Larry Summers Wants To Give You A Free Lunch

Submitted by MN Gordon via EconomicPrism.com,

The existing capital stock continues to be frittered away at the expense of savers and retirees.  Nonetheless, central bankers don’t give a doggone about it.  This, after all, is one consequence of roughly eight years of near zero interest rate policy.

Another related consequence is that the pricing equilibrium of capital markets has broken down.  In particular, bond yields no longer reflect a market determined price of money established by the economy’s demand for credit.  Hence, previously unfathomable interest rate movements are now happening with regular occurrence.

Presently, the yield on the 10-Year U.S. Treasury note is sliding into the abyss.  On Wednesday a new record low yield of 1.34 percent was reached.  This is the lowest historical yield we could find based on a review of 10-Year Treasury rate data going back to about 1870.

The last time the interest rate cycle bottomed out was during the early 1940s.  The low inflection point at that time was somewhere around 2 percent.  Where and when rates will finally turn this time is anyone’s guess.

In the meantime, who in their right mind is plowing their hard earned money into Treasuries at these negligible returns?  Obviously, it’s better than the negative rate of return that Swiss 50-year bonds are yielding.   But come on.  Is it not conceivably possible, with the Fed’s desired 2 percent inflation target, that inflation could run-up above 1.34 percent at some time over the next decade?

A Matter of Life or Death

By way of full disclosure, we’ve been anticipating the conclusion of the great Treasury bond bubble for about 8 years – possibly longer.  After a 25-year soft slow slide down from a peak above 15 percent in 1981, it only seemed logical that yields would bottom out around 2 percent and then resume a new, generation long uptrend.  So far this hasn’t happened.  Yields, in practice, have gone down…and then they’ve gone down some more.

In hindsight, we’ve come to recognize that for a number of years we didn’t fully appreciate the significance of one very important component to this credit cycle.  Moreover, it’s something that’s unlike the last credit cycle.

Specifically, with a fiat based paper money system, and extreme central bank intervention, we didn’t account for just how far the limits of illogicality could push beyond what is honestly conceivable.  Perhaps a better imagination was needed.

Over the last few years we’ve made painstaking efforts to recalibrate our expectations.  Namely, we’ve done away with them.

But just because we have no expectations doesn’t mean we are indifferent.  To the contrary, we are far from indifferent.  We observe 10-Year Treasury yield movements with the same acute interest we observe an amorphous skin discoloration appearing on our torso.

What do each day’s slight changes mean?  Will they eventually become a matter of life or death?  These are the questions.  What are the answers?

Larry Summers Wants to Give You a Free Lunch

One possible suite of solutions came to us this week from Larry Summers, the former Treasury Secretary and legend in his own mind.  Summers, no doubt, is so smart he already knows the answers to questions before they are even asked.

“The world,” as Summers perceives it, “is demand-short — that the real interest rates necessary to equate investment and saving at full employment are very low and often may be unattainable given the bounds on nominal interest rate reductions.”

 

“The result is very low long-term real rates, sluggish growth expectations, concerns about the ability even over the fairly long term to get inflation to average 2 percent, and a sense that the Fed and the world’s major central banks will not be able to normalize financial conditions in the foreseeable future.”

According to Summers, with this low growth and low interest context, government debt levels no longer matters.

“In a world where interest rates over horizons of more than a generation are far lower than even pessimistic projections of growth, traditional thinking about debt sustainability needs to be discarded.  In the U.S., the U.K., the Euro area and Japan, the real cost of even 30-year debt will be negative or negligible if inflation targets are achieved.”

Somehow Summers already knows what interest rates will be more than a generation from now.  And based on the ultra-low rates that Summers sees far out into the future, he believes expansionary fiscal policy can pay for itself.  In other words, federal governments have free reign to massively increase deficit spending and run-up federal debts, because, on balance, the fiscal stimulus will pay for itself.

Do you buy what Summers is selling?  What if bond yields don’t go down over the next generation?  What if they go up?  Then, instead of being self-financing, fiscal stimulus would be self-destructing.

Regardless, by our estimation he’s just promising something for nothing – that he can give you a free lunch.  Alas, policies like these are what got us into this mess to start with.

Sound money, and the just discipline that comes with it, makes more sense to us.  But what do we know?  We’re lacking in many of Summers’ unique qualifications.  For example, unlike Summers, we’ve never lost $1.8 billion of other people’s money.

via http://ift.tt/29z23Yj Tyler Durden

Jack Dorsey Hacked Following Efforts To Mute Abusive Accounts

Jack Dorsey has been on a rampage against abuse on Twitter.. which may (or may not) have something to do with the fact that the dual Square/Twitter CEO had his Verified Twitter account hacked by OurMine.

