or a purse with a bunch of cards in it,” Cook said.

“And it’s more secure, if you’ve ever had your credit card ripped off, I’m sure a lot of you have, I have, it’s not a good experience.”

Until now, it has tended to be politicians and central bankers leading the call for a cashless society… for your own good.

The enemies of cash claim that only crooks and cranks need large-denomination bills. They want large transactions to be made electronically so government can follow them. Yet these are some of the same European politicians who blew a gasket when they learned that U.S. counterterrorist officials were monitoring money through the Swift global system. Criminals will find a way, large bills or not.

The real reason the war on cash is gearing up now is political: Politicians and central bankers fear that holders of currency could undermine their brave new monetary world of negative interest rates. Japan and Europe are already deep into negative territory, and U.S. Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen said last week the U.S. should be prepared for the possibility. Translation: That’s where the Fed is going in the next recession.

Negative rates are a tax on deposits with banks, with the goal of prodding depositors to remove their cash and spend it to increase economic demand. But that goal will be undermined if citizens hoard cash. And hoarding cash is easier if you can take your deposits out in large-denomination bills you can stick in a safe. It’s harder to keep cash if you can only hold small bills.

So, presto, ban cash. This theme has been pushed by the likes of Bank of England chief economist Andrew Haldane and Harvard’s Kenneth Rogoff, who wrote in the Financial Times that eliminating paper currency would be “by far the simplest” way to “get around” the zero interest-rate bound “that has handcuffed central banks since the financial crisis.” If the benighted peasants won’t spend on their own, well, make it that much harder for them to save money even in their own mattresses.

All of which ignores the virtues of cash for law-abiding citizens. Cash allows legitimate transactions to be executed quickly, without either party paying fees to a bank or credit-card processor. Cash also lets millions of low-income people participate in the economy without maintaining a bank account, the costs of which are mounting as post-2008 regulations drop the ax on fee-free retail banking. While there’s always a risk of being mugged on the way to the store, digital transactions are subject to hacking and computer theft.

Cash is also the currency of gray markets—amounting to 20% or more of gross domestic product in some European countries—that governments would love to tax. But the reason gray markets exist is because high taxes and regulatory costs drive otherwise honest businesses off the books. Politicians may want to think twice about cracking down on the cash economy in a way that might destroy businesses and add millions to the jobless rolls. The Italian economy might shut down without cash.

By all means people should be able to go cashless if they like. But it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that the politicians want to bar cash as one more infringement on economic liberty. They may go after the big bills now, but does anyone think they’d stop there? Why wouldn’t they eventually ban all cash transactions much as they banned gold and silver as mediums of exchange?

Beware politicians trying to limit the ways you can conduct private economic business. It never turns out well.

But the swing to America’s corporatocracy calling for a war on cash is not for your own good ‘Murica.

All of this anti-cash angst from Cook can be summed up in 3 short words – Use Apple Pay – and follows Visa’s Andy Gerlt, who last year proclaimed: “We are declaring war on cash.”

As we detailed previously, the shots fired in the war on cash may have several unintended casualties:

1. Privacy

  • Cashless transactions would always include some intermediary or third-party.
  • Increased government access to personal transactions and records.
  • Certain types of transactions (gambling, etc.) could be barred or frozen by governments.
  • Decentralized cryptocurrency could be an alternative for such transactions

2. Savings

  • Savers could no longer have the individual freedom to store wealth “outside” of the system.
  • Eliminating cash makes negative interest rates (NIRP) a feasible option for policymakers.
  • A cashless society also means all savers would be “on the hook” for bank bail-in scenarios.
  • Savers would have limited abilities to react to extreme monetary events like deflation or inflation.

3. Human Rights

  • Rapid demonetization has violated people’s rights to life and food.
  • In India, removing the 500 and 1,000 rupee notes has caused multiple human tragedies, including patients being denied treatment and people not being able to afford food.
  • Demonetization also hurts people and small businesses that make their livelihoods in the informal sectors of the economy.

4. Cybersecurity

  • With all wealth stored digitally, the potential risk and impact of cybercrime increases.
  • Hacking or identity theft could destroy people’s entire life savings.
  • The cost of online data breaches is already expected to reach $2.1 trillion by 2019, according to Juniper Research.

As the War on Cash accelerates, many shots will be fired. The question is: who will take the majority of the damage?

via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/2sULlOk Tyler Durden

Is This The End Of Bear Markets Forever?

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

My…my…how quickly we forget.

Yesterday, as the markets rocketed higher, my email lit up with questions surrounding the discussion from this last weekend’s newsletter.

“I have questioned over the last couple of weeks exactly how much volatility the Fed would allow before stepping into the fray to keep the markets stable.

We now know it is roughly a 10% decline.

