How The Federal Reserve Quietly Bankrupted The US Pension System

Submitted by Stephanie Pomboy of Macro Mavens

Actions have consequences.  Even for the Fed.

That’s not a reference to the market’s grumpy reaction to the central bank’s continued rate hikes and quantitative tightening.  No.  The impact of both on financial assets were as obvious as they were inexorable.  To be sure, Wall Street’s resident soothsayers had a good run spinning tales that ‘this time’ was different. A tightening Fed, we were assured, was a good thing—a ringing endorsement of the economy’s indefatigable strength. But, in the end, there was simply no way around the basic fact: Just as rate cuts and QE were designed to expand the pool of credit and incent the embrace of risk, so would rate hikes and QT necessarily beget the reverse. And so they have.

But while the impact of receding liquidity and the reduced reward for reckless speculation and risk-taking have finally begun to play out on Bloomberg screens everywhere, the real devastation has yet to be revealed.  In the ensuing weeks and months the full and lugubrious legacy of the Fed’s great monetary experiment of the last decade will finally come into view.

Beyond inflating and bursting a bubble in corporate debt (with leveraged loans acting as posterchild), the Fed’s decade-long financial repression has had a far larger and more sinister impact: It has silently bankrupted the US pension system.  

Sound overly dramatic??

Here are the numbers from no lesser authority than the institution responsible for this destruction itself: the Federal Reserve.   By their calculations, at the end of the 3rd quarter, the funding shortfall of U.S. pension plans (public and private) stood at -$6.18t.  That’s trillion, with a capital ‘t’.  To put that in perspective, that’s roughly 30% of GDP:

But that’s not even the scary part.  The scary part is that this is the funding deficit NOW…after a decade of rampant financial asset inflation and a 10-year economic expansion. One shudders to imagine what the picture will look like as these tailwinds reverse.  If the last two cycles are any indication, it won’t be pretty. The DotCom bust sent the cumulative deficit from -$1.2t to -$3.1t and the GFC saw it swell from -$2.9t to -$5.3t.  Split the diff’ at a doubling of the deficit and we’d be looking at a hole of $12t before you can blink.   

The numbers are hard enough to fathom, much less figure a way out of.  No amount of fancy accounting footwork can bring these obligations into a realm where they can possibly be fulfilled.  Nor, I regret to add, does the standard operating procedure – blow it off and hope that time solves the problem.   With our rapidly-aging population, more and more retirees are knocking on the door to collect their benefits every day.  

At its enormous size, even the effort to begin shoring-up these pension deficits (rendered newly urgent by the market meltdown) will have a material economic impact.  At the state and local level, balanced budget mandates are such that any monies directed to pensions will need to be diverted from spending and/or conjured via higher taxes.  And for corporations, freshly turned-out of the credit markets, the dough will come out of hiring and capex and/or share buybacks.  In the (likely) alterative that these untenable pension obligation are renegotiated and/or reneged upon instead, the saving onus would simply be passed from employer to employee.  And newly disenfranchised day laborers would be forced to ramp-up saving, by cutting spending.  Either way, the economy will take a material hit.  

It’s true that the mushrooming of these deficits has occurred by dint of the Fed’s low interest rates over these last several years, which swelled the present discounted value of future obligations.  However, as the recent market action (and the experience of the last two times the Fed tightened into a bubble of its own making) makes plain, higher rates are hardly going to act as a cure…far from it.  At the risk of spilling any state secrets, the only way pension managers had a chance to meet 8% return assumptions in a 1% risk-free world was to stretch into the deepest corners of risk assets, now blowing up.  

Sigh.  This was all totally foreseeable.  For the 3rd time in as many decades we are being reminded that the solution for excess debt is not, in fact, to incent economic and financial agents to borrow MORE.  Inflating financial assets in the hopes that, one day, the economy rises to meet them is a dangerous exercise—one that isn’t rendered any less perilous by a Fed that (incredibly) imagines it can ratchet-up rates and tighten the credit upon which both rest without consequence ?!!  

After 9 ½ years of expanding economic activity and a decade of rising asset prices and falling volatility, it’s a reality which investors had altogether forgotten (and which the Fed obviously never recognized in the first place).  But it’s one that is about to come into sharp focus.

via RSS http://bit.ly/2Res6uT Tyler Durden

Saudi Teen Who Tried To Flee Family Says, “They Will Kill Me” 

The head of Thailand’s immigration police said Monday that an 18-year-old Saudi woman was detained by Saudi officials at a Bangkok airport, as she attempted to reach Australia to seek asylum.

