Key Events In The Coming Week: All Eyes On Inflation And Retail Sales

This week’s post payrolls data calendar is pretty modest: the US reports consumer credit today, small business optimism tomorrow, but attention is reserved for CPI and retail sales on Friday.

asd

Elsewhere around the globe, SocGen summarizes that we get Eurozone consumer and business confidence data today (it hit a 2 decade high), unemployment tomorrow the ECB ‘account’ on Thursday; The UK has a cabinet re-shuffle today, industrial production tomorrow and trade on Wednesday; Chinese CPI data are due Wednesday.

Data and events ahead

In Euro area, the unemployment rate is expected to decline to 8.7% (8.8% prev), and German GDP (Thurs) to rise 2.6% (prev 1.9%). In UK, we forecast Industrial Production on Wed to be1.8% (3.6%, prev) and Manufacturing Production to be 2.8% (3.9% prev). We also have Non-monetary policy’s ECB meeting on Tues, ECB Monetary Policy Meeting Accounts and Bank of England Credit Conditions & Bank Liabilities Surveys on Thurs.

In China, we have producer and consumer price index (Wed). Banks expects CPI inflation to inch up to 1.9% yoy in Dec from 1.7% in Nov. PPI inflation has likely eased to 4.8% in Dec from 5.8% in Nov, mainly due to a higher comparison base last year.

In US, core CPI is expected to grow 0.2% mom in Dec, leaving yoy inflation at 1.7% on Fri. Market consensus for retail sales is a 0.40% increase vs the previous release of 0.80%. We will hear from a number of Fed speakers, including NY Fed Pres Dudley on Thurs.

asd

Deutsche Bank’s Jim Reid breaks down key events day by day:

  • Monday: November factory orders will be out as this note hits inboxes. Then we get a range of confidence indicators for the Eurozone, including the January Sentix investor confidence along with the December economic, consumer and business confidence stats. Elsewhere, the Eurozone’s retail sales and the UK’s December Halifax house price index are due. Over in the US, the November consumer credit numbers are also due. Onto other events, the Fed’s Williams and Rosengren speak at an Inflation targeting conference, while the Fed’s Bostic will also speak on monetary policy and the US economic outlook. Elsewhere, France’s President Macron arrives in China today for a three day state visit.
  • Tuesday: The November unemployment rate for the Eurozone and Italy are due, along with Germany’s IP. Then the trade and current account balance stats for France and Germany are also due. Over in the US, there is the December NFIB small business optimism index and JOLTS job openings. Onto other events, the Fed’s Kashkari speaks at a moderated panel. Elsewhere, North and South Korean delegates will meet for the first time since 2015.
  • Wednesday: In early morning, China’s December CPI and PPI are due. The November IP and manufacturing production for the UK and France are also due, followed by the UK’s November trade balance. Over in the US, there is the November wholesale inventories along with December stats on exports and imports. Onto other events, the Fed’s Evans discusses the economy and policy outlook. Elsewhere, the US Chamber of Commerce CEO Donohue will deliver his annual address and the South Korean President will host a New Year’s news conference.
  • Thursday: The Eurozone’s November IP and Italy’s retail sales are due, along with the December reading for the Bank of France industrial sentiment index. Over in the US, there is the December PPI as well as the weekly initial jobless and continuing claims. Onto other events, the minutes for the ECB December meeting will be out and the Fed’s Dudley will speak on the US economic outlook. Elsewhere, the BOE will publish its 4Q credit conditions survey and China begins a three-day annual meeting to set the agenda for its anti-corruption work in 2018.
  • Friday: Japan’s outright buying of foreign bonds and China’s December current account balance along with imports and exports stats will be out in early morning. In Europe, Italy’s November IP and the final reading of France’s December CPI are due. Over in the US, there is the December CPI and retail sales along with the November business inventories. Onto other events, the Bundesbank’s Weidmann and the Fed’s Rosengren will speak.  Elsewhere, Wells Fargo, JP Morgan and Blackrock will release its results.

Finally, here is Goldman’s take on just the US, together with consensus forecasts: The key economic releases next week are CPI and retail sales on Friday. There are several scheduled speaking engagements by Fed officials this week.

Monday, January 8

  • 12:40 PM Atlanta Fed President Bostic (FOMC voter) speaks: Atlanta Fed President Bostic will give a speech on the U.S. economic outlook and monetary policy to the Rotary Club of Atlanta. Audience and media Q&A is expected.
  • 01:35 PM San Francisco Fed President Williams (FOMC voter) speaks: San Francisco Fed President Williams will participate in a panel discussion on the topic “Should the Fed stick with the 2 percent inflation target or rethink it?” at the Brookings Institution in Washington D.C.
  • 03:00 PM Consumer credit, November (consensus +$17.8bn, last +$20.5bn)
  • 04:00 PM Boston Fed President Rosengren (FOMC non-voter) speaks: Boston Fed President Rosengren will take part in a panel titled “Next steps: Learning from the Bank of Canada” at the Brookings Institution in Washington D.C.