According to Engadget’s screen shot, OurMine took over Dorsey’s account and tweeted:

“Hey, its OurMine, we are testing your security, visit ourmine.org”

OurMine is the same organization fighting anonymous in a battle which culminated with a
DDoS attacked on Wikileaks
.  The attack took Wikileaks offline according to HotForSecurity and has also attacked Facebook, Oculus, and Google

The Dorsey hack comes on the heels of Twitter’s action to lock-down millions of accounts following a password theft.  As The Verge puts it:

“…after cross-checking the password dump with its records, Twitter identified some of its accounts as requiring extra protection, locking them and requiring a password reset. It’s not clear how many accounts Twitter chose to lock…”

Recall back in February when we reported on Twitter’s “Ministry of Truth” in which we said:

“Twitter is a private company. It is free to make whatever speech rules it wants. Forcing Twitter to permit more kinds of speech would not actually be pro-free speech—in fact, it would violate the First Amendment. We hope we don’t get banned for saying that.”

Dorsey is now seeing backlash against his efforts at squelching ‘free‘ speech he may not like while simultaneously promoting Twitter as a First
Amendment platform
. It is only a matter of time until the First Amendment is destroyed (for your own protection) in favor of Safe Spaces and Political Correct And Approved speech.

via http://ift.tt/29XYcSJ Tyler Durden

The Great Market Tide Has Now Shifted

Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith via PeakProsperity.com,

In the conventional investment perspective, risk-on assets (i.e. investments with higher risks and higher potential returns) such as stocks are on a see-saw with risk-off assets (investments with lower returns and lower risk, such as Treasury bonds). When risk appetites are high, institutional managers and speculators move money into stocks and high-yield junk bonds, and move money out of safe-haven assets such as gold and U.S. Treasuries.

But recently, markets are no longer following this convention. Safe haven assets such as precious metals and Treasuries are soaring at the same time that stock markets bounced strongly off the post-Brexit lows.

Risk-on assets (stocks) rising at the same time as safe-haven assets is akin to dogs marrying cats and living happily ever after. 

What the heck is going on?

Why is the market acting so schizophrenic? What’s changed?

Before we cover the dynamics that are in play, let’s review the market gyrations so far in 2016.

The Market Gyrations Of 2016

Risk-off / safe havens

  • Gold: from $1,060/oz in January to $1,360/oz (as of July 5)
  • Silver: from $13.90/oz to $20/oz
  • U.S. dollar: from 99 in January to 92 in May to a current level around 96. (The DXY dollar index was 80 in mid-2014 and topped 100 in March 2015.)
  • U.S. 30-year Treasury bond yield: from 3.00% in January to 2.14% in early July.
  • TLT (20 year bond ETF): from 120 in early January to 142 in early July.

Risk-on

  • S&P 500: from around 2,035 in early January to 1,820 in February, topping 2,100 in April, then a decline below 2,000 in June and back to 2,100 by July 1 – and a new all-time high just today. (SPX was above 2,100 in mid-2015, then it plummeted to 1,825 before bouncing back to 2,100 in late 2015.)
  • JNK (high-yield bond ETF): from 36.5 in May 2015 to 32.5 in early January to 30.5 in February to 35.5 on July 1.

In broad brush, the tide that raised all risk-on boats for the past seven years is now ebbing.

The momentum that drove the stock market higher since early 2009 has weakened. Stocks have repeatedly plummeted sharply over the past year, only to be saved by central bank jawboning of the now-shopworn “whatever it takes” variety, or by coordinated central bank purchases of stocks, futures, ETFs, etc.

The momentum has clearly shifted to the risk-off safe-haven assets such as precious metals and sovereign bonds. This flood-tide of cash into bonds has helped push yields into negative territory, an unprecedented development: owners of capital are so concerned about getting their money back that they are accepting negative returns, i.e. guaranteed losses, to park their cash.

In effect, capital is focusing less on earning a return on cash and more on making sure the cash is returned. Paying 1% for the privilege of parking capital is making cash and gold look attractive, as the cost of holding cash and precious metals is relatively modest, and the upside is potentially significant.

Indeed, the flood-tide of money into precious metals is attracting speculative hot money: Chinese Day Traders Are Behind Silver Frenzy Moving Prices (Bloomberg)

What has caused this sea-change in risk appetite and sentiment?  A number of fundamental dynamics now in play globally.

Diminishing Returns on Monetary Policy

What worked so effectively in the aftermath of the 2008-09 Global Financial Meltdown is no longer working: lowering interest rates and pumping more money into the financial system is no longer sparking risk-on animal spirits. Rather, pushing these monetary policies to new extremes is now perversely generating negative consequences: rather than pushing growth higher, the policies are causing stagnation in the real economy and unhealthy speculative frenzies that last a few days or weeks.

