iftttwall

The Justice Department was fully aware that the notorious Steele Dossier was connected to Hillary Clinton and might be biased – a crucial detail which was omitted just weeks later from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant used to spy on the Trump campaign, reports John Solomon of The Hill. 

According to Solomon’s sources – which have proven impeccable, the former #4 Department of Justice (DOJ) official, Bruce Ohr – who had extensive contact with Steele, briefed “both senior FBI and DOJ officials in summer 2016 about Christopher Steele’s Russia dossier, explicitly cautioning that the British intelligence operative’s work was opposition research connected to Hillary Clinton’s campaign and might be biased.” 

Ohr’s activities, chronicled in handwritten notes and congressional testimony I gleaned from sources, provide the most damning evidence to date that FBI and DOJ officials may have misled federal judges in October 2016 in their zeal to obtain the warrant targeting Trump adviser Carter Page just weeks before Election Day. –The Hill

Ohr’s activities also contradict a key argument made by House Democrats in their attempts to downplay the significance of the Steele Dossier; that the FBI claimed it was “unaware of any derogatory information” about Steele, and that the former MI6 operative was “never advised … as to the motivation behind the research.” The FBI further “speculates” that those who hired Steele were “likely looking for information to discredit” Trump’s campaing. 

There was no “speculation” going on by the FBI. Thanks to Ohr’s warning, they absolutely knew about Steele’s bias against Trump while working for a Clinton-funded project to gather harmful opposition research on him. 

Ohr had firsthand knowledge about the motive and the client: He had just met with Steele on July 30, 2016, and Ohr’s wife, Nellie, worked for Fusion GPS, the same firm employing Steele.

“I certainly told the FBI that Fusion GPS was working with, doing opposition research on Donald Trump,” Ohr told congressional investigators, adding that he warned the FBI that Steele expressed bias during their conversations.

“I provided information to the FBI when I thought Christopher Steele was, as I said, desperate that Trump not be elected,” he added. “So, yes, of course I provided that to the FBI.” –The Hill

When lawmakers pressed Ohr as to why he would volunteer that information to the FBI, he answered “In case there might be any kind of bias or anything like that,” adding later “So when I provided it to the FBI, I tried to be clear that this is source information, I don’t know how reliable it is. You’re going to have to check it out and be aware.”

Ohr also says he told the FBI that his wife and Steele were working for Fusion GPS – the same firm hired by the Clinton campaign through intermediary law firm Perkins Coie, and that they were conduction Trump-Russia research at the behest of Clinton’s camp.

“These guys were hired by somebody relating to, who’s related to the Clinton campaign and be aware,” Ohr told lawmakers, explaining how he warned the bureau. 

Perkins Coie eventually admitted to paying Fusion GPS, disguising the payments as legal bills when it was in fact opposition research. 

When Ohr was asked if he knew of any connection between the Steele Dossier and the DNC, he said he thought the project was really connected to the Clinton campaign, saying: “I didn’t know they were employed by the DNC but I certainly said yes that they were working for, you know, they were somehow working, associated with the Clinton campaign.” 

“I also told the FBI that my wife worked for Fusion GPS or was a contractor for GPS, Fusion GPS,” he added. 

Ohr divulged his first contact with the FBI was on July 31, 2016, when he reached out to then-Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and FBI attorney Lisa Page. He then was referred to the agents working Russia counterintelligence, including Peter Strzok, the now-fired agent who played a central role in starting the Trump collusion probe.

But Ohr’s contacts about the Steele dossier weren’t limited to the FBI. He said in August 2016 — nearly two months before the FISA warrant was issued — that he was asked to conduct a briefing for senior Justice officials.

Those he briefed included Andrew Weissmann, then the head of DOJ’s fraud section; Bruce Swartz, longtime head of DOJ’s international operations, and Zainab Ahmad, an accomplished terrorism prosecutor who, at the time, was assigned to work with Lynch as a senior counselor.

Ahmad and Weissmann would go on to work for Mueller, the special prosecutor overseeing the Russia probe. –The Hill

In early 2018, Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee sought to downplay Ohr’s connections to Steele during their investigation – insisiting Ohr only notified the FBI about Steele after Steele was fired by the FBI in November 2016 for improper contacts with the media. 