Tuesday, January 9

  • 06:00 AM NFIB small business optimism index, December (consensus 108.3, last 107.5)
  • 09:00 AM Minneapolis Fed President Kashkari (FOMC non-voter) speaks: Minneapolis Fed President Kashkari will take part in a moderated Q&A session at Cargill Headquarters in Wayzata, Minnesota. Audience Q&A is expected.
  • 10:00 AM JOLTS job openings, November (last 5,996k)

Wednesday, January 10

  • 08:30 AM Import price index, December (consensus +0.4%, last +0.7%)
  • 09:00 AM Chicago Fed President Evans (FOMC non-voter) speaks: Chicago Fed President Evans will discuss the economic and monetary policy outlook at a breakfast event hosted by the Lake-Forest-Lake Bluff Rotary Club.
  • 09:10 AM Dallas Fed President Kaplan (FOMC non-voter): Dallas Fed President Kaplan will participate in a moderated Q&A session. Audience and media Q&A is expected.10:00 AM Wholesale inventories, November final (consensus +0.7%, last +0.7%)
  • 01:30 PM St. Louis Fed President Bullard (FOMC non-voter) speaks: St. Louis Fed President Bullard will give a speech on the US economic outlook at the Missouri Athletic Club in St. Louis.

Thursday, January 11

  • 08:30 AM PPI final demand, December (GS +0.2%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.4%); PPI ex-food and energy, December (GS +0.1%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.3%); PPI ex-food, energy, and trade, December (GS +0.2%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.4%): We estimate a 0.2% increase in headline PPI in December, reflecting an uptick in gasoline prices. We expect a smaller 0.1% increase in in the PPI ex-food, energy, and trade services category. In the November report, the producer price index firmed more than expected, reflecting firmness in core measures, particularly in upstream input prices.
  • 08:30 AM Initial jobless claims, week ended January 6 (GS 250k, consensus 248k, last 250k); Continuing jobless claims, week ended December 30 (consensus 1,920k, last 1,914k): We estimate initial jobless claims were unchanged at 250k in the week ended January 6, reflecting elevated claims in Puerto Rico and a possible boost from end-of-year seasonal volatility. Continuing claims – the number of persons receiving benefits through standard programs –appear to have stabilized after rebounding in November and early December.
  • 02:00 PM Monthly budget statement, December (consensus-$49.0bn, last -$138.5bn)
  • 03:30 PM New York Fed President Dudley (FOMC voter) speaks: New York Fed President Dudley will give a speech on the U.S. economic outlook at an event hosted by the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association event. Audience and media Q&A is expected.

Friday, January 12

  • 8:30 AM CPI (mom), December (GS +0.17%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.39%); Core CPI (mom), December (GS +0.22%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.12%); CPI (yoy), December (GS +2.11%, consensus +2.1%, last +2.2%); Core CPI (yoy), December (GS +1.71%, consensus +1.7%, last +1.7%): We estimate a 0.22% increase in December core CPI (mom sa), which would leave the year-over-year rate unchanged at +1.7%. Our forecast reflects additional post-hurricane strength in used car prices, a rebound in lodging away from home, and a possible rebound in airfares. On the negative side, we expect imputed utilities costs to continue to weigh on the owners’ equivalent rent category. We estimate a 0.17% increase in headline CPI, reflecting higher food quotes but mixed consumer energy prices in December.
  • 08:30 AM Retail sales, December (GS +0.5%, consensus +0.5%, last +0.8%); Retail sales ex-auto, December (GS +0.4%, consensus +0.3%, last +1.0%); Retail sales ex-auto & gas, December (GS +0.4%, consensus +0.5%, last +0.8%); Core retail sales, December (GS +0.4%, consensus +0.4%, last +0.8%): We estimate core retail sales (ex-autos, gasoline, and building materials) rose at a firm 0.4% pace in December, reflecting indications of a solid end to the holiday shopping season. However, we also expect a partial reversal of the boost from the iPhone launch in last month’s report (iPhone X on November 3). Given the further rise in (sa) gasoline prices and the modest uptick in auto SAAR, we estimate 0.4% and 0.5% respective increases in the ex-auto and headline measures.
  • 10:00 AM Business inventories, November (consensus +0.4%, last -0.1%)
  • 04:15 PM Boston Fed President Rosengren (FOMC non-voter) speaks: Boston Fed President Rosengren will give the keynote speech at a conference on “Money, Models, and Digital Innovation” at the University of California San Diego. Audience Q&A is expected.

Source: SocGen, BofA, Deutsche, Goldman

via RSS http://ift.tt/2qF5gj9 Tyler Durden

Furious Trump Snubs Olive Branch: You’re With Bannon Or With Me

Steve Bannon’s apparent olive-branch-offering over the weekend has reportedly been snubbed by an angry President Trump who exclaimed: you’re either with Bannon, or with me.

As we reported previously, perhaps in an attempt to salvage his political (or any) career, Bannon issued a statement praising Donald Trump Jr. (who he repeatedly mocked and disparaged in Wolff’s book) saying his negative comments were aimed at Paul Manafort, who has already been indicted by the Mueller investigation.

“Donald Trump, Jr. is both a patriot and a good man. He has been relentless in his advocacy for his father and the agenda that has helped turn our country around.”

“My support is also unwavering for the president and his agenda — as I have shown daily in my national radio broadcasts, on the pages of Breitbart News and in speeches and appearances from Tokyo and Hong Kong to Arizona and Alabama.”

“President Trump was the only candidate that could have taken on and defeated the Clinton apparatus. I am the only person to date to conduct a global effort to preach the message of Trump and Trumpism; and remain ready to stand in the breech for this president’s efforts to make America great again.”

“My comments about the meeting with Russian nationals came from my life experiences as a Naval officer stationed aboard a destroyer whose main mission was to hunt Soviet submarines to my time at the Pentagon during the Reagan years when our focus was the defeat of ‘the evil empire’ and to making films about Reagan’s war against the Soviets and Hillary Clinton’s involvement in selling uranium to them.”