John Rubino recently covered the diminishing returns on Abenomics in Japan: Something Huge Is Coming From Japan. Policies that were intended to expand exports by driving the Japanese yen down have failed, as the yen is drifting higher despite ever-greater policy extremes.

In China, the solution that worked in the past—expanding credit to new extremes—has not generated real growth in the real economy. All it has accomplished is yet another housing bubble in Tier 1 cities and a speculative hot-money frenzy as cash sloshes from one asset class to the next in rapid succession. Not only are the positive returns on these monetary policies diminishing; these new extremes are unleashing new systemic risks in global markets. Kyle Bass expects a devaluation in China’s currency that is beyond the control of its central bank, and Analyst Andy Xie believes "China Is Headed For A 1929-Style Depression" as a result of its unprecedented expansion of debt.

In Europe, the same “whatever it takes” monetary easing policies that sparked a global risk-on rally in 2012 have failed to spark real growth in Europe or save its banking sector:  EU Banks Crash To Crisis Lows

The Social Contract Is Unraveling

Around the world, the message being sent to the average citizen is “the lifestyle you ordered is out of stock”. The promises of rising consumption, steady employment, secure pensions and guaranteed healthcare are running aground on the unwelcome reality that promises made decades ago can no longer be kept in a world of limited resources, stagnant growth, negative demographics and rising income/wealth inequality.

The status quo promised that growth could be restored and its promises fulfilled with extraordinary monetary and fiscal policies, but now that the returns on these policies are diminishing, people are waking up to the reality that the “good old days” of cheap, abundant energy and steady expansion of consumption, jobs, profits and taxes are over.

People are also waking up to the reality that these unprecedented monetary policies have exacerbated income/wealth inequality, as the few with access to near-zero-cost credit have scooped up productive assets that have boosted their income and wealth at the expense of the many without access to what I call free money for financiers.

The failure of these policies to accomplish anything but widen the income/wealth gulf has de-legitimized not just the policies but the institutions that issued them: central banks and states.

Rather than lay out a practical solution to the demographic/resource constraints that required proportionate sacrifices from everyone, central banks and states have continued to promise what amounts to a free lunch—borrowing our way to prosperity by borrowing from future earnings and future taxpayers.

The moral and financial bankruptcy of this policy is now evident to all, and the result is profound uncertainty. This uncertainty is no longer short-term, as people have lost faith in the promise that yet another expansion of monetary policy will fix what’s broken.

Uncertainty Is Now Long-Term

It’s an investment maxim that "markets don’t like uncertainty," and now that the limits of extreme monetary policies are self-evident, uncertainty stretches far beyond any political time horizon.  Any confidence that another interest rate cut or another quantitative easing asset purchasing program will magically restore flailing risk-on animal spirits is fleeting, for a very good reason: there is no reason to place any long-term confidence in policies that are so obviously yielding diminishing returns.

Long-Term Political Instability

The realization that conventional monetary/fiscal policies have failed those who have been turned away from the 'free money for financiers’ banquet is fueling political rebellion against the status quo. This global grassroots movement has found expression in the recent Brexit vote in the United Kingdom and in the rise of anti-establishment politicians and parties around the globe.

Profits Are Declining for Structural Reasons

The ultimate foundation supporting risk-on assets is rising profits: as profits increase, stocks rise and the multiples of valuation expand.  Higher stock prices fuel a self-reinforcing virtuous cycle feedback in which hot-money speculators pile in, pushing prices higher, and companies are able to issue more debt to buy back their own shares. This reduction in outstanding shares pushes the per-share value higher, which then fuels more speculative buying, and so on.

Now profits are harder to come by for a number of reasons. The best way to visualize this stagnation is the S-Curve: rapid expansion leads to a boost phase in which everything goes right. But inevitably, the fuel for this expansion is consumed, and growth stagnates and then rolls over.

In the classic investment cycle, some new engine of growth emerges to re-energize a stagnant economy.  Over the past 35 years, the new engines of growth have been favorable demographics, financialization, the rise of the Internet, and the emergence of China/India/emerging markets (globalization).

Now that financialization and globalization have run their courses, the central banks and states have attempted to restart growth with debt.  Injections of new credit work wonders when economies are lightly indebted, but once they’ve become heavily indebted, adding more credit/debt accomplishes less and less in the way of sustainable real growth.

Globalization has expanded productive capacity to the point that most sectors of the global economy suffer from excess capacity. This makes it harder to extract a premium, i.e. profit, for producing goods and services.