Specifically were the comments about QE being ‘useful to have in the toolkit for those times when the short-term interest rate tool may not be available,’ adding that the Fed is ‘quite likely’ to require large-scale asset purchases again because real rates will remain low due to slow productivity and labor-force growth. They also added that ‘if LSAPs are indeed not effective, then the Fed may need to take other measures.’ (Zerohedge has the complete article.)

In other words, despite the rhetoric to the contrary, the Fed isn’t going away…….ever!”

The deluge of emails revolved around much of the same premise.

“If the the Fed isn’t going away, then why would there ever be another bear market?” 

It is certainly an interesting question, particularly as the Fed continues to trot out officials to make market supporting statements such as Fed Vice Chairman Quarles who stated on Monday:

“It might seem reasonable to assume that faster growth would lead to firmer inflation. However, I think a lot remains to be seen.” 

Or even Mario Draghi, Chairman of the ECB, who said:

“In the presence of an economic situation that is improving constantly, we need the right blend of measures. Uncertainties continue to prevail.”

So, despite economies that are supposedly improving, Central Banks continue into their tenth year of “emergency measures.” As Michael Lebowitz recently stated:

“Global central banks’ post-financial crisis monetary policies have collectively been more aggressive than anything witnessed in modern financial history. Over the last ten years, the six largest central banks have printed unprecedented amounts of money to purchase approximately $14 trillion of financial assets as shown below. Before the financial crisis of 2008, the only central bank printing money of any consequence was the Peoples Bank of China (PBoC).”

With that, I certainly understand the reasoning that if indeed “Central Banks” are now committed to monetary interventions going forward, the financial markets have been effectively “fire-proofed against bear markets.”

But such a belief is extremely dangerous.

It is also the same “belief” every major bubble was built upon throughout history and driven by the same underlying foundations.

Which created the bubble in “THE” asset class of choice at that time…

Which created the bubble…

Which always ended badly for investors.

Every. Single. Time.

Is “this time different?”

No, and it will end just the same as every previous liquidity driven bubble throughout history.

Of this, there is absolute certainty.

There are only TWO questions that must be answered:

  1. What will cause it, and;

  2. When will it happen?

What Will Cause The Next Crash

No one knows for certain what will cause the next financial crisis. However, in my opinion, the most likely culprit will be a credit-related event caused by the Fed’s misguided policy of hiking interest rates, and tightening monetary policy, when the financial system is more heavily levered than at any other point in human history.

The illusion of liquidity has a dangerous side effect. The process of the previous two debt-deleveraging cycles led to rather sharp market reversions as margin calls, and the subsequent unwinding of margin debt fueled a liquidation cycle in financial assets. The resultant loss of the “wealth effect” weighed on consumption pushing the economy into recession which then impacted corporate and household debt leading to defaults, write-offs, and bankruptcies.

With the push lower in interest rates, the assumed “riskiness” of piling on leverage was removed. However, while the cost of sustaining higher debt levels is lower, the consequences of excess leverage in the system remains the same.

You will notice in the chart above, that even relatively small deleveraging processes had significant negative impacts on the economy and the financial markets. With total system leverage spiking to levels never before witnessed in history, it is quite likely the next event that leads to a reversion in debt will be just as damaging to the financial and economic systems.

Since interest rates affect “payments,” increases in rates negatively impact consumption, housing, and investment which ultimately deters economic growth.

It will ultimately be the level of interest rates which triggers some “credit event” that starts the “next bear market”  

It has happened every time in history.

Importantly, as prices decline it will trigger margin calls which will induce more indiscriminate selling. The forced redemption cycle will force investors to dump positions to meet margin calls at a time when the lack of buyers will create a vacuum causing rapid price declines.

When Will It Happen

Honestly, no one knows for sure. However, history can give us some guide.

“In the past six decades, the average length of time from the first tightening to the end of the business cycle is 44 months; the median is 35 months; and the lag from the initial rate hike to the end of the bull equity market is 38 months for the average, 40 months for the media.” – David Rosenberg

Averages and medians are great for general analysis but obfuscate the variables of individual cycles. To be sure the last three business cycles (80’s, 90’s and 2000) were extremely long and supported by a massive shift in financial engineering and a credit leveraging cycle. The post-Depression recovery, and WWII, drove the long economic expansion in the 40’s, and the “space race” supported the 60’s.

Currently, employment, economic and wage growth remain weak with 1-in-4 Americans on Government subsidies and the majority living paycheck-to-paycheck. This is why Central Banks, globally, have continued aggressively monetizing debt in order to keep growth from stalling out. With the Fed now hiking rates, and reducing market liquidity, the risk of a policy mistake has risen markedly.

If David is correct, given the Fed began their current rate hiking campaign in December 2015, the next recession would occur 38-months later or February 2019. Such a span would make the current economic expansion the second longest in history based on the weakest economic growth rates.