Rahaf Mohammed Alqunun, remained barricaded in a tiny airport hotel room Monday while sending out dozens of tweets for help.

Alqunun began tweeting late Saturday after her passport was confiscated at Bangkok airport on a flight from Kuwait.

On Sunday, she pleaded for refugee status from the United Nations refugee agency and anyone else who could help, said AP.

The office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees published a statement Monday morning saying it was closely following the case and would assess Alqunun’s need for international protection.

Maj. Gen. Surachate Hakparn, the chief of Thailand’s Immigration Police, said Monday that Alqunun would not be transferred anywhere against her will. 

On Twitter, where Alqunun’s following base has rapidly increased in the last several days, alleges that she is in “real danger” if forced to return to her family under pressure from Saudi authorities and had claimed in media interviews that she could be killed.

Alqunun told Human Rights Watch she fled the constant abuse from her family, including regular beatings and death threats from her male relatives who forced her to remain in her room for six months. 

Asked why she was seeking refuge in Australia, she said: “Physical, emotional and verbal abuse and being imprisoned inside the house for months. They threaten to kill me and prevent me from continuing my education.”

Alqunun added: “They won’t let me drive or travel. I am oppressed. I love life and work and I am very ambitious but my family is preventing me from living.”

Australian Senator Sarah Hanson-Young said on Monday that her country would do everything they could to assist the young women with safe passage. 

“Rahaf Mohammed al-Qunun fears for her life and is facing deportation to Saudi Arabia, but we can help. We understand she has a visa and needs emergency travel documents to be brought safely here,” Hanson-Young said in a statement.

“I have called on the Liberal Government to act urgently to ensure Rahaf Mohammed al-Qunun has safe travel to Australia. She has denounced Islam and is fleeing a forced marriage.”

Alqunun has used Twitter to publicize her unique situation. In the last several days, she has shared countless pictures and videos of the room she is detained in, and of the men guarding her door.

She reached out to major media outlets, who have shared her story on their social media channels. 

Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director for Human Rights Watch, shared one such video on Monday where Alqunun claimed men were outside her hotel room door, while she waited for a meeting with the UN refugee agency. 

Young Saudi women runaways have increasingly turned to social media to amplify their calls for help.

Two years ago, Dina Lasloom triggered a social media firestorm when she was stopped en route to Australia where she planned to seek asylum. She was forced to return to Saudi Arabia and has not been heard from since. 

*This story is still developing… 

via RSS http://bit.ly/2sgwJFM Tyler Durden

OWU Offers ‘Social Justice’ Major With Mandatory ‘Activism’ Work

Authored by Adam Sabes via Campus Reform,

A university in Ohio is offering a “social justice major” to students, aiming to “cultivate…the knowledge and skills needed to analyze social injustices.”

Ohio Wesleyan University is offering the major to undergraduate students who are interested in creating social change through activism, stating that the major gives students the skills to “reflect critically on the meaning of social justice” on multiple levels.

“Through this interdisciplinary major, students will develop the knowledge and skills to reflect critically on the meaning of social justice at both the local and global levels, examine the dynamics of societal conflicts and struggles for social justice within and among various groups and institutions, and apply interdisciplinary perspectives at multiple levels of analysis,” states the description for the major.

In addition to coursework, the major requires that each student does work outside of class, which includes an “activism” project.

“Students will be required to supplement their classwork with a more experientially-oriented activist project, and will be encouraged to further participate in a travel-learning course, theory-to-practice grant, and other service projects,” states the description.

The university contends that these activism components of the major which take place outside of the classroom will give students the chance to build career-related skills, such as “community organizing, working with and mediating diverse social groups, presenting ideas in professional forums, and managing real-world projects.”

Course requirements to obtain a “Social Justice Major” include “Teaching for Social Justice,” and a choice between a variety of courses such as “Contemporary Feminist Theory,” “Social Inequality,” “Feminist Philosophy,” and more.

Contemporary feminist theory, for example, aims to study far-left versions of feminism, including “marxist feminism” and “socialist feminism.”