The rapid advances in software and automation are gathering speed as these technologies are commoditized, meaning they are becoming cheaper and more abundant. Markets that are commoditized offer few profits, as somebody somewhere else is producing the same goods and services for less.

This Sea-Change Results In Dangerous Waters Ahead

These trends cannot be reversed with yet another rate cut or another “whatever it takes” announcement of central bank bond purchases. Greater volatility and uncertainty are baked in the cake at this point as what worked before fails to produce the rescues it once did.

For the individual investor looking to preserve capital, these will be treacherous waters to navigate. Not only is another crisis approaching, but it will not unfold similarly to the one in 2008. With the greater pressures in play now — economically, demographically, resource-wise, and politically — the fracture lines will be different and likely more disruptive.

In Part 2: Investing For Crisis, we identify the biggest risks and most important strategies for individual investors to be aware of as they navigate the dangerous waters ahead. What are the biggest threats? Where are the safest havens likely to be? What's most likely to happen with stocks, gold, and the dollar?

Click here to read Part 2 of this report (free executive summary, enrollment required for full access)

via http://ift.tt/29KgwlN Tyler Durden

It`s Time To Raise Rates

By EconMatters


The Fed has argued that it is easier to respond to an upsurge in economic growth from here by staying conservative at the zero bound than it is to continue hiking and the economy takes a downturn from here. Actually this isn`t even correct, as they could very easily just cut rates again much easier than trying to chase runaway inflation.

But we think there are more dangerous precedents being set by the Federal Reserve right now. First of all, given the economic condition of the economy based on a broad spectrum of indicators, that if the Federal Reserve cannot normalize interest rates now, that the bar is so high for normalization, this is setting a bad precedent for Federal Reserve policy in a capitalistic economy. If you cannot raise rates under these conditions, then you are committing yourselves to never being able to normalize rates, and this has dire consequences, and the unintended consequences of this extreme monetary policy stance are far worse than any minor incremental benefits to be squeezed out from  a continual zero bound approach.

The second precedent that is being set by this Federal Reserve is that US Monetary policy is being set by external factors outside their mandates which are inflation, employment and market stability and not Chinese stock market bubbles, a British Independence Vote, International Terrorism or the effects of a strong dollar on emerging markets.

The third poor precedent being set by the Federal Reserve is being so highly data dependent as to become “knee-Jerk” in responding to every little wiggle in the economic data. To the extent that in preparing for a rate hike which was long overdue the Federal Reserve overreacted to a Brexit vote (which will take two years to fully negotiate) and a poor employment report (after eight years of solid employment improvement and an overall tight labor market) which for all intents and purposes is probably at Full Employment Levels right now. This is the entire role of economists to take a high level or Bird`s Eye view of the economy and economic data. A responsible Federal Reserve cannot be this stop and start in regards to their economic outlook, their economic forecasts and embarking on a normalization rate hiking schedule.

It doesn`t matter whether the markets sell off, or the economy takes a slight downturn, or even goes into a slight recession from this point on a natural business cycle downturn, as remember we are at “emergency financial crash level” monetary policy measures. This was never supposed to be permanent, only a temporary measure to respond to emergency conditions in the credit markets after the financial crisis of 2007/08. It is unhealthy to run emergency monetary policy for 8 years. The most important role for the Federal Reserve should be in reestablishing a normal rate environment that resembles a healthy finance and capitalistic structure – which we can see is hurting the banking sector right now in regards to a flattening  yield curve and bizarre low yield environment. The proper analogy is getting a patient back to normal after major surgery, the benefits derived from returning the patient to normal activities as opposed to enabled activities becomes self fulfilling and reinforcing in nature.

The fourth bad precedent is that the United States has always been a leader as the strongest capitalistic, free market society in the world. We are not Japan, China, or Europe and the more we resemble their dysfunction with overly intrusive central bank intervention in financial markets the worse off we become – this dysfunction feeds off itself in a growth draining manner. We need to be setting the example in terms of normalizing monetary policy, not following the negative interest rate black hole paradigm that is highly deflationary and growth stunting in nature. You have to respect capital – and ZIRP is the antithesis of respecting capital and has negative consequences for a capitalistic financial model. 

The final precedent is that financial market stability is a Federal Reserve mandate whether explicitly or implicitly defined in their mission statement. And the level of poor positioning right now in financial markets given the economic conditions relative to current asset prices in multiple markets is off the charts and unprecedented in nature. The Federal Reserve is basically setting the necessary conditions for the biggest collapse in the Bond Markets, the bond markets were a bubble two years ago, now they have gotten so out of whack due to central bank insanity, that we are talking about multiple standard deviations from historical norms, all with a 2.2% core inflation rate – this just never ends well.