The memo from House Democrats – led by Rep. Adam Schiff’s (D-CA), says that Ohr’s contact with the FBI only began “weeks after the election and more than a month after the Court approved the initial FISA application.”

Ohr’s testimony refutes Schiff’s memo, making clear he was in contact with FBI and DOJ officials long before the FISA warrant or the 2016 US election. 

Not only that, “Ohr explicitly told the FBI that Steele was desperate to defeat the man he was investigating and was biased,” according to Solomon, and the FBI didn’t have to guess as to Steele’s motives.

The Hill article is a powerful piece of evidence that the Mueller investigation is the illegitimate offspring of a prior investigation based on a phony dossier paid for by the DNC. This was never revealed in false affidavits presented to FISA court. Mueller’s people implicated.

— Rudy Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) January 17, 2019

via RSS http://bit.ly/2QP1c7T Tyler Durden

A space-based series of sensors that would coordinate with missile interceptor sites in the continental US to counter ballistic missiles threats posed by countries like North Korea and Iran? This is but one of the jaw dropping newly proposed defense technologies that will be highlighted as part of a long-awaited report on the status of the country’s missile defense capabilities to be unveiled during President Trump’s visit to the Pentagon Thursday. 

The president will make the visit to reveal the Missile Defense Review, which studies and assesses US missile defense capabilities and needs under in order to inform the White House’s Pentagon funding request for the upcoming fiscal year 2020 budget. Crucially, it’s expected to outline changes in America’s missile defense strategy toward Russia and China, as well as present key avenues of upcoming research, such as futuristic and experimental advanced tech systems like laser intercept capabilities and space-based detection systems. 

The congressionally mandated review is the first of its kind to be undertaken since 2010, and though it was scheduled to be released in late 2017, it was finally completed in October of last year — pushed back in part due to the administration’s desire to expand the scope of the study from ballistic missile defense to all missile defense.

Likely the most provocative and headline grabbing part of the review will be space related defense. According to ABC News:

According to a senior administration official, the review looks at the development of new space-based sensors that could detect long-range missile before they are launched and calls for the study of whether lasers could be used to counter ballistic missiles that are launched by rogue states.

Statements from senior Pentagon officials previewing what to expect have indicated these new space capabilities could become the next big layer of missile defense against Iran and North Korea. “Space is key to the next step of missile defense,” said one official to ABC.

Potential plans and areas of further research will include “early warning systems” in space that could track missiles as they are being prepared for launch, perhaps ever more crucial given current reports of Russian and Chinese rapid development of hypersonic threats. 

The Missile Defense Review is also expected to explore “a space-based interceptor that could fire rockets into space, directed at an incoming missile,” according to senior officials. This will also include study of the use of what an official described as “directed energy” against incoming missiles, possibly through laser technology. On these and other technologies that sound straight out of Star Trek, the official said “we think is worth looking into”.

Specifically on the North Korea nuclear and long-range ballistic missile threat, the following bizarre and futuristic sounding weapon has been described as under consideration as an avenue of research:

ABC News has learned that one concept being explored for countering the North Korean missile threat in the future is using a new solid state powered laser on a high-altitude drone. The long-range laser would be able to destroy a North Korean missile while in the initial boost phase of its launch.

“This is really a comprehensive look at our missile defense capabilities and programs and posture,” a senior administration official said of the report’s release. “Both what we have today, what we’d like to make improvements to and then what are the next generation programs we’d like to invest in to get ahead and stay ahead of the threat.”

Both the private defense technology industry as well as foreign nations and their defense sectors are expected to pay close attention to what’s unveiled later on Thursday, especially competitors in this arena already touting their own cutting edge weaponry such as Beijing and Moscow. 

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

Authored by Andrew Moran via Liberty Nation,

Canada’s energy sector is home to the nation’s forgotten man…

All over the world, the forgotten man is rising up, reminding the ruling elite of his existence. Fed up with leaders catering to the whims of 0.05% of society, or instituting policies that impact their pocketbooks, the working folks of America, Italy, Brazil, and France are making sure their voices are heard in the political arena. This uncomfortable fact is sending shivers up and down their masters’ spines, including those in the Great White North.