“My comments were aimed at Paul Manafort, a seasoned campaign professional with experience and knowledge of how the Russians operate. He should have known they are duplicitous, cunning and not our friends. To reiterate, those comments were not aimed at Don Jr.”

“Everything I have to say about the ridiculous nature of the Russian ‘collusion’ investigation I said on my 60 Minutes interview. There was no collusion and the investigation is a witch hunt.”

“I regret that my delay in responding to the inaccurate reporting regarding Don Jr has diverted attention from the president’s historical accomplishments in the first year of his presidency.”

Wolff refuted Bannon’s statement in an interview with MSNBC Monday, saying that Sunday’s statement from Bannon does not reflect what he said at the time. “It was not directed at Manafort, it was directed directly at Don Jr.,” Wolff said.

But, as Bloomberg reports, it is too little too late for a furious president, as aides describe the president demanding a stark choice from supporters of both men: you’re either with Bannon, or with me.

http://ift.tt/2D9yzNp

Trump’s aides are tracking who came out with full-throated criticism of Bannon over the weekend, and they put out the word that the president is keeping score.

 

http://ift.tt/2CFGS2u

One person who was judged as being insufficiently critical of Bannon was David Bossie, president of Citizens United. On Friday night, Bossie came out with a forceful condemnation of Bannon, his longtime friend, in an op-ed in the Washington Post.

While I can’t know for sure whether Bannon said all of the outrageous things that Wolff alleges, he publicly stated this week that he wants Trump and his “America first” agenda to succeed.

Make no mistake, from the beginning, long before the campaign officially began, Trump himself decided on the agenda to Make America Great Again and he has worked to make his agenda a reality.

That goal is shared by all of us who work for and support Trump and by the 60-million-plus Americans who voted for him. Over the past year, Trump has enacted historic reforms that are making America safe and prosperous again. Bannon should clear the air so that we can all get back to the business of Making America Great Again.

Bannon may have hoped his statement would begin to put the episode behind him – A half dozen sources describe almost the exact opposite:

Trump remains angry at the disloyalty of his former strategist, and is forcing a him-or-me moment inside Trump World and the Republican Party as a whole.

“I don’t know if it’s ever repairable,” said Matt Schlapp, the chairman of the American Conservative Union, who has been friends with Bannon for two decades.

These wounds are pretty deep.”

The implications for Trump’s agenda are stark according to Bloomberg: at a moment when he needs maximum coordination to push through infrastructure, welfare reform and funding for the U.S.-Mexico border wall, he’s at war with the leader of the party’s activist base — the very voters who propelled Trump to the White House in 2016.

Fred Brown, a crisis communications strategist and former GOP spokesman: “The fact that Bannon was dumb enough to make people choose between him and the president shows he has a more delusional opinion of himself than even Trump does.”

Finally, putting another nail in the coffin of the Bannon/Trump relationship, Wolff said today that  “I like Steve, I’m grateful” for the time and insights he gave him for the book.

via RSS http://ift.tt/2D8WP22 Tyler Durden

Frontrunning: January 8

  • At Golden Globes, Causes Outshine Celebrities (WSJ)
  • Equity Euphoria Grips the Entire World (BBG)
  • Pimco, Citigroup Sound Complacency Alarm on Global Economy (BBG)
  • Improving Economy Sparks Rebound In Inflation Bets (WSJ)
  • U.S. offers drillers nearly all offshore waters, but focus is on eastern Gulf (Reuters)
  • Intel CEO’s Stock Sale ‘Unusual,’ Private Securities Experts Say (WSJ)
  • ‘It Can’t Be True.’ Inside the Semiconductor Industry’s Meltdown (BBG)
  • Pentagon, diplomats to play bigger role on arms sales (Reuters)
  • In jab at hardliners, Rouhani says Iran protests were not only economic (Reuters)
  • North and South Korea Prepare for Talks (WSJ)
  • Once-Hungry Investors Pass on Meal-Kit Startups (WSJ)
  • U.S. bank gains from tax law start with red ink (Reuters)
  • U.S. military helicopter makes emergency landing at Japanese hotel (Reuters)
  • Pfizer ends research for new Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s drugs (Reuters)
  • In possible boon for White House, Fed ready to lay low as tax plan kicks in (Reuters)

Overnight Media Digest

WSJ

– Celgene Corp agreed to buy blood-disease biotechnology company Impact Biomedicines for as much as $7 billion. on.wsj.com/2mcQs6E

– Jana Partners LLC and the California State Teachers’ Retirement System, or Calstrs, which control about $2 billion of Apple Inc shares, sent a letter to Apple on Saturday urging it to develop new software tools that would help parents control and limit phone use more easily and to study the impact of overuse on mental health. on.wsj.com/2maeGi6

– “Star Wars: The Last Jedi” opened to a soft $28.7 million in China this weekend, less than the prior two installments in the series. on.wsj.com/2mdnKCL

 

FT

Airbus was offering an industrial partnership on the A380 with China if Chinese airlines place orders for the company’s jet, whose future is in doubt unless it wins new customers.

The growth of Royal Dutch Shell’s oil and gas operations in the next decade will depend on shale production, Chief Executive Ben van Beurden told the Financial Times, in the latest sign of western energy groups pinning their hopes for expansion on those “unconventional” resources.