And moreover, the Fed is directly causing and acting irresponsible in setting this entire market crash scenario up because they fail to normalize interest rates in a timely manner, i.e., they keep stalling on every little excuse from a strong dollar to Chinese Investors bidding up stocks and running for the exits to a British self governing decision to a weak job`s report. None of this matters, these are all small picture items taken into the context of the bubble and respective tail risk that currently resides in the bond markets right now at current prices – it is unsustainable by any financial models. I have run them all and this is the real risk the Fed needs to be paying attention to regarding their FOMC meetings.

If we cannot raise rates and normalize interest rates now given these economic conditions (Just look at all these economic charts) in our economy, then we are committed to never being able to normalize monetary policy. So in essence just set the Fed Fund`s Rate at Zero and get rid of the Federal Reserve entirely, at that point they serve no useful function if we are permanently committed to the Zero Bound.

 

 

© EconMatters All Rights Reserved | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | Email Digest | Kindle    

via http://ift.tt/29G3bsj EconMatters

In Latest Shooting, Two Houston Police Officers Kill Gunman Who Aimed Gun At Cops

Among the numerous mostly peaceful protests across the country overnight, another deadly incident between a lone black gunman and police took place shortly after midnight on Saturday, one which will further raise tensions and likely lead to more deadly escalation of this week’s events.

According to ACB13, two Houston officers shot and killed an armed man on the city’s south side early this morning. Police says the officers involved were wearing body cameras and they each fired multiple shots.

Houston Police Department officials say the shooting happened on Cullen near Ward around 12:40am. Officers say they saw a man with a revolver standing in the road. There were two officers in one vehicle and they asked the man to put the revolver down. Police say a witness also asked him to drop the weapon. Officers say instead of dropping the gun, the man raised his weapon pointing it in the air. He then lowered it and pointed it at the two officers.

Immediately after, HPD says they each fired multiple shots and he died at the scene.

Bystander Eric Puckett told KTRK-TV that the victim was a black male. The officers’ races were not immediately known.

 

A woman who says she’s the man’s wife later identified him as Alva Braziel. 

KTRK says one of the unidentified officers is a 10-year veteran of the force, and the other is a 13-year veteran. As is routine following any officer-involved shooting, the officers will be investigated by internal affairs, along with Harris County.

Abc13 cites a bystander, Eric Puckett, who told abc13 he thinks black men in the area are being targeted. “It’s like we got a target on our back even if we’re innocent, it hurts,” said Puckett. “You don’t even want to walk outside your house any more. But to all the young black men and young black women out there, all black people, do something positive.” It was unclear if Puckett had anything to say about the alleged shooter pointing his gun at police officers when told to stand down.

 

A nearby gas station captured the scene and police say the video will confirm what happened, along with witness testimony. Police continue to investigate at the scene where a large crowd has gathered. abc13 writes that its reporters saw shell casings and the revolver among the evidence markers.

Dwight Boykins tells abc13, “The biggest gorilla in the room is very clear. We need to put officers in neighborhoods that reflect the neighborhood.”

Meanwhile, speaking in Warsaw, President Obama addressed the ongoing events in the US and said that America is “not as divided as some suggest” while admitting this has been “a very tough week” for the nation. Obama added that Americans of all races and backgrounds are “rightly outraged” by the deadly attack on Dallas police officers, and “rightly saddened and angered” by the fatal police shooting of two black men in Louisiana and Minnesota. 

The president also said that those who protested the killings of the two black men are as outraged as anyone by the killings of five police officers in Dallas.

Obama says that “as tough, as hard, as depressing” as has been the loss of lives this week, “we’ve got a foundation to build on.”

He then proceeded to pivot to his favorite topic, gun control, saying that it should be “harder for disturbed people to get guns.” It was unclear if he was referring to US police officers, whose response he broadly criticized on Thursday, and tried to placate today by saying that there has been a “huge drop” in murder rates in the US which is a “testament to smarter policing.”

via http://ift.tt/29vF3I6 Tyler Durden

The Rise Of Hillary Clinton – Survival Of The Morally Unfittest?

Submitted by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org,

Does Hillary Clinton possess the integrity and honesty to be president of the United States? Or are those quaint and irrelevant considerations in electing a head of state in 21st-century America?

These are the questions put on the table by the report from FBI Director James Comey on what his agents unearthed in their criminal investigation of the Clinton email scandal.

Clinton dodged an FBI recommendation that she be indicted for gross negligence in handling U.S. security secrets, a recommendation that would have aborted her campaign. But Director Comey dynamited the defense she has been offering the country.

