Beige Book Finds Expansion Remains “Modest”; Employers Bring Back Retirees To Fill Job Openings

Beige Book Finds Expansion Remains “Modest”; Employers Bring Back Retirees To Fill Job Openings

One month after the Fed “modestly” downgraded its outlook on the US economy from “modest to moderate” growth to “slight to modest pace”, there were no notable changes in the latest, just released November Beige Book, in which the Fed said that at the national level, economic activity expanded “modestly” from October through mid-November, similar to the pace of growth seen over the prior reporting period.

The good news for the US economy, which for the past two quarters was almost entirely driven by consumer spending…

… is that most districts reported “stable to moderately growing consumer spending”, and increases in auto sales and tourism were seen across several Districts, even if St Louis noted that “multiple auto dealers continued to note seeing an increased preference for used and low-end vehicles.”

In welcome news for the US manufacturing recession, more Districts reported an expansion in the current period in manufacturing, than the previous one, even though the majority continued to experience no growth. Meanwhile, the picture for nonfinancial services remained quite positive, with most Districts reporting modest to moderate growth. Some more perspectives on the economy from sectors including:

  • Transportation activity was rather mixed across Districts. Reports from the banking sector indicated continued but slightly slower growth in loan volumes.
  • Home sales were mostly flat to up, and residential construction experienced more widespread growth compared to the prior report.
  • Construction and leasing activity of nonresidential real estate continued to increase at a modest pace.
  • Agricultural conditions were little changed overall, remaining strained by weather and low crop prices.
  • Activity in the energy sector deteriorated modestly among reporting Districts. Outlooks generally remained positive, with some contacts expecting the current pace of growth to continue into next year.

While the economy was roughly unchanged over the past month, the Fed founds that employment continued to rise slightly overall, even as labor markets remained tight across the U.S. Several Districts noted relatively strong job gains in  professional and technical services as well as healthcare, while reports were mixed for employment in manufacturing, with some Districts noting rising headcounts while others noted stable employment levels and one District reported layoffs. And while there were scattered reports of labor reductions in retail and wholesale trade, the prevailing complaint was one of continued labor shortages as the vast majority of Districts continued to note difficulty hiring driven by a lack of qualified applicants as the labor market remained very tight.

The shortage of workers spanned most industries and skill levels, and some contacts noted that their inability to fill vacancies was constraining business growth with multiple contacts reporting “bringing back retired workers as a way to fill openings.” Moderate wage growth continued across most Districts, and the Fed said that wage pressures intensified for low-skill positions, even if reports from both the BLS and Umich shows that wage growth has now peaked and is moving lower.

Finally, prices rose at a modest pace during the reporting period, with the Fed noting that reports regarding input costs and selling prices in the manufacturing sector were mixed, with some Districts noting deceleration in prices, while others cited increased cost pressures and a few indicated little to no change. Of note, some retailers mentioned higher costs, which contacts in some Districts attributed to tariffs. And yet, it will come as great news to Trump that most firms’ ability to raise prices to cover higher costs remained limited, suggesting there was no tariff passthru inflation, though a few Districts noted that companies affected by the tariffs were more inclined to pass on cost increases.

At the same time, service sector prices in reporting Districts were mostly flat to up. Energy and steel prices were flat to down, while reports on construction materials and agricultural commodity prices were mixed. Overall, the Fed said that firms generally expected higher prices going forward. Now if only the Fed would also join them and hike rates…

Quantifying the shift in the economy, while respondents showed a modest increase in concerns about trade, with “Tariff” mentions rising from a 4 month low of 24 to 30, mentions of “slow”-ness eased somewhat, and dropped from 56 back to 51 last month, which is to be expected in light of the modest improvement in the broader outlook.

What is perhaps more amusing is that one month after one Fed region blamed sharks and tornadoes for the recent downgrade in the economic outlook, this month it was revealed that it wasn’t the weather after all, but rather “a much deeper contraction in capital equipment spending.” Surely, that mistake is easy to make.

 A heavy equipment producer noted a slowdown in sales that they initially blamed on heavy rainfall this year, but said this “masks a much deeper contraction in capital equipment spending”

Oops.