PwC has launched a UK drones team as the company looks to increase demand from investors, local authorities and companies for real-time data that can be more easily obtained by unmanned flight systems than by humans.

BBC China editor Carrie Gracie resigned from her position after learning that the broadcasting company operates a “secretive and illegal pay culture” that systematically discriminates against women. Gracie learned that two of her male peers were paid significantly more. She accused her bosses of taking a “divide-and-rule” approach to female staff in an open letter published online late on Sunday.

 

NYT

– Intel Corp and its chief executive, Brian Krzanich, are in the hot seat over Meltdown and Spectre, two chip security issues that were disclosed last week. The company said it has quietly marshaled a coalition of software, hardware and cloud services to develop and deploy programming tweaks that are designed to close most of the security gaps. nyti.ms/2AFwohG

– Jared Kushner’s family real estate company received a roughly $30 million investment from Menora Mivtachim, an insurer that is one of Israel’s largest financial institutions, according to a Menora executive. The deal, which was not made public, took place shortly before Jared Kushner accompanied U.S. President Trump, on the pair’s first diplomatic trip to Israel. nyti.ms/2ADGP5u

– Carrie Gracie, a senior editor for BBC News accused the network in an open letter on Sunday of operating a “secretive and illegal” salary system that pays men more than women in similar positions. nyti.ms/2CT6gGk

 

Canada

THE GLOBE AND MAIL
** Eight American senators have joined a campaign by politicians and publishers to tout the virtues of U.S. community newspapers as the Department of Commerce prepares to announce its decision Tuesday on whether to impose countervailing duties against Canadian newsprint. bit.ly/2CT2RXI

** Lithuania is urging Canada to sign on to a long-term package of support for Ukraine that would funnel more investment into the Eastern European country and strengthen its ties with the West as Kiev struggles to fight internal corruption and rebuild its economy despite a war with Moscow-backed militants. tgam.ca/2AEI8Bh

** The latest Public Health Agency of Canada FluWatch report shows influenza activity keeps rising, hitting those 65 and older the hardest and causing outbreaks primarily at long-term-care facilities. More than 1,000 hospitalizations have been reported, and at least 34 people have died, the report says. tgam.ca/2qDx5bB

NATIONAL POST
** A Toronto anti-abortion group is alleging in federal court that the government is violating its rights by requiring it to endorse reproductive rights in order to access a grant for hiring summer students. bit.ly/2qwCEZh

 

 

Britain

 

 

 

via RSS http://ift.tt/2D8zGNh Tyler Durden

Grand Jury Empaneled In $10 Million Fraud Probe Involving Jane And Bernie Sanders

An FBI probe into a 2010 property deal orchestrated by Jane Sanders, wife of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), has escalated after a report by VTDIGGER reveals that a grand jury has been empaneled, and at least one witness has given sworn testimony in the case. 

asd
Jane and Bernie Sanders

According to VTDigger, “Former Burlington College board member Robin Lloyd says she testified for about an hour on Oct. 26 before a grand jury at the federal courthouse in Burlington.”

Paul Van de Graaf, chief of the criminal division for the U.S. attorneys office in Vermont, questioned Lloyd about her role as the development chair of the colleges board of trustees during a period when Sanders was collecting donations and pledges for the purchase of a $10 million city lakefront property.VTDigger

The Grand Jury will decide whether or not indictments should be handed down over a $10 million loan orchestrated by Jane Sanders purchase a 33 acre property for the now defunct Burlington College – allegedly obtained through a ‘fraudulent scheme.’ Mrs. Sanders is accused of having lied about funding for transaction, while the FBI has also been looking into claims that Bernie Sanders’ office pressured the bank to approve the loan

asd
Burlington College 33-acre property

In June 2017, Politico confirmed that Bernie Sanders and his wife Jane had retained high powered DC lawyers amidst the investigation.

The original request for an investigation into Federal bank fraud was sent in a January 2016 letter to the Vermont District Attorney as well as the FDIC by Brady Toensing – an attorney and chair of Donald Trump’s Vermont campaign. The letter detailed the mechanics of the alleged fraud, which is what reportedly launched official investigations. Toensing told Politico on in June; “The investigation was started more than a year ago under President Obama, his Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and his United States Attorney, all of whom are Democrats.”

A brief history of Jane Sanders and Burlington College

In 2004, Jane Sanders left her position as her husband’s congressional chief of staff to become president of the unaccredited and struggling Burlington College – founded in 1972 and operated out of a former grocery store. When Sanders took over as a “turnaround” president, she set out to rapidly grow the college – announcing a $6 million plan to expand the campus in 2006 which never came to fruition.

Meanwhile, Sanders was rapidly earning a reputation for her “toxic and disruptive” leadership style, and in late 2008, according to a 2016 essay on the college written by a former teacher Greg Guma, “Nearly half of the students and faculty members signed a petition demanding a meeting about the “Crisis in leadership,” while Jane Sanders’ salary rose to $150,000 in 2009 amidst a tuition hike from $5,000 to $22,407 in 2011. Meanwhile, enrollment dropped by almost 25%.

In 2008, literature professor Genese Grill wrote to the school’s academic affairs committee, describing Sanders’ “harassment and unethical treatment of other faculty and staff members, many of whom have since left the college disgruntled and angry.”

And in 2010, Jane Sanders announced a plan to move the tiny underfunded Burlington college onto a 33 acre parcel of valuable lakefront real estate in Northern Burlington. “It was the last piece of undeveloped, prime property on the lake shore,” according to Guma.