Comey all but declared that Clinton lied when she said she had State Department approval for the email server in her home.

He all but declared that she lied when she said she had only one server, and that no classified or secret material was transmitted. He also implied that she lied when she said she had used only one device and had turned over all of her work-related emails to State. The FBI found “several thousand” more.

Clinton said her emails were stored in a secure area. This, too, was false. Hostile actors and hostile regimes, said Comey, had access to email systems of those with whom she communicated.

Comey said he found no criminal “intent” in what Clinton did.

Yet, he charged her with having been “extremely careless” with U.S. national security secrets, a phrase that seems synonymous with the gross negligence needed to indict and convict.

While recommending against prosecution, Comey added, “This is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequence. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions.”

Translation: Were Clinton still the secretary of state and were such recklessness with secrets to be discovered, she could have been forced to resign and stripped of her security clearance forever.

Yet if Clinton is elected president, our commander in chief for the next four years, and her confidantes Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills, will all be individuals the FBI has found to be reckless and unreliable in the handling of national security secrets.

We will have security risks running the armed forces of the USA.

Nor is this the first time Clinton’s truthfulness has been called into question. Twenty years ago, she fabricated a tale about crossing a tarmac in Bosnia “under sniper fire,” and running with “our heads down.” Photos showed a peaceful arrival featuring a smiling little girl.

Family members of the dead heroes of Benghazi’s “13 Hours” say Clinton told them she would see to it that the creator of the anti-Islamic video that incited the mob that killed their sons would be run down, all the while knowing it had been a planned terrorist attack.

In 1996, The New York Times’ William Safire went over all of the statements Clinton had made in Whitewater and related scandals of Bill Clinton’s first term, compared them with subsequently revealed truth, and pronounced Hillary Clinton a “congenital liar.”

She has claimed she tried to join the Marines in 1975, and long contended she was named for famed mountaineer Edmund Hillary, who conquered Mount Everest. Only Sir Edmund climbed Everest when Hillary was 6 years old. The perfect running mate for this serial fabricator would be the Cherokee lass Elizabeth Warren.

Still, a question arises as to Comey’s motives in airing the findings of an FBI investigation. Normally, the bureau passes on the evidence it has found, along with its recommendation, to the Justice Department. And Justice decides whether to prosecute.

Instead, Comey called a press conference, documented the charge that Clinton was “extremely careless,” contradicted, point by point, the story she has told the public, then announced he was recommending against prosecution.

What was behind this extraordinary performance?

By urging no prosecution, but providing evidence for a verdict of criminal negligence in handing classified material, Comey was saying:

I am not recommending prosecution, because, to do that, would be to force Hillary Clinton out of the race, and virtually decide the election of 2016. And that is my not decision. That is your decision.

 

You, the American people, should decide, given all this evidence, if Clinton should be commander in chief. You decide if a public figure with a record of such recklessness and duplicity belongs in the Oval Office.

Comey was making the case against Clinton as the custodian of national security secrets with a credibility the GOP cannot match, while refusing to determine her fate by urging an indictment, and instead leaving her future in our hands.

And, ultimately, should not this decision rest with the people, and not the FBI?

If, knowing what we know of the congenital mendacity of Hillary Clinton, the nation chooses her as head of state and commander in chief, then that will tell us something about the America of 2016.

And it will tell us something about the supposed superiority of democracy over other forms of government.

via http://ift.tt/29uVDZF Tyler Durden

Bahamas Issues Travel Advisory: “Avoid Interaction With US Policemen”

You know it’s bad when… The Bahamas government Friday is urging nationals to exercise caution if they intend on travelling to the United States following the shooting deaths of five police officers in Dallas on Thursday night.

Over 90 percent of residents in the Bahamas are black, and Monday is a national holiday – commemorating its 43rd anniversary of political independence from Britain – which, as WaPo notes, means some will travel north from the archipelago to vacation in the United States.

And so, it apperars the Bahamian government is taking a page out of the US government foreign policy play book (having recently advised travelers to avoid repressive regimes such as Laos and Nicaragua – beware of secutiy and street demonstrations).

In a statement, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it had taken note of the recent  tensions  in some American  cities  over  shootings  of young  Black  males by policemen.

“We wish to  advise  all  Bahamians  travelling  to  the  US  but  especially  to the  affected cities  to exercise  appropriate caution  generally.  In particular young males are asked to exercise extreme caution in affected cities in their interactions with the police.

 

“Do not be confrontational and cooperate. If there is any issue please allow consular for the Bahamas to deal with the issues. Do not get involved in political or other demonstrations under any circumstances and avoid crowds,” the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said.