Finally, here are some of the most notable Beige Book anecdotes from the various regional Feds, as picked by Bloomberg:

  • Boston: Office leasing demand in Boston has been robust even as leasing activity has slowed because of extremely low vacancy rates
  • New York: Prices for Broadway theater tickets have edged down and are slightly lower than a year ago
  • Philadelphia: One staffing firm reported more difficulty recruiting for firms that only offered minimum wage, and another indicated that a different staffing firm was deploying yard signs to recruit for jobs paying $16 an hour
  • Cleveland: A clothing retailer reduced the use of price discounting to offset higher costs resulting from tariffs. By contrast, a food retailer said that while tariffs had increased costs, the company ‘cannot raise prices on a whim’ because of fierce competition
  • Richmond: A Virginia yarn manufacturer reported that economic uncertainty is hurting demand by leading some customers to reduce inventory levels
  • Atlanta: Monthly Mississippi casino gross revenues were up for the first nine months of the year compared with the same time frame in 2018
  • Chicago: Contacts indicated that the labor market was tight and that it was difficult to fill positions at all skill levels. Multiple contacts reported bringing back retired workers as a way to fill openings.
  • St. Louis: Multiple auto dealers continued to note seeing an increased preference for used and low-end vehicles
  • Minneapolis: A heavy equipment producer noted a slowdown in sales that they initially blamed on heavy rainfall this year, but said this ‘masks a much deeper contraction in capital equipment spending’
  • Kansas City: The number of active rigs continued to decline across most states but was primarily driven by a decrease in Oklahoma
  • Dallas: Contacts noted continued concern among agricultural producers over trade issues with China but noted there was increased optimism regarding trade talks and the possibility of some tariffs being removed
  • San Francisco: A few businesses in higher cost urban areas noted efforts to relocate jobs to lower cost areas of the district in order to contain labor compensation

The bottom line: the Beige Book will just weak (or perhaps strong) enough to justify the Fed’s decision to stay “patient” on future interest-rate hikes (or cuts) amid a healthy, but modest economic expansion, one where the only thing that matters is the S&P500.


Tyler Durden

Wed, 11/27/2019 – 14:40

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/35EOVun Tyler Durden

Trump’s Farm Bailout Has Cost Over $10 Billion This Year

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has now spent more than $10 billion this year to bail out farmers affected by President Donald Trump’s trade war, according to updated U.S. Department of Agriculture data.

Illinois and Iowa have received more than $1 billion each, while Minnesota, Texas, and Kansas have received more than $700 million each, according to the USDA’s data. The bailout payments cover a wide variety of crops, and allow farmers to receive between $15 and $150 per acre, depending on what crops and where in the country the farm is located.

Trump has authorized up to $16 billion in bailout spending this year, on top of $12 billion spent in 2018.

All told, the price tag for Trump’s trade war farm bailout now far exceeds the $12 billion in net losses (after loans were repaid) incurred by the Obama administration to bail out domestic auto manufacturers in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis—a policy that was roundly criticized by Republicans and by Trump.

Trump says the farm bailout is being paid for by China, but that’s inaccurate in two ways. First, the tariff revenue that’s supposedly covering the cost of the bailout is coming from American consumers and businesses that are paying higher taxes because of Trump’s tariffs.

Second, the tariff revenue is insufficient to cover the cost of the bailout.

But even if the math added up, the farm bailout would be poor policy. Trump is trying to shield farmers from the loss of a huge export market; China has largely cut-off purchases of American agricultural goods in response to American tariffs on Chinese-made goods. But bailout checks are a poor substitute for a free market. An analysis of the bailout by the Environmental Working Group (EWG), an agricultural policy watchdog, shows that the government largess is flowing mostly to large farms and is not adequately covering farmers’ losses.

According to EWG’s analysis of more than $6 billion in bailout funds distributed between early July and the end of October, half went to just 10 percent of all recipients. The bottom 80 percent of recipients received an average of just $5,130. And thanks to what the group calls “laughably lax eligibility rules,” relatives with no direct connection to farms can cash-in on the bailout—a problem that has long plagued other forms of farm subsidies.

No wonder many farmers say they would much rather be able to sell their goods to China than wait for government checks to arrive.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/33sdusY
via IFTTT

Trump’s Farm Bailout Has Cost Over $10 Billion This Year

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has now spent more than $10 billion this year to bail out farmers affected by President Donald Trump’s trade war, according to updated U.S. Department of Agriculture data.