The property was owned by the Roman Catholic Diocese, which was strapped for cash after recently settling over two dozen sexual abuse lawsuits for $17.76 million. The 33 acre property hit the market for $12.5 million, and the church agreed to take Jane Sanders’ offer of $10 million.

Scheming for loans

When Jane Sanders made the offer to the Roman Catholic Diocese, Burlington College was nearly broke – with an annual budget just below $4 million. In order to finance the property, Sanders secured a $6.5 million loan from People’s United Bank in the form of a tax exempt bond purchase, and the Catholic Church agreed to carry a $3.65 million second mortgage on the property. Sanders told both institutions that Burlington college had $5 million in likely donor pledges and $2.4 million in confirmed pledges to be used to pay off the debt.

Unfortunately, that was just for the land. Sanders apparently didn’t plan for the $6 million or so required to actually build out the campus on the property to include green space, athletic fields, lecture halls, and walkways. 

Compounding an already dire situation, Sanders’ original claim of $2.4 million in confirmed donor pledges was quickly reduced to $1.2 million according to documents filed in the first fiscal year after the purchase – yet in records obtained by VTDiggerBurlington College received only $279,000. Despite hopes by Sanders and college trustees that they could boost enrollment and expand the student body, nothing changed – and the school failed at raising the money to satisfy it’s loans.

And then Jane Sanders was fired, with a $200,000 severance package.

 

asd

 

In order to try and avoid bankruptcy, Burlington college sold off pieces of the 33 acre property to a local developer – which allowed the institution to pay off some of the debt Jane Sanders had accumulated, however in April 2016 the bank called it’s loan – and on May 28th, the college closed it’s doors after 44 years in operation.

As part of its bankruptcy, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Burlington lost at least $1.5 million and perhaps as much as $2 million on the $3.65 million loan.

 

asd

Enter the FBI

Politico revealed in their June report that [F]ederal investigators and FBI agents started to pull apart the $10 million financial arrangementThey showed up at Burlington College to sift through hard drives, audit reports and spreadsheets. They began to interview donors, board members and past president Carol Moore. I was contacted and spoke with an FBI agent numerous times last spring, again last summer, Moore told Vermont Public Radio in May 2017, and recently, maybe a month ago.

With a Grand Jury now empaneled and interviewing witnesses in the Burlington College saga, one can imagine the outcome of their investigation will largely determine whether Bernie Sanders is a viable candidate in 2020, should he wish to challenge Oprah Winfrey of course.

via RSS http://ift.tt/2AEQitc Tyler Durden

CIA Director Defends Trump’s Mental Abilities, MGM Resorts Says Hotel Staff Interacted 10 Times With Vegas Shooter, 117 Degrees in Sydney: A.M. Links

  • CIA Director Mike Pompeo defended President Trump’s mental abilities from characterizations in Michael Wolff’s new book about Trump’s first year.
  • Steve Bannon said he regretted not releasing a statement to respond to comments critical of Donald Trump, Jr. attributed to him in the Wolff book sooner.
  • Oprah Winfrey won the Cecil B. DeMille Award at the Golden Globes.
  • MGM Resorts released a statement saying Mandalay Bay hotel staff interacted with Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock 10 times in two or three days, entering his room at least once.
  • The American Friends Service Committee and leaders of about 20 other organization will be banned from entering Israel for supporting the boycott-divest-sanctions effort.
  • 32 people are missing after an Iranian oil tanker collided with a freight ship off the coast of China.
  • The temperature hit 117 degrees in Sydney, an 80 year high.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and don’t forget to sign up for Reason’s daily updates for more content

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2m9bja3
via IFTTT

Oprah Denies Presidential Ambitions, As 2020 Speculation Rises

With Donald Trump yet to tweet, one of the bigger political stories in the interim this morning is whether 2020 will see president Donald Trump replaced by president Oprah Winfrey. It all started with a surprising tweet by NBC: “Nothing but respect for OUR future president. #GoldenGlobes”

To be sure, speculation about Oprah may be running is not new per se, and was certainly prompted by the Trump victory.

However, minutes after giving a rousing speech at the Golden Globes Awards that promised “a new day” for women, minorities and the downtrodden…

… Oprah Winfrey said she has no ambitions to run for president. In a brief interview backstage at the event, Winfrey was told that “Oprah 2020” was circulating on Twitter, and asked whether she planned to run. “I don’t — I don’t,” the 63-year-old billionaire told Bloomberg.

By then, however, the drumbeat was well underway according to Bloomberg.

“She. Is. Running,” said John Podhoretz, editor of Commentary magazine. “Oprah. 2020,” said Shaun King, the Black Lives Matter activist. The host of the Golden Globes, late-night comedian Seth Meyers, jokingly urged Winfrey to run in his opening monologue, noting that President Donald Trump had reportedly decided to make his bid for the office after he was the butt of Meyers’s jokes at the White House Correspondents Dinner in 2011.

In her speech, Winfrey, worth ~$3.6Bn, made references to the sexual harassment scandal in Hollywood and marked the recent death of Recy Taylor, whose sexual assault in 1944 became a focal point for civil rights activists, in her speech to accept the Cecil B. DeMille award for lifetime achievement.

“I want all the girls watching here, now, to know that a new day is on the horizon!” Winfrey said. “And when that new day finally dawns, it will be because of a lot of magnificent women, many of whom are right here in this room tonight, and some pretty phenomenal men, fighting hard to make sure that they become the leaders who take us to the time when nobody ever has to say, ‘Me too’ again.”