The chart and table below compares real, inflation-adjusted, GDP to Federal Reserve interest rate levels. The vertical purple bars denote the quarter of the first rate hike to the beginning of the next rate decrease, or onset of a recession.

If you look at the underlying data, which dates back to 1943, and calculate both the average and median for the entire span, you find:

  • The average number of quarters from the first rate hike to the next recession is 11, or 33 months.
  • The average 5-year real economic growth rate was 3.08%
  • The median number of quarters from the first rate hike to the next recession is 10, or 30 months.
  • The median 5-year real economic growth rate was 3.10%

The importance of this reflects the point made previously, the Federal Reserve lifts interest rates to slow economic growth and quell inflationary pressures. Yet, economic growth and inflation are running well below historical norms and system-wide leverage has surged to new records as individuals and corporations have feasted on debt in a low-rate environment.

That is now changing as the Fed hikes interest rates. Notice in the chart above, that recessions occur when the Fed starts hiking interest rates and the Fed rate approaches the 10-year Treasury rate. In every instance, a recession or “crisis” occurred.

Crisis, Recession & Bear Markets

If historical averages hold, and since major bear markets in equities coincide with recessions, then the current bull market in equities has about one year left to run. While the markets, due to momentum, may ignore the effect of “monetary tightening” in the short-term, the longer-term has been a different story.

As shown in the table below, the bulk of losses in markets are tied to economic recessionsHowever, there are also other events such as the Crash of 1987, the Asian Contagion, Long-Term Capital Management, and others that led to sharp corrections in the market as well.

The point is that in the short-term the economy, and the markets (due to momentum), can SEEM TO DEFY the laws of gravity as interest rates begin to rise. However, as rates continue to rise they ultimately act as a “brake” on economic activity.

While rising interest rates may not “initially” impact asset prices, it is a far different story to suggest that they won’t. In fact, there have been absolutely ZERO times in history that the Federal Reserve has begun an interest rate hiking campaign that has not eventually led to a negative outcome.

What the majority of analysts fail to address is the “full-cycle” effect from rate hikes. While equities may initially provide a haven from rising interest rates during the first half of the rate cycle, they have been a destructive place to be during the second-half.

It is clear from the analysis that “bad things” have tended to follow the Federal Reserve’s first interest rate increase. While the markets, and economy, may seem to perform okay during the initial phase of the rate hiking campaign, the eventual negative impact will push most individuals to “panic sell” near the next lows. Emotional mistakes are 50% of the cause as to why investors consistently underperform the markets over a 20-year cycle.

The exact “what” and “when” of the next “bear market” is unknown. It has always been some unanticipated event that triggers the “reversion to the mean.”

It will be obvious in “hindsight.”

While the media will loudly protest that “no one could have seen it coming,” there are plenty of clues if you only choose to look.

The Fed has not put an “end” to bear markets. 

In fact, they have likely only succeeded in ensuring the next bear market will be larger than the last.

For now, the bullish trend is still in place and should be “consciously” honored. However, while it may seem that nothing can stop the markets rise, or seemingly the Fed will never let it fall, it is crucial to remember that it is “only like this, until it is like that.”

For those “asleep at the wheel,” there will be a heavy price to pay when the taillights turn red.

via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/2HSLu8A Tyler Durden

Gun Sales Surge After Florida School Shooting

A North Florida gun store owner says firearms sales surged more than 33% compared to February last year, indicating Floridians are concerned the erosion of the Second Amendment is imminent in the wake of the Parkland shooting.

“The last couple of weeks have been very busy,” John Garner, gun store owner told WYFF News 4. “Guns are political. It doesn’t take much to spark an interest.”

Garner has been selling guns for nearly 20-years. He told the WYFF investigative team that firearms sales have spiked in the past couple of weeks, after the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Garner even stated his sales are up 33% when compared to last February.

Garner further said the AR-15, 5.56×45mm, magazine-fed, gas-operated semi-automatic rifle, is the hottest item in the shop, selling more than 17 in two weeks.

As we noted, this past weekend’s gun show at the Florida State Fairgrounds, saw a record number of gun enthusiasts who were eager to get their hands on an AR-15 before the government bans assault-style rifles.

“Hundreds have signed up for firearms safety training classes at the Florida Gun Show & organizers say it’s a big spike from years past,” said Bay News 9 field reporter, Angie Angers.

‘Just 3 days after Florida’s worst ever school shooting….Floridians flood to a gun show to further arm themselves with high powered assault weapons,” said the British journalist, .

“Florida Gun Show organizers say they saw record crowd yesterday with nearly 7,000 attendees despite gun control debate,” said one aspiring Twitter blogger.