Illinois and Iowa have received more than $1 billion each, while Minnesota, Texas, and Kansas have received more than $700 million each, according to the USDA’s data. The bailout payments cover a wide variety of crops, and allow farmers to receive between $15 and $150 per acre, depending on what crops and where in the country the farm is located.

Trump has authorized up to $16 billion in bailout spending this year, on top of $12 billion spent in 2018.

All told, the price tag for Trump’s trade war farm bailout now far exceeds the $12 billion in net losses (after loans were repaid) incurred by the Obama administration to bail out domestic auto manufacturers in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis—a policy that was roundly criticized by Republicans and by Trump.

Trump says the farm bailout is being paid for by China, but that’s inaccurate in two ways. First, the tariff revenue that’s supposedly covering the cost of the bailout is coming from American consumers and businesses that are paying higher taxes because of Trump’s tariffs.

Second, the tariff revenue is insufficient to cover the cost of the bailout.

But even if the math added up, the farm bailout would be poor policy. Trump is trying to shield farmers from the loss of a huge export market; China has largely cut-off purchases of American agricultural goods in response to American tariffs on Chinese-made goods. But bailout checks are a poor substitute for a free market. An analysis of the bailout by the Environmental Working Group (EWG), an agricultural policy watchdog, shows that the government largess is flowing mostly to large farms and is not adequately covering farmers’ losses.

According to EWG’s analysis of more than $6 billion in bailout funds distributed between early July and the end of October, half went to just 10 percent of all recipients. The bottom 80 percent of recipients received an average of just $5,130. And thanks to what the group calls “laughably lax eligibility rules,” relatives with no direct connection to farms can cash-in on the bailout—a problem that has long plagued other forms of farm subsidies.

No wonder many farmers say they would much rather be able to sell their goods to China than wait for government checks to arrive.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/33sdusY
via IFTTT

Margin Call Chaos: Hong Kong Stock Plummets 75% In Minutes 

Margin Call Chaos: Hong Kong Stock Plummets 75% In Minutes 

China First Capital Group, an investment holding company, saw its equity trading on the Hong Kong exchange placed in a trading halt on Wednesday after it crashed 78% in minutes, reported Bloomberg

The collapse in equity wasn’t just limited to China First Capital. Another company that is partly owned by the investment holding company also saw its shares initially crash by 80% but ended the session down 33%. Both moves wiped out $1.2 billion in shareholder value, underscore how the Hong Kong market is fraught with volatility. 

Chen Keyu, Virscend’s director of investor relations, told Bloomberg that the sudden crash in Virscend shares could’ve been due to a margin call by China First Capital.

Bloomberg said the abrupt stock slumps are “once again putting the spotlight on corporate governance at the city’s listed companies.” 

Adding that “One oft-cited catalyst for the outsized swings is forced selling by major shareholders who have borrowed against their positions. That can lead to a domino effect when companies are connected by investors or business lines, and it’s not always clear under Hong Kong’s disclosure rules when a stake has been pledged.” 

We noted last year some prominent risks facing the Chinese stock market was the threat of margin calls resulting in forced selling of stocks pledged as collateral for loans. 

Companies who pledged shares as loan collateral could be one of the reasons behind Wednesday’s margin call dump in China First Capital that spread into Virscend. 

There was another panic last week when ArtGo Holdings plunged 98% after MSCI rejected plans to add the stock to its benchmark indexes. Then another stock, a Chinese furniture maker, plummeted 91% after a short-seller questioned the company’s accounting practices. 

The next significant risk for investors in Hong Kong and or Chinese stocks are sliding prices because of a decelerating regional economy. As a result, this would lead to additional margin calls and force a vicious circle of panic selling. 

 


Tyler Durden

Wed, 11/27/2019 – 14:25

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/37FeTjv Tyler Durden

Monsanto Pays Out $10 Million For Spraying Toxic Chemicals On Hawaiian Crops

Monsanto Pays Out $10 Million For Spraying Toxic Chemicals On Hawaiian Crops

Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

The embattled biotech company Monsanto will have to pay a hefty fine of $10 million for spraying a dangerous pesticide on “research crops” in Hawaii.  Over 160 lbs if the pesticide used was stockpiled and sprayed even after it was banned by the US government.