Still, even with Winfrey’s denial to Bloomberg, the speculation is likely to continue.

It’s up to the people,” Winfrey’s longtime partner, Stedman Graham, told the Los Angeles Times on Sunday when asked about a presidential run. “She would absolutely do it.”

via RSS http://ift.tt/2CRLUx0 Tyler Durden

Congress Braces For “Political Bomb Cyclone” As Immigration, Funding Debates Flare

As Fox News and Bloomberg  pointed out today, since returning from their holiday break last week, Congress has been bracing for a “political bomb cyclone” as a series of high-profile confrontations loom regarding the future of DACA protections and Republicans’ ability to keep the federal government operational.

According to Bloomberg, Republicans and Democrats in Congress are once again far apart on a government spending bill with less than two weeks to go before a partial shutdown. They also need to come to an agreement on an immigration package that will preserve protections for undocumented immigrants who were brought to the US as children while also probably allocating some money to Trump’s border wall. The continuing resolution passed shortly before holiday break expires on Jan. 19. And what’s worse for Republicans, Alabama Sen. Doug Jones has taken his seat, paring the GOP’s Senate majority to just one vote. Realistically, Republican and Democratic leaders need to hash out a solution this week, so they can bring the bills to the floor next week.

 

McConnell

But these aren’t the only issues. Increasing spending for the Pentagon, reauthorizing (or killing) a controversial surveillance program, providing permanent provisions for a popular children’s health-insurance program, putting in place some stopgap to keep Obamacare from collapsing, disaster-relief funding and a two-year agreement to raise budget caps.

As always, the threat of a shutdown is ever-present, as Republicans defy Democrats to take a stand on DACA. Meanwhile, the question of whether Democrats will allow another continuing resolution to pass without first securing DACA protections remains an open one.

“If the Democrats want to shut down the government because they can’t get amnesty for illegal immigrants, then they’re going to have to defend those actions to the American people,” Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” program.

If both parties can agree this week on raising budget limits, Congress may be able to pass a short-term spending bill, known as a continuing resolution, said Muftiah McCartin, a former spending panel staff member for House Democrats and now at Covington & Burling LLP.

“If they don’t get a deal, will the Democrats allow another CR to go forward? I’d kind of be surprised,” McCartin said.

Trump has insisted that money to begin construction on his signature border wall be included in any bill authorizing DACA.
“We want the wall,” Trump said Saturday at Camp David. “The wall is going to happen or we’re not going to have DACA.”

Top congressional leaders from both political parties huddled last Wednesday in the office of House Speaker Paul Ryan, with White House budget Director Mick Mulvaney and White House Director of Legislative Affairs Marc Short. Everyone spoke in positive terms following the conclave.

“All those talks, I think, are going well,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, “Nobody wants to shut the government down on either side. We’re in intense talks about trying to deal with all of these issues.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, said in a joint statement following the hour-long session: “We had a positive and productive meeting, and all parties have agreed to continue discussing a path forward to quickly resolve all of the issues ahead of us.”

As Fox  points out, the biggest issue will be the battle over immigration policy, as Republicans push for the construction of a border wall and Democrats a fix for DACA. DACA is a President Barack Obama-era policy that granted some persons the right to remain in the US legally if they arrived as minors with parents.

The White House last week asked for $18 billion as the administration braces for the upcoming battle over US immigration policy. The money would be used to build 700 miles of new and replacement barrier along the southern border over the coming decade.

But funding isn’t the only issue that’s important to Trump. During a weekend summit with GOP Congressional leaders, Trump said he wants Congress to work out a solution to “chain” migration for family members entering the US while eliminating a diversity lottery system.

Of course, the battle over DACA was widely expected. Mitch McConnell said late last year that DACA would be a major legislative issue in the new year as Republicans engage in the latest installment of political brinksmanship over funding the federal government.

Trump reiterated his sympathy for the Dreamers, and told Fox “we all want DACA to happen.” But he added that “we also want great security for our country.”

“We have a commitment on a bipartisan basis to address the DACA issue,” McConnell said. “We’ll devote floor time to that in January.”

As of now, North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis said the plan is to keep the immigration package separate from the government spending bill.

Expect to hear more about where negotiations are heading after a mid-week meeting between Republican and Democratic leaders.

via RSS http://ift.tt/2m6B6Qi Tyler Durden

The day I found out it was all rigged

May 6, 2010 started off as a pretty boring day.

The most exciting stories from the morning’s newspapers were reviews of the upcoming Iron Man 2 film.

But all that changed at around 2:45pm when, without warning, the stock market crashed, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 1,000 points within minutes.

It was unprecedented… especially because there was absolutely no reason why stocks should have fallen so much.

It’s not like Apple had declared bankruptcy, or the Central Bank had jacked interest rates up to 50%. Up until that point it had been pretty quiet in the markets.

As it turned out, the reason behind the crash was that the investment banks’ fancy trading algorithms had gone completely haywire.

Several of the largest banks had developed autonomous software that was capable of trading billions of dollars without the need for human beings.

And at 2:45PM that day, their software started to fail… inexplicably selling stocks to the point that prices collapsed nearly 10% in minutes.

They called it the Flash Crash, and, even though stocks had largely recovered by the end of the day, the banks lost an enormous amount of money.

Then something interesting happened. Within a few days, the major exchanges announced that they would CANCEL many of the trades that took place during the Flash Crash window.

In other words, they were handing the banks their money back.