Ivory Tower

For so long, Canadians were passive and apathetic about how they were treated by their rulers. They just drowned their sorrows of excessive taxation and abuse of the public purse in a Tim Hortons double-double and a plate of poutine. That’s just the way it is, they cried. There’s nothing to do, they grieved.

But then Prime Minister Justin Trudeau happened.

The trust fund baby is a man who continually talks down to those who are not like him. By encouraging young people to use “peoplekind,” openly wishing that Ottawa would embrace a Chinese-style government, and suggesting citizens with real concerns about Syrian migrants are racist, Trudeau has begun to light the populist spark from British Columbia to Newfoundland.

To truly comprehend the left’s disdain for blue-collar Canadians who do not accept the premises of leftist dogma, you will need to travel to Calgary, Alberta. At a recent demonstration of energy workers, Liberal Mayor Naheed Nenshi treated the crowd like kindergarteners:

“Well, for those of you who are saying, ‘No I don’t believe in climate change,’ good luck changing hearts and minds because we have to be able to say that there is no difference between standing up for the economy and standing up for the environment.”

Nenshi shifted his remarks into French, but he received pushback from the crowd. This led the condescending mayor to threaten the crowd with detention: “If you want someone to listen to you, you have to speak their language.”

It is this mockery, condescension, and dismissal that is producing discontent nationwide, particularly in the energy sector. In the era of Trudeaumania 2.0, politicians from major urban centers turn their noses up at workers employed in the oil, gas, and coal industries. Journalists, accepting a $600 million bribe from the federal government, refrain from calling out such deplorable behavior. Instead, they report favorably on imposing carbon taxes, delaying pipelines, and implementing egregious environmental regulations in the resource-rich country.

Of course, the energy sector’s tax dollars are good enough to be used against them, extending generous grants and subsidies to the politically-connected green industry. Why? To appease the globalists who are using the religion of global warming to control populations.

But Canadians are no longer sitting idly by. They’re mad as hell and are sending clear signals that they’re not going to take it anymore.

Polite No More

In December, a convoy of trucks in Grand Prairie, Alberta “touched its tail” as it rallied in the city impacted by several government policies, including the carbon tax, Bill C-48, and Bill C-69. While the carbon tax is terrifying for all Canadians, C-48 and C-69 mainly target energy; the former prohibits oil tanker traffic on British Columbia’s northern coast and the latter dramatically transforms the process of environmental assessments for every major infrastructure project, including the ever-important trans-province energy project proposals.

The protests against the levy and Bills C-48 and C-69 are only intensifying. Another Alberta-based convoy of trucks is taking its frustrations to Ottawa next month.

“We want to make our voices heard,” James Robson, the grassroots Canada Action manager, told The Star. “Families are supported by the energy sector. It’s one of the most important economic drivers in Canada.”

The Trudeau government seems indifferent to the growing opposition to carbon taxes and punishing legislative blitzkrieg. This should not come as a surprise. Energy Minister Catherine McKenna, also known as Climate Barbie, encouraged a grain farmer to just adopt artificial intelligence to combat the costs of the carbon tax.

It is this level of arrogance that puts Trudeau and his minions out of touch with typical Canadians.

The Forgotten Man’s Resurgence

Is Canada igniting another Tea Party, Arab Spring, or Yellow Vest movement?

Perhaps the modesty of your average Canadian will never concede to something so iconic, instead preferring to just have their voices heard by the central planners who think they’re better than someone from rural Alberta or the Maritimes. Canada’s thought police and gatekeepers of permissible opinion are warning about the dangers of populism, but if they wish to quash its inevitable ascent to mainstream politics, they should quit treating voters not from Toronto, Vancouver, or Ottawa either like they don’t exist or as if they’re children riding the short bus.

via RSS http://bit.ly/2RvbBL8 Tyler Durden

Following what Bloomberg calculated was a record net reverse repo liquidity injection on Wednesday, when the PBOC injected a whopping 560 billion yuan of liquidity into the financial system via open market operations, the Chinese central bank has done it again and in Thursday’s open market operation, it sold 250BN yuan in 7 Day repos (slightly below yesterday’s record 350BN), and 150BN in 28 Day repos, which net of maturities resulted in a whopping net 380BN yuan ($56.2BN) liquidity injection.