 

The island commemorates its 43rd anniversary of political independence from Britain this weekend “many Bahamians will no doubt use the opportunity to travel, in particular to destinations in the United States.

 

“While it is prudent for travellers to conduct themselves in an orderly manner at all times, in light of recent episodes of involving police officers and young black men in the United States, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Immigration wishes to advise the Bahamian Public to exercise due care and attention especially when travelling to particular cities in the United States.”

What next? Somalia warns its warlords to avoid vacationing in America?

via http://ift.tt/29JZ80G Tyler Durden

The Bitcoin Halving Day is Upon Us – Vinny Lingham Weighs In

Screen Shot 2016-07-09 at 10.01.07 AM

With the Bitcoin halving event just hours away, I want to once again turn your attention to the thoughts of Vinny Lingham.

Here’s his latest post on the topic, The Lake Wobegon Effect:

Here we are on the eve of only the second “Bitcoin Halving” and there is an immense amount of speculation around what will happen. When I wrote my Bitcoin 2016 post in early May, the price was $450 and I speculated that after the halving, it would hit $1,000 by the end of the year. I clearly wasn’t the only one who believed that the halving would have an impact and the price ran up to around $770 last month, but then came crashing down to mid $500’s and is now in a broad consolidation range. Given the liquidity that sits outside the traditional exchanges and lives within the Bitcoin OTC market, the price will continue to be volatile until more coins are traded via a transparent marketplace — which may take months or years. We can’t plan around that.

continue reading

from Liberty Blitzkrieg http://ift.tt/29FSjLf
via IFTTT

Due Process? A Drone Was Used To Blow Up A US Citizen Without Trial This Week

Submitted by Daniel McAdams via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

undefined

The Dallas shootings have ushered in a very new world for US citizens. For the very first time, drones have been used on US soil to kill Americans without trial or charges. The suspected shooter in yesterday's tragic killings, US Army veteran Micah Xavier Johnson, was, according to police and press reports, holed up in a parking garage and would not give himself up. After hours of what police claimed were fruitless negotiations with Johnson, a weaponized robot was sent to where he was hiding and blown up, taking Johnson with it.

Get past the horror of what Johnson was accused of doing and think about that precedent for a moment. Is it not chilling?

RPI regular contributor Peter Van Buren, a retired State Department official who did a tour in Iraq, put a very fine point on the "robot" bomb:

Indeed, even without wings, this was a drone sent in to kill an American suspected of a crime

Police claim that continuing the negotiations was pointless and attempting to capture him would have put officers at risk. He was supposedly shooting. While no sane person wants police officers to be killed, risk is something we are told they willingly accept when they sign up for police duty. There are plenty of low-risk jobs out there. 

The media and opinion-leaders are presenting us with a false choice: if we question the use of drones to kill Americans — even if we suspect they have done very bad things — we somehow do not care about the lives of police officers. That is not the case. It is perfectly possible to not want police officers to be killed in the line of duty but to wholeheartedly reject the idea of authorities using drones to remotely kill Americans before they are found guilty.

African-American Dallas protester Mark Hughes was wrongly identified by Dallas Police as a suspect in the shootings. Police tweeted photos of Hughes marching with protesters openly carrying a rifle, as is permitted in Texas. Police claimed was involved in the shooting. He was a suspect just like Johnson was a suspect. During questioning they told Hughes that they had video of him shooting people, which was a lie. What if police had sent in a drone to take out Mark Hughes? What will happen in the future to a future Mark Hughes, falsely accused by police of being involved in a shooting? Will we come to accept murder without trial?

via http://ift.tt/29vqzYK Tyler Durden

Bank of America Throws In The Towel: “The Profits Recovery Won’t Live Up To Expectations”

Next week the second quarter earnings season begins in earnest (as usual with Alcoa reporting after the close on Monday), with some 5% of the S&P reporting Q2 results, a number which will rise to 89% by August 5.

During this period, most corporate buybacks, arguably the only source of stock buying, will remain in a blackout period. Whether this means the S&P will again remain rangebound for the next 4 weeks is unclear: with rampant central bank intervention now a daily fixture of “markets”, it remains a folly to attempt any predictions.

A more interesting question will be what earnings will be reported. As is widely known, Q2 will be the fifth consecutive quarter of declining earnings, the first time this has happened since the financial crisis. Curiously, in just the past week, analysts have further taken down their estimates, with average EPS now seen a declining 5.6% from a year ago, compared to a drop of 5.4% as of June 30 (with revenue set to drop by 0.7% Y/Y).