Monsanto admitted that it used the pesticide containing methyl parathion, the active ingredient in Penncap-M, on corn seed and other crops on the Hawaii island of Maui back in 2014.  The company also did this knowing that it was prohibited by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the previous year. The controversial company told its employees to go back into the sprayed fields seven days after the toxic Pennicap-M was used, whereas the area should have been closed off for 31 days.

The US Justice Department, which investigated the case, said that over 72 kg (160 lbs) of the chemical was illegally stored at a company facility, endangering “the environment, surrounding communities and Monsanto workers.” Methyl parathion is fatal if inhaled and hazardous if swallowed.

Things are not looking up for Monsanto.  The company has agreed to pay $10 million, which includes a $6 million criminal fine and $4 million in community service payments. The payoff is part of a deal by which federal prosecutors will dismiss felony charges against Monsanto in two years if it abides by the law.

This news comes as Monsanto faces a flurry of lawsuits over the potential hazards of its products. Just yesterday, Canadian lawyers launched a $500 million lawsuit against Monsanto and its owner, Bayer of Germany. It says Canadian plaintiffs affected by weed killer Roundup have been diagnosed with different forms of cancer, including brain and lung cancer. -RT

BUSTED! Monsanto Caught Writing Their Own Independent Safety Reviews

Last month, a lawsuit put together by Maui residents blamed birth defects on chemicals from Monsanto cornfields. The plaintiffs believe that multiple toxins were heavily sprayed to test the seeds on Monsanto fields near their homes, local media reported.


Tyler Durden

Wed, 11/27/2019 – 14:05

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

Study Finds Nearly All Minnesota Patients With Vaping-Related Lung Injuries Used Illegal THC Products Containing Suspect Additive

A new study of vaping-related lung injuries in Minnesota by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reinforces the case against vitamin E acetate, a diluting and thickening agent found in black-market THC products. The study, published yesterday in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, also provides evidence that use of the additive is a relatively new phenomenon, which might explain why cases like these were not reported until recently.

In light of the accumulating evidence implicating illegal cannabis products in the lung disease outbreak, which as of November 20 included 2,290 cases and 47 deaths, the CDC has modified its advice about vaping. But it continues to imply, without evidence, that legal nicotine products, which have been used by millions of Americans for years without causing acute respiratory reactions like these, might have something to do with the lung injuries.

In the new study, researchers interviewed 58 Minnesota patients, 91 percent of whom reported obtaining THC products from “informal sources such as friends, family members, or in-person or online dealers.” Just two patients said they had vaped only nicotine. It is not clear whether those reports were accurate, since patients may be reluctant to admit illegal drug use and may not actually know the contents of black-market products. Previous research has found THC in the lung fluid of patients who did not report vaping it. Without urine or blood testing, it is impossible to verify reports of exclusive nicotine use.

The researchers analyzed 67 product samples provided by patients, 46 of which contained THC. The most common THC brand by far was “Dank Vapes,” a label widely used by bootleggers. Of the 12 patients who provided THC products, all but one submitted samples containing vitamin E acetate, which was not found in any of the nicotine products tested. Lung fluid samples from five patients all contained the additive, which is consistent with an earlier CDC study of 29 patients. Comparing 10 THC products seized by law enforcement agencies in 2018 to 20 THC products seized in September 2019, the researchers found vitamin E acetate in all of the latter but none of the former.

“The findings support a potential role for vitamin E acetate in lung injury,” the study says, noting that the additive “has been detected in a high proportion of THC-containing products” used by patients, including samples tested in Minnesota, in New York, and in Utah as well as samples from 25 states analyzed by the Food and Drug Administration. The researchers also note that the CDC’s analysis of lung fluid from 29 patients in 10 states “found vitamin E acetate in all specimens.” And while “vitamin E acetate was not detected in the limited number of tested products seized [by Minnesota authorities] in 2018, it was detected in products seized in 2019, suggesting that vitamin E acetate might have been introduced recently as a diluent or filler.”