“Often U.S. contemporary feminist theory is characterized as a typology of theories (sometimes assumed to be distinct and separate from each other) that follows a linear chronology such as: liberal feminism, Marxist feminism, socialist feminism, radical feminist, ecofeminism, queer feminism, postcolonial/ global feminism, postmodern/poststructuralist feminism, feminist ethnography, and critical race or “woman of color” feminism (or as first, second, and third wave feminisms),” states the course description.

In addition, the course “Teaching for Social Justice” is a required course for all social justice majors.

Greg Margevicius, a student at Ohio Wesleyan University, told Campus Reform that the program isn’t something he’d personally enjoy, but understands why some students may want to pursue it.

“I think that the wide breadth of student interests will result in some students wanting to study the subject,” Margevicius said.

Margevicius also added that while he does not believe the major will prepare students for some professions, he contends there is less of an emphasis on what a potential employee’s major is.

“While it may not prepare students adequately for some professions, I think that a lot of employers are less concerned with a potential employee’s major and are more concerned with that student’s work ethic and experience,” Margevicius said, adding that students majoring in social justice could go to work for non-profits.

Campus Reform reached out to Ohio Wesleyan University but did not receive a response in time for publication.

via RSS http://bit.ly/2GYV4dB Tyler Durden

Explosive WSJ Report Exposes China’s Role In 1MDB Scandal

In the waning months of his administration, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak was desperate to stave off the bankruptcy of1MDB, the sovereign wealth fund that Razak and members of his inner circle looted (allegedly with the help of Goldman Sachs). So, he turned to an unlikely source of funding to bail out the fund – signing away rights to some of his country’s most valuable resources in the process.

China

The source? China. Employing financier Jho Low as an intermediary, Razak worked out an arrangement with the Chinese government whereby Razak’s government would grant state-owned Chinese enterprises lucrative stakes in Malaysian railway and pipelines projects in exchange for $34 billion – more than enough to clear the shortfall in 1MDB, and then some.

By 2016, Mr. Najib was in a bind because the fund had borrowed $13 billion it couldn’t repay. He turned to Jho Low—a Malaysian financier the U.S. Justice Department has alleged was the mastermind of a multibillion-dollar theft of 1MDB funds—to negotiate with China to resolve the crisis, according to current and former Malaysian officials.

According to a report in the Wall Street Journal, Razak offered the Chinese an invaluable cherry on top of the sweetheart deal. Permission to dock Chinese Navy ships in two Malaysian ports – a “significant concession” that would push Malaysia undeniably into the orbit of Beijing.

Mr. Najib also embarked on secret talks with China’s leadership to let Chinese navy ships dock at two Malaysian ports, say two people familiar with the discussions. Such permission would have been a significant concession to Beijing, which seeks greater influence across contested waters of the South China Sea, but it didn’t come to pass.

The projects – and the port permissions – were swiftly incorporated into China’s ambitious “One Belt, One Road” initiative – a series of infrastructure projects across Europe, Asia and Africa to fill in gaps in railway and pipeline infrastructure (and help cement China’s influence across the developing world).

The WSJ, which cited documents and minutes from meetings between Malaysian and Chinese officials in its report, described the projects as one of the most egregious examples of what China’s critics have derided as “debt trap diplomacy” – extending credit to desperate countries in exchange for rights to key strategic resources that can be applied to BRI.

China

US national security officials who spoke with WSJ on the condition of anonymity described the Malaysia deal as one of China’s most ambitious attempts to leverage state-backed financing to cement its geostrategic advantage.

A Journal examination of the China-Malaysia projects, based on documents and interviews with current and former Malaysian officials, offers one of the most detailed accounts to date of the political forces at work behind China’s Belt and Road program, a signature initiative of building ports, railways, roads and pipelines in some 70 countries to generate trade and business for Chinese companies.

U.S. officials say China is using the program to increase its sway over developing nations and trap them in debt while advancing its military aims. Several countries, including Pakistan and the Maldives, have been reviewing One Belt, One Road projects amid allegations some deals unfairly advanced Beijing’s interests.

What’s more, minutes from the meetings revealed that China and Razak tried to cover up the prime minister’s intentions, saying the deals must be portrayed as “market-driven” instead of “political” in nature.

The minutes also revealed that the projects were a fount of corruption, with valuations of the deals priced at above-market rates so that some of the money could be diverted for “other needs.”