And for those wondering, no – it is not just energy companies whose earnings are plunging: as the chart below shows, a majority, or 6 of the S&P’s 10 sectors, are expected to report negative earnings growth with only Telecom, Consumer Discretionary, Utilities and Healthcare posting an increase (largely due to the daily ongoing collapse in interest rates to all time lows).

But while a Q2 earnings contraction is a given (even when factoring the last minute “beats”, which traditionally push up the final result by 3-4%), another question is what to expect out of Q3: will the earnings recession last for an unprecedented 6 quarters even as the S&P hits all time highs? For now, the answer is borderline: while consensus expects a sharp drop in the second quarter, Q3 EPS, as of this moment, are expected to rise a modest 0.7% (however this number too is declining).

 

To be sure, what is going on here is the traditional optimism bias prevalent among all analysts: we expect that as we get closer to the end of the third quarter, the Q3 EPS consensus will drop sharply lower.

And nowhere is this more evident than in a note released overnight by Bank of America’s Dan Suzuki who is the first analyst to admit that an earnings recession that will have lasted well over one year is not normal, and as a result he has thrown in the towel, saying that “The profits recovery is unlikely to live up to expectations.” Here is his full note which admits that the “hockeystick” EPS rebound in 2016 and 2017 is a mirage that will promptly float away in the coming months.

Cutting forecasts to reflect a weaker recovery

 

Trimming EPS by 3% in 2016 and 2% in 2017

 

In the wake of the weaker-than-our-expected 1Q results and recent macro headwinds, we are trimming our S&P 500 EPS forecasts by 3% in 2016 and 2% in 2017. Our revised forecasts of $117 (flat y/y) in 2016 and $125 (+7% y/y) in 2017 suggest downside to the bottom-up consensus of 1% and 7%, respectively. Excluding the extremely volatile earnings of the Energy sector, which we expect to decline by more than 50% for a second consecutive year, we forecast S&P 500 earnings growth to trend from 7% in 2015 to 0% in 2016 and 4% in 2017. At 2098, the S&P 500 currently trades at 17.9x our 2016E EPS while our year-end target of 2000 implies a 16x multiple on our 2017E EPS.

 

 

 

Headwinds from Brexit, pensions, FX and oil

 

As a result of the UK referendum, we now assume slower global growth and a modestly stronger dollar. Our biggest cuts for 2016 were to the global cyclicals’ earnings (Chart 2): Financials (-$14bn), Tech (-$11bn), Energy (-$10bn) and Industrials (-$5bn). We assume that the impact of net buybacks (+1ppt), a stronger dollar (-1ppt) and declining Energy profits (-2ppt) will result in a net drag of 2ppt in 2016 vs. a drag of 10ppt in 2015 (Chart 4 and Table 3). Excluding these factors, our forecasts imply a slowdown in non-Energy constant currency earnings growth from roughly +10% to +4%. See the detailed forecast table on page 3. Given the fall in interest rates this year, we think pension expense is likely to be another modest headwind to earnings growth next year. And just as the GAAP gap was closing, we could see it widen at the end of the year, as those companies that have transitioned to mark-to-market pension accounting take charges that hit GAAP EPS.

 

The profits recovery is unlikely to live up to expectations

 

Earnings season for 2Q is about to kick off, and despite our expectation of a 3% beat vs. consensus, we think S&P 500 EPS is still likely to come in below 2Q15. While this would mark the fourth consecutive quarter of negative y/y EPS growth, in our view, what is encouraging is that 1Q likely marked the trough. Despite the negative impact of the Brexit vote, we see EPS growth accelerating throughout the rest of the year, but not nearly at the trajectory of consensus expectations, which imply growth will accelerate from -6% in 1Q to +9% by 4Q (Chart 1) and +16% by 1Q17. And given the S&P 500’s 15% rally since mid- February, we are concerned that much of the improvement in earnings growth may already be priced in, especially with signs that earnings revision trends may be rolling over.

We expect other banks to promptly join the crowd and slash their own overly optimistic forecasts which will never materialize.

So does that mean that stocks will stop rising in a world in which they are unable to generate incremental income growth? Of course not: since the S&P’s GAAP PE is currently north of 24x, there is no reason central banks can’t push it even higher: after all any time the market has rallied over the past 1.5 years, a time when earnings have been steadily declining has been on multiple expansion. And since even the Fed admits the stock market is in bubble territory, saying “forward price-to-earnings ratios for equities have increased to a level well above their median of the past three decades“, and yet does nothing about it, we expect the bubble to keep growing ever bigger until the day it finally bursts. What concerns us more, however, is that the world will be engaged in both regional and global conflict and/or war at that time, for anyone to really care too much.

via http://ift.tt/29CDBph Tyler Durden