The researchers caution that “further research is needed to establish a causal link” between respiratory disease and inhalation of vitamin E acetate. Nevertheless, they say, “These Minnesota findings highlight concerns about e-cigarette, or vaping, products that contain THC acquired from informal sources. Because local supply chains and policy environments vary, CDC continues to recommend not using e-cigarette, or vaping, products that contain THC or any e-cigarette, or vaping, products obtained from informal sources.”

The latest version of the CDC’s official advice about vaping likewise emphasizes the potential hazards of vitamin E acetate and black-market THC products. But the CDC is still describing the problem as “e-cigarette, or vaping, product use associated lung injury (EVALI),” a phrase that is not only absurdly cumbersome but highly misleading, since most people, when they read “e-cigarette,” think of legal nicotine vaping products.

The CDC also continues to say that “the only way to assure that you are not at risk while the investigation continues is to consider refraining from use of all e-cigarette, or vaping, products.” Meanwhile, it contradicts itself by warning smokers who have switched to vaping that they should not return to their former habits, which are indisputably much more dangerous.

It’s instructive to compare the CDC’s general warnings about vaping to its much more specific advice concerning the recent outbreak of illnesses caused by E. coli contamination of romaine lettuce harvested in or near Salinas, California. “CDC’s current advice applies to all brands, use-by dates, and types of romaine lettuce grown in the Salinas growing region,” it says. The CDC is not suggesting that people stop eating, or that they avoid all fresh produce, or even that they stop eating romaine lettuce in general. The evidence points specifically to romaine lettuce from the Salinas area, so the CDC’s advisory appropriately focuses on those products.

Although the conspicuous role of black-market THC products in vaping-related lung injuries has been apparent for months, the CDC has been slow to acknowledge it. The agency’s nomenclature and its advice about vaping betray an irrational bias against e-cigarettes that has nothing to do with “EVALI.” Its muddled message has done real harm to public health by failing to give cannabis consumers adequate warnings and by scaring smokers away from products that provide a much less hazardous source of nicotine.

A Morning Consult poll conducted in September found that 58 percent of respondents, based on what they had “seen, read, or heard on the news lately,” believed people had “died from lung disease” caused by “ecigs, such as Juul,” compared to 34 percent who said the cases involved “marijuana or THC e-cigs.” Meanwhile, the share of Americans who recognize that e-cigarettes are less dangerous than the conventional, combustible kind continues to decline, a trend that is bound to be accelerated by “EVALI” scaremongering.

According to survey data reported this month in The Journal of the American Medical Association, just 26 percent of respondents perceived “electronic nicotine delivery systems” (ENDS) as less harmful than cigarettes in 2018, down from 39 percent in 2012. Between 2017 and 2018, the researchers noted, “an increase in perceiving ENDS as much more harmful than cigarettes was observed among cigarette smokers, which may influence their decision to try or switch to ENDS use.”

The lead author of the JAMA study, Georgia State University public health researcher Amy Nyman, amplified that point in a press release. “Smokers who perceive too much risk from e-cigarettes may decide against using them to quit smoking and may instead continue with their combustible smoking habit,” Nyman said. “The increase in perceived harm of electronic cigarettes may reflect growing concerns about the surge in e-cigarette use among young people, and the subsequent media coverage of the teen vaping epidemic.”

Notably, the 2018 survey preceded the outbreak of vaping-related lung injuries. “If this survey were to be done again,” one of Nyman’s co-authors told Vox, “it would probably be shocking in terms of even more negative perceptions.”

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/35JENjZ
via IFTTT

Study Finds Nearly All Minnesota Patients With Vaping-Related Lung Injuries Used Illegal THC Products Containing Suspect Additive

A new study of vaping-related lung injuries in Minnesota by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reinforces the case against vitamin E acetate, a diluting and thickening agent found in black-market THC products. The study, published yesterday in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, also provides evidence that use of the additive is a relatively new phenomenon, which might explain why cases like these were not reported until recently.

In light of the accumulating evidence implicating illegal cannabis products in the lung disease outbreak, which as of November 20 included 2,290 cases and 47 deaths, the CDC has modified its advice about vaping. But it continues to imply, without evidence, that legal nicotine products, which have been used by millions of Americans for years without causing acute respiratory reactions like these, might have something to do with the lung injuries.