By 2017, the money had already started flowing through China’s Export-Import Bank and into the coffers of 1MDB.

Documents reviewed by the Journal show Malaysian officials suggested that some of the infrastructure projects be financed at above-market values, generating excess cash for other needs. Investigators from the current Malaysian government, which replaced Mr. Najib’s last year, believe some of the money helped Mr. Najib finance his political activities and cover maturing debts of 1MDB, a fund he set up in 2009 to finance local development.

Mr. Najib was aware of the 2016 Malaysian-Chinese meetings, according to people familiar with them. Asked about them, the former prime minister issued a statement saying the rail project would have brought tens of thousands of jobs to Malaysia and stating that under his leadership, the country experienced nine years of continuous economic growth.

[…]

A month later, the Malaysians proposed that Chinese state companies instead make payments that would “indirectly be used to repay 1MDB debt,” according to meeting minutes.

Notes of a discussion on Sept. 22, 2016, say the sides agreed to move ahead with the infrastructure deals even though “they may not have strong project financials.”

Participants needn’t “waste time studying the actual project financials to see if they can sustain the debt etc.,” because Malaysia’s government backed the deals for strategic reasons, the documents say.

Notes from that meeting said Malaysia was working to enhance bilateral ties, citing support Mr. Najib voiced for China’s position in the South China Sea during a regional summit in Laos.

Two months later, Mr. Najib went to Beijing and signed the deals. Together with other projects, they made Malaysia the second-biggest recipient of One Belt, One Road funding after Pakistan.

Money was flowing by the middle of 2017 as the Export-Import Bank of China issued the first loans. By fall the bank had paid out 80% of the $2.5 billion pledged to state-owned China Petroleum Pipeline Bureau to build the pipeline, although little work had been done, according to Malaysian officials.

The story shed some light on one of the enduring mysteries of the 1DB scandal: how Low has managed to evade US and Malaysian prosecutors. Per WSJ, he has been hiding out in China under Beijing’s protection.

In another interesting detail, WSJ reportedly confirmed that the Chinese government had ordered increased surveillance of WSJ’s reporters in Hong Kong who were working on the story.

At a meeting the next day, Sun Lijun, then head of China’s domestic-security force, confirmed that China’s government was surveilling the Journal in Hong Kong at Malaysia’s request, including “full scale residence/office/device tapping, computer/phone/web data retrieval, and full operational surveillance,” according to a Malaysian summary of that meeting.

China worked hard on behalf of Razak during his reelection campaign. But it wasn’t enough, and instead former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamed, who is in his 90s, prevailed. He is now struggling to renegotiate Razak’s deals with the Chinese. Meanwhile, Razak is facing corruption charges and will likely head to trial later this year. And Mahathir is struggling to renegotiate some of his predecessors deals.

In summary, one of the biggest financial frauds in Asian history was facilitated with the cooperation of the Chinese Communist Party and Goldman Sachs.

via RSS http://bit.ly/2GZ8czb Tyler Durden

Graphic: Chairman Of Germany’s Far-Right Party Brutally Beaten Within Inch Of His Life In “Assassination Attempt”

Frank Magnitz, Chairman of Germany’s right-wing AfD party, was beaten within an inch of his life on Monday by three men as he left a New Year’s reception, according to the AfD Bremen Facebook page, which adds that he was knocked unconscious with a wooden board and repeatedly kicked in the head.  

The attack on Magnitz was stopped after the “courageous” intervention of a construction worker, according to the Facebook post. The AfD Chairman is currently in the hospital with serious injuries, as well as police protection since the incident has been ruled to be politically motivated. 

While the attackers have not been identified, AfD notes in its Facebook post that both the Left and Germany’s Social Democratic Party (SPD) support Antifa and its attacks, and asks rhetorically “Is this what the other political parties want?” 

“Again and again, the AfD is the focus of left-wing attacks that are not condemned or even supported by the other parties,” reads the post. “Today is a black day for democracy in Germany.”

via RSS http://bit.ly/2CWcNhK Tyler Durden

Erdogan Promised Trump Turks Won’t Slaughter Kurds; Proposes New “Stabilization Force”

Speaking to CNBC on Monday, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo sought to reassure the public that Turkey’s President Erdogan has made a personal commitment to President Trump that the Turks won’t slaughter the Kurds as US forces draw down in Syria.