I never forgot that moment… because I received an email from my broker informing me of the news.

They were canceling a profitable trade that I had placed during the Flash Crash window, effectively giving it back to the banks.

When the banks’ trading algorithms performed well and they all made money, the profit was theirs to keep.

But when the software failed and the banks lost money from their own mistakes, the exchanges gave them a do-over.

Sadly that episode only begins to scratch the surface of all the ways that the market is rigged against the little guy– high frequency traders, brokerage rehypothecation, manipulation of interest rates, exchange rates, and asset prices, etc.

It’s not to say that there’s no opportunity in the market for individual investors–

Owning shares of a successful business that’s run by honest, talented executives can be a fantastic investment.

The key lesson for me, though, was that I should NOT buy unless the odds of success are remarkably in my favor… or as Jim Rogers says, to wait until the money is just lying in the corner, and all I have to do is walk over and pick it up.

Coincidentally we’re having this conversation at a time when stocks (at least in the United States) have hit fresh, record highs.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average passed 25,000 last week, and the NASDAQ Composite Index hit 7,000.

By themselves these numbers are meaningless, except to suggest that stock prices have never been higher.

The numbers that really matter are the valuations, i.e. how expensive is a company’s share price relative to its earnings, assets, sales, etc.?

To put things in perspective, the average Price/Earnings ratio across the companies in the S&P 500 Index is now 26.36.

If you flip that number around, it means that the current profits of the average company in the S&P 500 are just 3.8% of its share price.

That’s pretty pitiful; it suggests that investors are paying way too much for shares, and receiving far too little profit in return.

Historically, today’s level is nearly 70% more expensive than the S&P 500’s long-term average Price/Earnings ratio.

And the only other times in history that it’s consistently been this high were just prior to the 2008 crash, the 2000 crash, and the 1929 crash.

The story is the same looking at other indicators.

The Cyclically-Adjusted Price/Earnings Ratio (or CAPE ratio) which adjusts earnings for inflation over a 10-year business cycle, is now 33.27, more than DOUBLE its long-term average.

In fact it’s only ever been higher ONCE in history– during the dot-com bubble in the late 1990s.

The S&P 500’s average ratio of Price to Book Value is 25% higher than its long-term average. And the average Price-to-Sales ratio across the S&P 500 has never been higher… EVER.

Buying stocks at historically risky valuations isn’t the kind of no-brainer edge that I’m looking for.

I’d much rather wait for a major correction, and then gobble up shares of fantastic companies when everyone else is selling.

To be fair, though, this could take a while.

Stock valuations have been anomalously high for the past several years. And they could become even more outrageously overpriced.

But that doesn’t mean you have to sit and do nothing (though sometimes doing nothing IS the right strategy.)

It means doing a bit more work to find successful, safe alternative investments.

A number of our readers, for example, have invested in short-term secured lending opportunities that can yield up to 13.5%. And there’s so much collateral backing the investment that risk is quite minimal.

Consider that, since the Flash Crash of 2010, the Dow Jones Industrial Average has returned about 12% per year…

So, yes, there are options out there that can generate strong returns while you wait for the right buying opportunity.

All of this goes back to the major theme we started talking about last week: AVOIDING BIG MISTAKES.

Financial markets are fickle. If/when stock prices fall, they can fall fast… and hard.

Last month, for example, shares of a retail conglomerate Steinhoff International fell more than 60% in a day, and 90% in a week.

Ask yourself how you and your family would be affected if your stock portfolio lost half of its value? And would that impact be worse than missing out on another 20% to 50% increase in stock prices?

It’s a question only you can answer.

But if your instincts are leading you to safety, it might be time to consider taking some money off the table and seeking safer alternatives.

Source

from Sovereign Man http://ift.tt/2CFtU4O
via IFTTT

Is Trump a ‘Very Stable Genius’ or a Dangerous Lunatic?

By calling himself “a very stable genius” on Saturday, Donald Trump invited his psychiatrically inclined opponents to reiterate their claim that he is mentally unfit for office. “The level of concern by the public is now enormous,” Yale forensic psychiatrist Bandy Lee told The New York Times. “They’re telling us to speak more loudly and clearly and not to stop until something is done, because they are terrified.”

Lee, who edited The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President, thinks the public is clamoring to hear the opinions of brave experts like her. Trump thinks the public is sick of bogus issues like “Russian collusion” and “mental stability” propagated by “the Democrats and their lapdogs, the Fake News Mainstream Media.” I think Lee and Trump both are drawing hasty conclusions based on biased samples, and Lee’s belief that she has any special authority to judge the president’s competence is at least as delusional as Trump’s belief that his success as a developer, a reality TV star, and a politician puts his I.Q. score above 140.

Lee is rebelling against the American Psychiatric Association’s rule barring members from diagnosing at a distance public figures whom they have not personally examined. The injunction, which can be found in Section 7 of the APA’s Principles of Medical Ethics, is known as the Goldwater rule because it was largely a response to psychiatric critiques of the 1964 Republican presidential nominee—in particular, an article in Fact magazine that quoted APA members who described Goldwater as, among other things, “a dangerous lunatic,” a repressed homosexual, a self-hating half-Jew, a paranoid schizophrenic, and “a mass-murderer at heart,” just like “Hitler, Castro, Stalin and other known schizophrenic leaders.”