This brings the net liquidity injection this week to a near record 1.14 Trillion yuan (Monday 20BN, Tuesday 180BN, Wednesday 560BN and Thursday 380BN) and the week is not even over yet – should tomorrow’s reverse repo be of similar magnitude, then this week will go down in history as China’s biggest liquidity injection on record.

As yesterday, today’s massive liquidity injection was aimed at “keeping reasonable and sufficient liquidity in banking system as liquidity falls relatively fast during peak season for tax payments,” according to a statement from the PBOC, although why this year should be such a significant outlier, even when factoring in the liquidity needs ahead of the Lunar new year, to prior periods was not exactly clear.

There is, of course, a much simpler explanation: with Chinese economic and trade data turning from bad to worse with every passing day, Beijing’s response is increasingly one of a panicked “spasm”, as Nomura’s Charlie McElligott wrote today when he noted that with regard to the response of Chinese authorities in addressing their economic slowdown and credit crunch, “it had to get worse before it got better”—recently collapsing Chinese data has now clearly forced an escalation of easing-/stimulus-/liquidity- policies, as follows:

• Two days ago in a press conference between the PBoC, the MoF and the NDRC, Beijing announced new tax cuts, fresh measures to stabilize auto consumption and an announcement that authorities are supportive of increasing issuance of local government “special bonds” to stimulate infrastructure spending were all made in a “stimulus” spasm.
• Overnight Chinese Premier Li has called for more investments in infrastructure and services, while also voicing support for a “stepping-up” of targeted economic controls from authorities.

And, as discussed in this post and last night, the annual PBoC liquidity injection to offset the pre-Lunar New Year holiday-/pre-tax payment peak-/maturation of MLF funds- cash drain went full mental” last night, with the Chinese central bank injecting a record 560B Yuan ($84B USD) into the system using 7d reverse repo operations—the largest 1d cash injection in their history, and was followed by a not much smaller 380B Yuan injection today.

It is worth noting that this short-term liquidity injection adds to the larger “credit impulse” being re-engineered by Chinese authorities, which on the headline level came in as “better than consensus” estimates across new aggregate social financing & new loans.

Unfortunately for Chinese stock bulls, this week’s record liquidity injections have had no impact whatsoever on Chinese stocks, which were unchanged yesterday and are flat on Thursday, while S&P futures are fractionally lower, amid growing fears that the trade war storm is back on after the WSJ reported that  U.S. authorities are investigating Huawei for stealing trade secrets, while according to a separate report, Apple plans to cut back hiring for some divisions, and finally Singapore exports unexpectedly fell, a trifecta of news hitting the market’s three weakest points: trade, earnings and the slowing global economy.

The bigger issue is that if not even China can move the needle with short-term liquidity injections, and a long-term monetary intervention is out of the question for now due to China’s record debt, while fiscal stimulus takes months if not quarters to kick in, once the sugar rush from the current bear market rally is over, the hangover will be especially brutal.

via RSS http://bit.ly/2AOPUv8 Tyler Durden

It was just a few days ago that we reported on the latest installment of the Elon Musk and Azealia Banks feud, which now appears to be escalating. Banks’ fire for Musk was recently stoked by a motion filed by the Tesla CEO’s lawyers to prevent Banks, Musk’s ex-girlfriend Grimes, and several media organizations from being subpoenaed as part of a shareholder lawsuit against Musk.

Now, it looks like we are one step closer to getting a chance at seeing what was on the mind (and on the devices) of Banks, Grimes and some of the reporters who were involved with them directly after the CEO put out his now infamous “funding secured” tweet. Banks was a guest in Musk’s home around the time Musk sent out the Tweet, reportedly invited by Musk’s then girlfriend, Grimes.