Asked about Erdogan’s trustworthiness not to turn on the US-backed Kurds in Syria, Pompeo made this dubious point: “Erdogan made a commitment to President Trump… that the Turks would continue to the counter ISIS campaign after our departure, and that the Turks would ensure that the folks that we’d fought with — that assisted us in the counter ISIS campaign — would be protected,” according to CNBC. Pompeo explained further that John Bolton is going to speak with Turkey during his visit there on how to put that promise into operation.

Cartoon via ShiaPac.org

If having to elicit simple assurances that Erdogan — who was years ago definitively established as among state sponsors of ISIS in order slaughter the Kurds and attempt regime change in Damascus will obey the United States and refrain from slaughtering the Kurds isn’t absurd enough, The New York Times also on Monday gave Erdogan lengthy editorial space to assure the world that “Turkey Has a Plan to Restore Peace in Syria” in what seems an attempt at well-timed propaganda. 

Erdogan asserts, “President Trump made the right call to withdraw from Syria,” and while claiming Turkey’s top priority is to fight Islamic State terrorists, ensuring they don’t regroup, he offers as a “first step” the creation of yet another Turkish-backed rebel group to fill the so-called power vacuum left by a future US withdrawal. But first Erdogan attempts to assure, “I would like to point out that we have no argument with the Syrian Kurds.”

However, we should point out that in the lead up to and during last year’s ‘Operation Olive Branch’ to take Afrin, Erdogan openly expressed his goal of radical demographic shift in northern Syria — or what’s long been a policy of ethnic cleansing targeting the Kurds something which has become a reality anywhere pro-Turkish rebel forces have captured Syrian Kurdish enclaves

But Erdogan emphasizes the “diversity” of his planned for “stabilization force”:

The first step is to create a stabilization force featuring fighters from all parts of Syrian society. Only a diverse body can serve all Syrian citizens and bring law and order to various parts of the country.

This makes the next part of Erdogan’s proposed Syrian “stabilization” plan all the more laughable considering the source. He promotes Turkish-backed “popularly elected councils,” which – he promises further – can be led by Kurdish community representatives:

Ensuring adequate political representation for all communities is another priority. Under Turkey’s watch, the Syrian territories that are under the control of the Y.P.G. or the so-called Islamic State will be governed by popularly elected councils. Individuals with no links to terrorist groups will be eligible to represent their communities in local governments.

Local councils in predominantly Kurdish parts of northern Syria will largely consist of the Kurdish community’s representatives whilst ensuring that all other groups enjoy fair political representation. Turkish officials with relevant experience will advise them on municipal affairs, education, health care and emergency services.

Crucially, Erdogan’s op-ed makes no mention whatsoever of the Syrian government or of Assad.

But this is where the Syrian Kurds are actually headed: towards making a deal with Assad which would provide Syrian Army protection to Kurdish enclaves in the face of the invading Turks. 

This truly local solution, fast taking shapewill occur without the United States or Turkey, and in affirmation of Syrian sovereignty. 

So Erdogan’s latest NYT “plan” is but an another empty propaganda exercise meant to satisfy the dilemma Trump expressed directly last week: “We want to protect Kurds, but I don’t want to be in Syria forever. It’s sand. And it’s death,” the president said. 

via RSS http://bit.ly/2Qxd4v4 Tyler Durden

Great American Blue State Exodus

Authored by Graham Noble via Liberty Nation,

People are fleeing the northeast but they need to leave their old values behind with their old lives…

The most talked-about story of the day is a real humanitarian tragedy. It is the story of a great wave of miserable humanity fleeing oppressive regimes to find a better life. Their journey is arduous but they are not all worthy of our sympathy, as many of them simply refuse to assimilate into their new surroundings should they complete their migration successfully. Instead, they complain, expect certain privileges, and stick to their old ways rather than conform to the local culture and customs. We are speaking, of course, about Americans who flee the Northeast to settle in the South.

Other than the gorgeous fall colors, there is not much to like about the blue states crushed together in the top right-hand corner of the American map. The climate is unpleasant, the cities overcrowded, the general mood cold and indifferent, and practically the only decent food is that which has been culturally appropriated from other parts of the world.