In the new study, researchers interviewed 58 Minnesota patients, 91 percent of whom reported obtaining THC products from “informal sources such as friends, family members, or in-person or online dealers.” Just two patients said they had vaped only nicotine. It is not clear whether those reports were accurate, since patients may be reluctant to admit illegal drug use and may not actually know the contents of black-market products. Previous research has found THC in the lung fluid of patients who did not report vaping it. Without urine or blood testing, it is impossible to verify reports of exclusive nicotine use.

The researchers analyzed 67 product samples provided by patients, 46 of which contained THC. The most common THC brand by far was “Dank Vapes,” a label widely used by bootleggers. Of the 12 patients who provided THC products, all but one submitted samples containing vitamin E acetate, which was not found in any of the nicotine products tested. Lung fluid samples from five patients all contained the additive, which is consistent with an earlier CDC study of 29 patients. Comparing 10 THC products seized by law enforcement agencies in 2018 to 20 THC products seized in September 2019, the researchers found vitamin E acetate in all of the latter but none of the former.

“The findings support a potential role for vitamin E acetate in lung injury,” the study says, noting that the additive “has been detected in a high proportion of THC-containing products” used by patients, including samples tested in Minnesota, in New York, and in Utah as well as samples from 25 states analyzed by the Food and Drug Administration. The researchers also note that the CDC’s analysis of lung fluid from 29 patients in 10 states “found vitamin E acetate in all specimens.” And while “vitamin E acetate was not detected in the limited number of tested products seized [by Minnesota authorities] in 2018, it was detected in products seized in 2019, suggesting that vitamin E acetate might have been introduced recently as a diluent or filler.”

The researchers caution that “further research is needed to establish a causal link” between respiratory disease and inhalation of vitamin E acetate. Nevertheless, they say, “These Minnesota findings highlight concerns about e-cigarette, or vaping, products that contain THC acquired from informal sources. Because local supply chains and policy environments vary, CDC continues to recommend not using e-cigarette, or vaping, products that contain THC or any e-cigarette, or vaping, products obtained from informal sources.”

The latest version of the CDC’s official advice about vaping likewise emphasizes the potential hazards of vitamin E acetate and black-market THC products. But the CDC is still describing the problem as “e-cigarette, or vaping, product use associated lung injury (EVALI),” a phrase that is not only absurdly cumbersome but highly misleading, since most people, when they read “e-cigarette,” think of legal nicotine vaping products.

The CDC also continues to say that “the only way to assure that you are not at risk while the investigation continues is to consider refraining from use of all e-cigarette, or vaping, products.” Meanwhile, it contradicts itself by warning smokers who have switched to vaping that they should not return to their former habits, which are indisputably much more dangerous.

It’s instructive to compare the CDC’s general warnings about vaping to its much more specific advice concerning the recent outbreak of illnesses caused by E. coli contamination of romaine lettuce harvested in or near Salinas, California. “CDC’s current advice applies to all brands, use-by dates, and types of romaine lettuce grown in the Salinas growing region,” it says. The CDC is not suggesting that people stop eating, or that they avoid all fresh produce, or even that they stop eating romaine lettuce in general. The evidence points specifically to romaine lettuce from the Salinas area, so the CDC’s advisory appropriately focuses on those products.

Although the conspicuous role of black-market THC products in vaping-related lung injuries has been apparent for months, the CDC has been slow to acknowledge it. The agency’s nomenclature and its advice about vaping betray an irrational bias against e-cigarettes that has nothing to do with “EVALI.” Its muddled message has done real harm to public health by failing to give cannabis consumers adequate warnings and by scaring smokers away from products that provide a much less hazardous source of nicotine.

A Morning Consult poll conducted in September found that 58 percent of respondents, based on what they had “seen, read, or heard on the news lately,” believed people had “died from lung disease” caused by “ecigs, such as Juul,” compared to 34 percent who said the cases involved “marijuana or THC e-cigs.” Meanwhile, the share of Americans who recognize that e-cigarettes are less dangerous than the conventional, combustible kind continues to decline, a trend that is bound to be accelerated by “EVALI” scaremongering.