According to Bloomberg, U.S. District Judge Edward Chen in San Francisco ordered on Tuesday that although Tesla and Musk themselves cannot be subpoenaed, Banks, Grimes and reporters involved with the situation immediately after it happened could be subpoenaed and asked to preserve records. Chen said “that asking for potentially relevant evidence to not be destroyed won’t impose any burdens on Tesla or Musk”. 

Business Insider also reported on Wednesday that a motion to serve subpoenas against Banks, Grimes, Business Insider, Gizmodo and the New York Times was granted.

Adam Apton, attorney for the Plaintiffs stated: “Ms. Boucher and Ms. Banks were in close contact with Mr. Musk before and after the tweet and are believed to be in possession of relevant evidence concerning Mr. Musk’s motives. Business Insider also appears to have relevant evidence in light of its relationship with Ms. Banks.”

Shareholder attorneys are trying to place Banks in Musk’s house during the fallout from Musk’s famous tweet. Banks had previously posted in depth about her time staying at Elon‘s home, claiming that while there, Grimes was comforting Musk about “being too stupid not to go on Twitter while on acid”. Banks claims she saw Musk “scrounging for investors” at the time of the incident. 

Curiously, the judge also said that “lead plaintiff’s claim that defendants have a practice of trying to silence critics is not well supported”. Perhaps he hasn’t heard of Montana Skeptic – or Martin Tripp.

Arguably, the possible results of any forthcoming subpoenas – as they sometimes do in lawsuits – may open up a new can of worms if any (or all) of the dirt Azealia Banks claims to have on Elon Musk turns out to not be fabricated.

Banks took to Instagram on last week writing “They are still slighting [sic] me like I don’t have plenty more dirt to spill on Elon. This is going to get extremely ugly…Elon will learn very soon who is more powerful of us two.”

The preservation of such material, from immediately after Musk put out his “funding secured” tweet may finally help answer the question of what was going on in Elon Musk’s head at the time of the incident. We can’t wait to see where this goes. 

via RSS http://bit.ly/2RA0ctB Tyler Durden

Authored by Jeff Thomas via InternationalMan.com,

We’re all familiar with the term, “quantitative easing.” It’s described as meaning, “A monetary policy in which a central bank purchases government securities or other securities from the market in order to lower interest rates and increase the money supply.”

Well, that sounds reasonable… even beneficial. But, unfortunately, that’s not really the whole story.

When QE was implemented, the purchasing power was weak and both government and personal debt had become so great that further borrowing would not solve the problem; it would only postpone it and, in the end, exacerbate it. Effectively, QE is not a solution to an economic problem, it’s a bonus of epic proportions, given to banks by governments, at the expense of the taxpayer.

But, of course, we shouldn’t be surprised that governments have passed off a massive redistribution of wealth from the taxpayer to their pals in the banking sector with such clever terms. Governments of today have become extremely adept at creating euphemisms for their misdeeds in order to pull the wool over the eyes of the populace.

At this point, we cannot turn on the daily news without being fed a full meal of carefully- worded mumbo jumbo, designed to further overwhelm whatever small voices of truth may be out there.

Let’s put this in perspective for a moment.

For millennia, political leaders have been in the practice of altering, confusing and even obliterating the truth, when possible. And it’s probably safe to say that, for as long as there have been media, there have been political leaders doing their best to control them.

During times of war, political leaders have serially restricted the media from simply telling the truth. During the American civil war, President Lincoln shut down some 300 newspapers and arrested some 14,000 journalists who had the audacity to contradict his statements to the public.

As extreme as that may sound, this practice has been more the rule in history than the exception.

In most countries, in most eras, some publications go against the official story line and may very well pay a price for doing so. But, other publications go along with the official story line to a greater or lesser degree and are often rewarded for doing so.

It should come as no surprise, then, that media outlets often come to report the news in a less than accurate manner.

Mark Twain is claimed to have said, “If you don’t read the newspaper, you’re uninformed. If you do read the newspaper, you’re misinformed.” Quite so.

Still, only fifty years ago, much of the then “Free World” enjoyed a relatively objective Press. Even on television, reporters such as Walter Cronkite, Huntley and Brinkley, etc. presented the news in a bland manner. It wasn’t very exciting, but at least it was relatively balanced and, to this day, most people who were around then still have no idea as to whether reporters like Walter Cronkite were liberal or conservative. Although he was a committed Democrat, he never allowed that to significantly colour his reporting.