To make things even worse, the taxes are high and the laws are many. Corrupt politicians rule with an iron fist. Individual freedom is almost unheard of. Think of banana republics without the bananas and you get a pretty good idea.

Escape From New Jersey

Perhaps the least appealing of these unappealing states is New Jersey, comically known as the Garden State. New York’s mentally-challenged cousin, New Jersey witnessed the largest exodus of any American state in 2018, according to a report in The New York Post. The Empire State itself wasn’t far behind.

The Post quotes United Van Lines – the company that conducted the survey into internal U.S. migration – as stating “The Northeast region continues to see more residents leaving than moving in, with 57 percent of all moves within the Northeast US being outbound moves.”

Census Bureau figures show that, in 2016 and 2017, every state in the Northeast and Upper Midwest – with the exceptions of Maine and Minnesota – saw a net loss of population. So, where are these wretches fleeing to? The South, the Southwest, and the Pacific Northwest were the regions that saw population growth.

Build That Wall!

The time has come, perhaps, to talk about tighter controls on migration.

Many of those who flee the socialist dystopias of New England, New York, Maryland, New Jersey, and so on, may be trying to evade the high taxes and soul-crushing cultures but they carry with them – like tuberculosis – their Democratic values and spread this infection to their new homes. This is why the wonderful state of Virginia is now barely recognizable as a “Southern” state and North Carolina is going down the same, dismal road.

The Mason-Dixon Line has been breached but it is not too late to build that wall. The rest of the South can still be saved and the caravans from Trenton and Albany can be diverted across the Midwest to Colorado and New Mexico. Let them cross the desert; it may give them a more sympathetic view of the founders of Israel, after all.

The moral of the story – for those fleeing the Northeast and California to settle in other states as well as for those who escape Central America to come to the U.S. – is this: Leave your flags behind, leave your old habits behind, and, most of all, leave behind the stupid values which made the places you are leaving so unbearable to begin with. Those of us who are already here in the places to which you are fleeing do not have to accommodate you or your way of life; it is you who must conform to our values.

via RSS http://bit.ly/2FfOqgp Tyler Durden

Xi Invites Kim To China As US Trade Talks Begin

As US-China trade talks begin (with Chinese Vice Premier Liu He, the top economic adviser to President Xi Jinping, unexpectedly attending), the x-dimensional chessboard of global geopolitics just got a little more complicated.

Korean Central News Agency reports that North Korean leader Kim Jong Un left Pyongyang with his wife Ri Sol Ju on Monday afternoon to visit China from January 7 to 10, at the invitation of Xi Jinping.

He was accompanied by Kim Yong Chol, Ri Su Yong, Pak Thae Song, Ri Yong Ho and other leading officials.

As Reuters reports, Kim’s visit, his fourth summit with Xi, comes amid reports of advanced negotiations for a second summit between the North Korean leader and U.S. President Donald Trump.

Kim travelled to China three times to meet with Xi last year before and after summits with U.S. President Donald Trump and South Korean President Moon Jae-in.

And while no details were released on the topics for discussion but it seems likely that Kim will be used as leverage in the negotiations with President Trump.

via RSS http://bit.ly/2FdOxt3 Tyler Durden

California Isn’t Buying PG&E Bankruptcy Threats

PG&E shares tumbled another 20% on Monday as the embattled utility, which is potentially facing billions of dollars in fines stemming from the deadliest wildfires in the state’s history (while simultaneously struggling to settle claims related to a round of fires that decimated California’s wine country in 2017), is facing pushback and skepticism from lawmakers following reports last week that it could file for bankruptcy as soon as next month.

According to Bloomberg, California lawmakers, who had been expected to bail out the utility, are questioning the political prudence of caving to the utilities bankruptcy threats. 

It’s widely suspected that the threat of a bankruptcy filing would force the California legislature to pass a law allowing PG&E to pass costs related to the fires on to its customers – an outcome that would risk enraging Californians who suspect that the utility’s equipment contributed to starting the deadly Camp and Woolsey Fires.

PGWE

As investigators press ahead with their probe into what caused the deadly fires, the issue of what should be done to hold PG&E accountable for any role in the fires could be one of the first major issues facing California’s newly inaugurated governor, Gavin Newsom, who was sworn into office on Monday.

As BBG reported, even if PG&E does follow through with its bankruptcy threats, they might not be enough to pressure lawmakersinto action – which could lead to serious risks for PG&E shareholders.