As we detailed before, this could explain why the Floridians’ excitement around guns is skyrocketing:

Somewhat ironically, this was to be expected considering the massive effort by gun control advocates to erode as much of the Second Amendment as they can in the wake of the Parkland shooting – never letting a crisis go to waste and all that. President Trump’s recent advocacy for more stringent background checks, a 10-day waiting period and raising the age limit on the purchase of guns following the Parkland shooting likely fueled concerns over a “slippery slope” of firearms legislation.

Florida lawmakers such as Senator Bill Nelson (D) have called for stricter laws to fix the so-called “gun show loophole” which allows people to purchase firearms without a background check. While federally licensed vendors at a gun show are still required to run background checks (FFL), private sellers without a federal license do not have the same requirement in 40 states. (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Washington D.C., New York, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island and Washington all require private sellers to conduct background checks).

“Some of the people attending are afraid that future legislation will impact their gun ownership rights,” said Fernandez. That said, 95% of the vendors at this weekend’s Florida Gun Show are required to run background checks since they are licensed dealers.

Also of note, suspected gunman Nikolas Cruz passed a background check before legally purchasing a semiautomatic AR-15 style rifle.

“This was a mental health issue. This is someone who should have been identified from the beginning by law enforcement,” says Fernandez.

Meanwhile, what Google reveals about Americans’ recent gun-related queries, is downright stunning:

Google searches for “buy a gun” in the Florida region have soared to all-time highs.

The rest of the US is not different: google searches for “buy a gun” across the entire United States also just hit a record.

Finally, one place where public anxiety has yet to surpass the levels post Sandy Hook is fears about the Second Amendment: here google searches are still well below what Google observed in the aftermath of the tragic December 2012 event.

via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/2EYlAT6 Tyler Durden

Watch Live: Ben Bernanke Interviews Janet Yellen

Less than a month after Donald Trump unceremoniously kicked Janet Yellen out of the Fed after a four-year term as Federal Reserve chair, today at 2:00 p.m. another former Fed Chair Ben Bernanke will interview Yellen on her career, her time at the Fed, her observations about the current state of the economy and the challenges that confront us. Following their conversation, the two former Fed chairs will take questions from the audience.

This is how UBS’ chief economist Paul Donovan previewed the interview: “much excitement as one highly respected economist sits down to interview another highly respected economist. Former Fed Chair Bernanke will be talking with former Fed Chair Yellen on economics and policy. What they say when unconstrained by politics will be market relevant.”

Readers can participate in the conversation, and have their questions asked, using the #FedDuet hashtag on twitter.

via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/2oB4xvf Tyler Durden

Tech Cracks Start To Show

Authored by Sven Henrich via NorthmanTrader.com,

Bulls are back to dining at the “V”, the magic quick dip correction that never happened. The price action appears massively bullish, yet the data underneath is not at all. Instead it appears more associated with bull market end-times.

The final thrashing about which we’ve seen several times before. After all the tops of 2000 and 2007 were marked by a sudden acceleration in volatility and sudden corrective moves exceeding 10% followed by rallies of the similar magnitude. The underlying theme of these subsequent rallies: Narrowing of leadership, negative divergences and a renewed bullishness breathing a sigh of relief at precisely the wrong time.

This is exactly what we are witnessing now and let me highlight the Nasdaq in particular as there are cracks appearing amidst this aggressive rally back to highs.

Here’s the “V”:

It used to be that 10% corrections would take months to repair, no more, we can now do this in 2 weeks. The consequence of course we see this massive candle on the monthly and we see similar candles on many of the index charts.

Yesterday I asked this question:

It may mean nothing and lacks confirmation, but it’s a highly unusual monthly candle.

Let’s look underneath the hood. $NDX is nearly making new highs and new high/new lows are a mere shadow of what they were just a few weeks ago at the same price levels:

$NDX stock above the 50MA? Recovered but with fewer participants:

Yesterday’s advance/decline on Nasdaq? Weaker than on Friday:

There are $NDX stocks that are making new all time highs. And guess what? All on massive negative divergences:

And the ones not having made new highs yet would make new highs also on negative divergences:

This rally’s advance came again on a complete collapse in equal weight:

$XVG continues to show a similar pattern of deterioration seen in 2007:

The recovery on $NDX was so fast one can’t even see a correction ever having taken place on the yearly chart:

Many of these high fliers continue to be vastly extended. Where have they corrected? You tell me:

We saw a quick 12-13% down on indices and now a similar move higher. All in 3 weeks producing negative divergences.

Thiswas precisely the action that marked the final throes for the Nasdaq in 2000:

None of this means of we can’t go higher still. Indeed we could make new highs altogether, however given the context of the patterns, the underlying data and historical comparisons strongly suggest that these appearing cracks are very much worth paying attention to.

So far this is a narrow rally that is dependent on a handful stocks some of which are making new highs on negative divergences while being historically extended.

For the latest public analysis please visit NorthmanTrader. For our market products please visit Services.

via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/2FD4cjS Tyler Durden