The APA rejected such wild speculation as unprofessional and unethical, a pseudoscientific cover for political disagreements. Yet psychiatry itself is based on equating things people say and do with diseases, providing a medical veneer to value judgments. The profession’s diagnoses are inherently subjective, say nothing about etiology, and cannot be verified by biological tests. If one of the psychiatrists quoted by Fact had talked to Goldwater before declaring him a paranoid schizophrenic, would that have made the label any more valid or informative?

Lee and her allies argue that the Goldwater rule, as applied to Donald Trump, conflicts with their “duty to warn” the public about the grave danger posed by a flagrantly unstable president. Allen Frances, who edited the fourth edition of the APA’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), agrees that Trump is temperamentally unsuited for his job but questions attempts to cast that assessment as a psychiatric diagnosis. “He is definitely unstable,” Frances told the Times. “He is definitely impulsive. He is world-class narcissistic not just for our day but for the ages. You can’t say enough about how incompetent and unqualified he is to be leader of the free world. But that does not make him mentally ill.”

The distinction drawn by Frances is rather mystifying in light of the DSM, including the version that Frances edited. DSM-IV, which was published in 1994 and revised in 2000, defines “narcissistic personality disorder,” for instance, as “a pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts.” The diagnosis requires at least five of these symptoms:

  1. Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements).
  2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love.
  3. Believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions).
  4. Requires excessive admiration.
  5. Has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations.
  6. Is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends.
  7. Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others.
  8. Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her.
  9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes.

As more than a few “mental health experts” (including contributors to Lee’s book) have noted, the fit between these criteria and Trump’s personality traits is striking, and the same is true of the somewhat modified criteria in DSM-5, which was published in 2013. According to the psychiatric bible that Frances edited, the pattern of behavior exhibited by the president is consistent with a “mental disorder,” and I suspect that impression would hold up even after a proper, professional psychiatric examination. Why, then, is Frances so dismissive of the idea that Trump is “mentally ill”?

In recent years, Frances has expressed qualms about the APA’s quest to classify every unlovely feature of human nature as a mental illness. “Psychiatric diagnosis still relies exclusively on fallible subjective judgments rather than objective biological tests,” he noted in a 2013 Annals of Internal Medicine article. “Psychiatric diagnosis is facing a renewed crisis of confidence caused by diagnostic inflation. The boundaries of psychiatry are easily expanded because no bright line separates patients who are simply worried from those with mild mental disorders.” Or as Frances put it more pithily in a 2011 interview with Gary Greenberg, “There is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bullshit. I mean, you just can’t define it.” In a 2012 Cato Unbound debate (in which I also participated), Frances declared that “mental disorders most certainly are not diseases.”

If so, you may wonder, why are they treated by medical doctors? And is Frances now saying that Trump does not qualify for a DSM label or that, even if he did, it would not mean anything, because it’s all “bullshit” anyway? I suspect, based on what Frances said in the Cato Unbound debate, that he is drawing a distinction between a diagnosis like “narcissistic personality disorder,” which is little more than a list of unappealing characteristics that often go together, and a “serious mental illness” like schizophrenia, which may actually be several different things and may or may not involve an identifiable neurological defect but, in Frances’s view, entails a lack of self-control that can justify coercive intervention.

Trump may be crazy, in other words, but he’s not that kind of crazy. The upshot is that, even if you think some parts of the DSM have scientific validity, the argument about Trump has nothing to do with mental illness and everything to do with his abilities and temperament (as well as his policies, an unspoken motivation for many, if not most, of the critics who worry about his mental health). Voters knew what they were getting with Trump, and almost half of them decided to give him a shot anyway. Trump provides daily ammunition to anyone who wants to argue that was a mistake. My own view is that his antics are more hilarious than terrifying and have the salutary effect of undermining respect for the presidency, which may lead to long-overdue limits on its powers. I am open to being persuaded otherwise by anyone whose arguments do not depend on psychiatric pseudoscience.

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

UK Political Circus Continues: May Spices Things Up With Cabinet Reshuffle

Described as a PR exercise by Labour (somewhat obvious in this day and age of politics, and spin), Theresa May will conduct a cabinet reshuffle which should see around a quarter of ministers ‘moved on’ to make way for fresh blood and inject some life into the government, clearly suffering in the polls due to frustration over the Brexit process as well as key issues domestically such as NHS funding.  

There are clear safe ‘seats’ in the process; Chancellor Hammond will likely remain where he is, as will David Davis in his post as Brexit minister – indeed he is set to receive some help from the introduction of a ‘No-Deal’ minister (that is how it has been branded) who will be responsible for covering all bases should EU negotiations fall flat. The official will have all privilege bar the rank of secretary of state. Hard line Brexiteers will naturally be appeased. Foreign secretary Boris Johnson is also expected to hold onto his position, as is Amber Rudd as Home Sec. 

So who is out? 

May’s

deputy Damian Green was sacked before the Christmas period, and is tipped to be replaced by Jeremy Hunt who will vacate the Health department. Patrick McLoughlin is also expected to be replaced as Tory Chairman; he a minister stretching back to the Thatcher era when he won the Wolverhampton East seat in the 1983 general election.  He was Transport Sec in 2012, moving to chairman in 2016.

Other members of the Cabinet in the line of fire are Justine Greening as Education Sec and Greg Clark in charge of Business, but these are down to conjecture at this point.  

The Prime Minister is looking to promote some of younger members of the party, and those from the fresh intake of MPs from 2015, with a focus on promoting women as well as ethnic minorities in order to refresh and clear out some of the old guard.

 

via RSS http://ift.tt/2m7Ir1W Tyler Durden