A potential bankruptcy may be enough to force the hand of state legislators who are mulling a potential bailout for the embattled utility. They’ll have to decide whether to allow the company to pass some of the costs of the fire through to taxpayers, Katie Bays and Clayton Allen, analysts at Height Securities LLC, said in a note on Monday.

Bankruptcy “should be considered a credible risk by shareholders,” they said. “While we think that sufficient support for such a bill could eventually be rallied, exploitive tactics and a reticence toward change will not improve” the company’s profile.

PG&E doesn’t “comment on market rumor or speculation,” spokeswoman Lynsey Paulo said in an email Monday.

Since the fires, PG&E’s shares have shed fully half of their value, while yields on its bonds have skyrocketed.

But for what it’s worth, the utility claims it’s “working diligently” to figure out what it might owe due to the wildfires. There has also been speculation that it could sell its oil and gas unit to pay off fines in excess of its insurance coverage, as well as dozens of lawsuits that are currently pending.

In a statement late Friday, PG&E said it’s “working diligently to assess the company’s potential liabilities as a result of the wildfires and the options for addressing those liabilities. We recognize the need to balance the interests of many stakeholders while maintaining safe, reliable, and affordable services for our customers, which is always our top priority.”

And with the California legislature reconvening on Monday, some lawmakers are warning that they won’t allow PG&E to use the bankruptcy threat as leverage like it has done in the past.

The California legislature is scheduled to reconvene today after its holiday break. State Senator Jerry Hill, an outspoken PG&E critic, said the utility previously raised bankruptcy as leverage when seeking state assistance in paying its liabilities from wildfires in 2017. The company could be engaged in similar brinkmanship now, he said.

“You can’t trust what they say,” said Hill, who represents San Bruno, where a PG&E gas pipeline exploded in 2010, killing eight. “Last year, they were able to fool the legislature with the narrative of bankruptcy or bailout, and the legislature gave them a bailout.”

Still, the fact that PG&E is the largest utility in California and the country gives it a fair amount of leverage. Analysts warned that the company could run out of money before the end of the year…which could create serious problems not just for PG&E, but for California consumers

PG&E “could face a liquidity crisis by mid-to-late ’19,” Greg Gordon, an analyst at Evercore ISI, said in a research note Monday.

But in one potential workaround, the state’s utility commissioner is evaluating a possible breakup of the utility, as well as a state takeover.

California Public Utilities Commission chief Michael Picker said that same month that he couldn’t imagine allowing the state’s largest utility to go into bankruptcy. His agency later began a formal process to evaluate whether to break up or take over PG&E’s Pacific Gas and Electric utility.

Earlier on Friday, PG&E said in a statement that it’s already weighing changes to both its board and how its businesses are structured. One option under consideration: Selling its natural gas business after a bankruptcy filing, the people familiar with the matter said. Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Kit Konolige said.

But even a state takeover wouldn’t necessarily prevent a rerun of the catastrophic fires, or other serious lapses in oversight.

“Breaking it up or the state running the company, those are all incredibly complicated proposals that just have no indication that they would be successful, certainly not anytime soon,” he said. “The assumption that whatever you put in place of PG&E would be better — that’s really unproven.”

But as legislators debate exactly what should be done regarding PG&E, one thing is for sure: Expect every new detail that emerges to have an impact on PG&E’s battered shares.

via RSS http://bit.ly/2LUbFy3 Tyler Durden

2019 Will Be The Year Of More State Control

Authored by John Lloyd, op-ed via Reuters.com,

A signature theme of the new year is the possibility of a malign confrontation between the world’s greatly enhanced capacity for electronic surveillance and the weakening of democratic control. The antidote to that risk is the democratic spirit and civil freedoms – both of which are suffering world-wide. These are not dead, but they are unwell, at times untended.

A man goes through the process of eye scanning for Aadhaar, India’s national government database, at a registration centre in New Delhi, Jan. 17, 2018. REUTERS/Saumya Khandelwal

The world’s two most populous states, China and India – together, around 37 percent of the global population – have rolled out nationwide digital systems of monitoring and classification. These combine the collection of personal information needed for fuller citizenship with the capacity for fuller surveillance and intervention by the state.