According to survey data reported this month in The Journal of the American Medical Association, just 26 percent of respondents perceived “electronic nicotine delivery systems” (ENDS) as less harmful than cigarettes in 2018, down from 39 percent in 2012. Between 2017 and 2018, the researchers noted, “an increase in perceiving ENDS as much more harmful than cigarettes was observed among cigarette smokers, which may influence their decision to try or switch to ENDS use.”

The lead author of the JAMA study, Georgia State University public health researcher Amy Nyman, amplified that point in a press release. “Smokers who perceive too much risk from e-cigarettes may decide against using them to quit smoking and may instead continue with their combustible smoking habit,” Nyman said. “The increase in perceived harm of electronic cigarettes may reflect growing concerns about the surge in e-cigarette use among young people, and the subsequent media coverage of the teen vaping epidemic.”

Notably, the 2018 survey preceded the outbreak of vaping-related lung injuries. “If this survey were to be done again,” one of Nyman’s co-authors told Vox, “it would probably be shocking in terms of even more negative perceptions.”

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/35JENjZ
via IFTTT

Deere Projects Tractor Sales Will Plunge, Says Farmers Paralyzed Amid Trade War Disputes 

Deere Projects Tractor Sales Will Plunge, Says Farmers Paralyzed Amid Trade War Disputes 

Deere & Co. warned Wednesday that sales would drop in its agriculture-and-turf and construction-and-forestry segments through 2020, citing the ongoing trade war

After nearly 17 months of trade disputes between the US and China, with no immediate resolution, farmers across Central and Midwest states have seen their personal incomes collapse, soaring farm bankruptcies, depressed commodity prices, and little relief from the government bailouts (mostly because the farm bailouts went to big corporate farms). As a result, the farming industry has plunged into a nasty recession, with tractor sales coming to a screeching halt. 

Deere shares are down 3.5% to 4% on Wednesday morning following the better than expected Q4 earnings report.

Investors were alarmed when guidance for agriculture-and-turf 2020 sales was lowered by 5% to 10% for the full year. The construction and forestry segment was also guided lower, down 10% to 15% next year. 

“John Deere’s performance reflected continued uncertainties in the agricultural sector,” CEO John May said. “Lingering trade tensions coupled with a year of difficult growing and harvesting conditions have caused many farmers to become cautious about making major investments in new equipment.”

The first hints that suggested farmers were being crushed by the trade war was a collapse in tractor and equipment sales reported by local dealerships across the Midwest in August. 

In May, JPMorgan told clients that the US farm industry was on the verge of disaster, with farmers caught in the crossfire of an escalating trade war.

“Overall, this is a perfect storm for US farmers,” JPMorgan analyst Ann Duignan warned investors.

Duignan downgraded Deere’s stock to underweight in May, citing fundamentals in the Central and Midwest are “rapidly deteriorating.”

Deere derives 60% of its sales from North America. The lower guidance for 2020 could suggest Deere shares are headed for a big slide. 


Tyler Durden

Wed, 11/27/2019 – 13:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2QX0kSr Tyler Durden

Rhode Island’s Stun Gun Ban Challenged in Federal Court

Rhode Island and Hawaii are the only states in the nation that prohibit the ownership of stun guns and Tasers. A new federal lawsuit filed in Rhode Island seeks to scrub the state from that list.

On Nov. 22, plaintiffs Michael O’Neil and Nicola Grasso filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island challenging the state’s ban on “electronic weapons”—devices like stun guns and Tasers. O’Neil is the vice president of the Rhode Island Second Amendment Coalition and Grasso is the former president of the Rhode Island Federated Sportsman’s Association. Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha and Rhode Island State Police Col. James Manni are named as defendants in the suit.

O’Neil and Grasso’s lawsuit argues that Rhode Island’s ban on electronic weapons violates the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution because the law is inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s rulings in 2008’s District of Columbia v. Heller and 2016’s Caetano v. Massachusetts, as well as other rulings in state and federal cases. The lawsuit points to Heller‘s holding that the Second Amendment protects weapons in “common use” (about 200,000 stun guns were in private hands as of 2009) and Caetano‘s reaffirmation that “the Second Amendment extends… to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding” to argue against Rhode Island’s ban.