China’s system overtly seeks to monitor the behavior of its 1.4 billion people and to reward those actions the state/Communist Party defines as “good” or punish those it defines as “bad.” It is the secular alternative to religiously-guided societies, substituting the commandments of a god mediated through a priesthood with the criteria of a state whose ruling party claims virtual infallibility through its interpretation of the philosophy of Karl Marx aided by a gloss provided by its president – the “Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era,” now written into China’s constitution.

The country’s “social credit system” combines face, voice and fingerprint recognition technology with monitoring of public and private behavior such as internet use, educational choices and social networks, as well as a huge web of paid informants who report unusual activities. The Chinese government uses these elements to produce a picture of each person’s social, political, professional and private activities – and awards points which aid career and other choices – or punishes anti-social or anti-Party behavior by depriving citizens of rights, promotions and travel possibilities. The official Party description of the system claims that it “will allow the trustworthy to roam freely under heaven while making it hard for the discredited to take a single step.” It already assigns rewards and punishments: 2019 is the year in which coverage is aimed to be completed so as to monitor everyone in the country by 2020.

India’s Aadhaar (“foundation” in Hindi) national identity card technology aims to be as comprehensive as the Chinese model, but is not designed to be as intrusive. It began as a voluntary initiative, the brainchild of software entrepreneur Nandan Nilekani, who wanted to make “every Indian, no matter how poor or marginalized, visible to the state.” Since last year, it ceased to be a choice in several Indian states, and the ambition is to make it compulsory, with plans to link it to access to needed commodities, higher education, government subsidies and healthcare.

Complaints that Aadhaar breaches the right to privacy are lodged with the courts, and a battle is joined between civil libertarians and the state. The economist Reetika Khera wrote in the Washington Post in August that the system constitutes “one of the most brazen breaches of the right to privacy and the right to live initiated by the government of a democratic country.”

Western democracies don’t have China-sized – or even India-sized – digital ambitions. But in the aftermath of the 2013 publication of documents taken from the U.S. National Security Agency, many of their secret services have been given legal power to monitor all their citizens’ communications – though with increased legal safeguards.

The most powerful of democracies, the United States itself, is the birthplace and headquarters of the great digital corporations which, with Facebook in the lead, now face increased questioning by the public and governments on their ability to preserve privacy and weed out or at least reveal the existence of illegal hate speech and covert propaganda masquerading as news.

A few years later, as Facebook was soaring in popularity, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg opined that keeping information private was no longer “a social norm.” He has no doubt changed, or been forced to appear to have changed, his views since then, but the business model of Facebook, and others of the tech giants’ pack, remains dependent on Facebook sharing personal information with advertisers.

These developments grow in importance and scope at the same time as the authoritarian world increases its size and becomes more restrictive. In a disturbing essay published last year, scholars Yascha Mounk and Roberto Stefan Foa wrote that “In the span of a quarter century, liberal democracies have gone from a position of unprecedented economic strength to a position of unprecedented economic weakness.” They believe that the dominance of global affairs by liberal democracies through the 20th century was less because of the attraction of either liberalism or democracy, but because of the example they set of wealth creation.

Besides the outright authoritarians, there are the democratically-elected populists – as in the United States, Italy, Poland, Hungary and elsewhere – who usually adopt some part of the authoritarian practice on issues like immigration, sexual and ethnic minorities and NGOs. The most recent addition – the presidency of Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil – saw the new leader threaten, on his first day in office, the land granted to indigenous peoples and to remove LGBT issues from the protection of the Human Rights Ministry.

Neither the authoritarians nor the national populists are likely to use the new powers of surveillance, and their capacity to discipline populations, with a strong regard for human rights – at least the rights of those of whom they wish to marginalize. Instead, these powers, especially the Chinese system, are likely to be used by leaders who wish to radically alter the liberal policies and customs they have inherited.

The danger is not in the technology. Mature democracies, whose publics, courts, media outlets and institutions of civil society remain free and vigilant, can – with some exceptions and accidents – ensure that technological use is consonant with the need to counter threats, or secure efficiency in the public sphere. They can also ensure that debate on the use of technology is robust, and that the weight of public opinion is felt, and can change policy. The predictions of democratic failure in the face of authoritarian power will come true only if publics allow it. 2019 cannot be the year of more control, but of the revival of the liberal spirit.

via RSS http://bit.ly/2seuTW3 Tyler Durden