Caetano dealt specifically with the question of whether stun guns are constitutionally protected weapons under the Second Amendment and whether Massachusetts had the authority to ban them. The suit was filed by Jaime Caetano, who was arrested for possessing a stun gun she obtained to protect herself from her ex-boyfriend. At the time, state law forbade private ownership of stun guns.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court upheld Caetano’s conviction by arguing that the Second Amendment doesn’t protect weapons that were not in common use at the time of the Second Amendment’s enactment, erroneously citing the Supreme Court’s language in Heller. The Supreme Court’s decision in Heller had actually rejected the notion that only guns existing during the 18th century fall under Second Amendment protection as “bordering on the frivolous.” This, in part, resulted in the Supreme Court unanimously deciding that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court had misapplied the Heller ruling in Caetano’s case. Massachusetts subsequently repealed its stun gun ban.

Rhode Island’s governmental agencies appear to concede that the state’s ban won’t hold up in court. Sid Wordell, executive director of the Rhode Island Police Chiefs Association, tells WPRI that his organization recognizes that Rhode Island’s electronic weapons ban makes the state an outlier nationally and that they’re likely “going to have to legalize them.”

Similarly, Providence Public Safety Commissioner Steven Pare told WPRI that he accepts that the Second Amendment protects ownership of stun guns, but expressed his belief that the state should, “be real restrictive [sic] with the persons who can carry these types of devices and where they can carry [them],” stating that he, “wouldn’t want to see someone carrying a stun gun which can incapacitate people in banks and government buildings and sensitive areas.”

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2QVQ5O4
via IFTTT

Rhode Island’s Stun Gun Ban Challenged in Federal Court

Rhode Island and Hawaii are the only states in the nation that prohibit the ownership of stun guns and Tasers. A new federal lawsuit filed in Rhode Island seeks to scrub the state from that list.

On Nov. 22, plaintiffs Michael O’Neil and Nicola Grasso filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island challenging the state’s ban on “electronic weapons”—devices like stun guns and Tasers. O’Neil is the vice president of the Rhode Island Second Amendment Coalition and Grasso is the former president of the Rhode Island Federated Sportsman’s Association. Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha and Rhode Island State Police Col. James Manni are named as defendants in the suit.

O’Neil and Grasso’s lawsuit argues that Rhode Island’s ban on electronic weapons violates the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution because the law is inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s rulings in 2008’s District of Columbia v. Heller and 2016’s Caetano v. Massachusetts, as well as other rulings in state and federal cases. The lawsuit points to Heller‘s holding that the Second Amendment protects weapons in “common use” (about 200,000 stun guns were in private hands as of 2009) and Caetano‘s reaffirmation that “the Second Amendment extends… to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding” to argue against Rhode Island’s ban.

Caetano dealt specifically with the question of whether stun guns are constitutionally protected weapons under the Second Amendment and whether Massachusetts had the authority to ban them. The suit was filed by Jaime Caetano, who was arrested for possessing a stun gun she obtained to protect herself from her ex-boyfriend. At the time, state law forbade private ownership of stun guns.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court upheld Caetano’s conviction by arguing that the Second Amendment doesn’t protect weapons that were not in common use at the time of the Second Amendment’s enactment, erroneously citing the Supreme Court’s language in Heller. The Supreme Court’s decision in Heller had actually rejected the notion that only guns existing during the 18th century fall under Second Amendment protection as “bordering on the frivolous.” This, in part, resulted in the Supreme Court unanimously deciding that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court had misapplied the Heller ruling in Caetano’s case. Massachusetts subsequently repealed its stun gun ban.

Rhode Island’s governmental agencies appear to concede that the state’s ban won’t hold up in court. Sid Wordell, executive director of the Rhode Island Police Chiefs Association, tells WPRI that his organization recognizes that Rhode Island’s electronic weapons ban makes the state an outlier nationally and that they’re likely “going to have to legalize them.”

Similarly, Providence Public Safety Commissioner Steven Pare told WPRI that he accepts that the Second Amendment protects ownership of stun guns, but expressed his belief that the state should, “be real restrictive [sic] with the persons who can carry these types of devices and where they can carry [them],” stating that he, “wouldn’t want to see someone carrying a stun gun which can incapacitate people in banks and government buildings and sensitive areas.”

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2QVQ5O4
via IFTTT