But today, we have a very different corporate structure as regards the media. The same six corporations hold the controlling interest of over 80% of the media. And those same corporations also own a controlling interest in the military industrial complex, Wall Street, the major banks, Big Pharma, etc.

What we’re witnessing today is media having been transformed into something more akin to a three-ring circus than journalism of old. This is no accident.

The present travesty that is the 21st century media, is journalism in name only.

So, why should this be so?

Well, as it happens, people tend not to like governments dominating their lives – simple as that.

And yet, the primary objective of any government is to increase its size and power as rapidly as the populace will tolerate it. The only reason that they rarely do this quickly, is that they can’t get away with it. Like boiling a frog, it takes time to lull the populace into submission, bit by bit.

Once having had enough time to do so, there comes a point at which the government becomes woefully top-heavy, as well as unworkably autocratic. At such times, all that’s necessary to make people rebel is an economic crisis.

Such is the case in much of the world today – the EU, the US, Canada, etc.. Even in their arrogance, the powers that be have to be aware that they’re right at the tipping point. An economic crisis would almost certainly push the situation over the edge.

When truth threatens to undermine machinations for self-aggrandizement, individuals tend to obfuscate in order to delay the inevitable fallout. Governments are no different.

So it was that, in 1999, the largest banks entered into a massive lending scam that would most certainly collapse within a decade. However, before putting the scam in place, they arranged for a “bailout” by the government, which would effectively pass the bill to the taxpayer, while the banks themselves simply increased their own wealth massively.

Of course, QE, as massive as it was, was a mere Band-Aid solution. All those involved (big business and the government) understood that it would hang like a sword of Damocles over the economy until it inevitably came crashing down – a fate far worse than if QE had never been implemented.

And so, for those entities to have invested into the domination of the media was, in fact, essential. Had they not done so, it’s entirely likely that, with a free press, the man on the street would, by now, have figured out that he’d been hoodwinked.

Thus do we see the journalistic equivalent of Quantitative Brainwashing, in which the inevitable realization is delayed for as long as possible.

And, in order to make sure that the public do not figure out what’s been done to them, the news reporting becomes Orwellian in its endless repetition of a false narrative.

It is, however, true that, “You can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” Eventually, the Band-Aid peels back to reveal an infection that’s far beyond what had been generally perceived. It then falls away in layers, as increasing numbers of people become aware that they’ve been scammed – that the media is entirely corrupt and that the media’s owners – big business – have, with the enthusiastic compliance of the government, robbed them on a wholesale basis.

Historically, that’s when the jig is up. What happens then is a matter of historic record.

*  *  *

Clearly, there are many strange things afoot in the world. Distortions of markets, distortions of culture. It’s wise to wonder what’s going to happen, and to take advantage of growth while also being prepared for crisis. How will you protect yourself in the next crisis? See our PDF guide that will show you exactly how. Click here to download it now.

via RSS http://bit.ly/2RC3vk4 Tyler Durden

In a world of record wealth inequality, many believe that one of the fringe benefits of the rich getting richer and the poor staying, well, poor is that consumption has become less sensitive to moves in stock prices because of the lower spending propensity of wealthy households, in other words, the “wealth effect” has become increasingly muted (after all remember, “The Rich Hold Assets, The Poor Have Debt“).

The claim, proposed for example by the NBER in 2013, is that declines in equity prices now translate into smaller declines in consumer spending than in the past, because wealthy households now bear a larger share of the losses and have lower propensities to spend. In other words, if the wealth effect has indeed fallen, it would be one reason to expect only a modest drag on consumer spending from the recent sell-off.

If this is correct, it would imply that the recent stock market sell-off is likely to weigh only modestly on consumption.

However, in a new report from Goldman’s economists, the bank disagrees with cheerful take and believes that once America’s rich see their latest, and sharply reduced brokerage statements, they too will cut back on spending, adversely impacting the broader economy, for two reasons:

First, while the share of equities owned by the wealthiest households has risen over the last three decades, equity holdings have more than tripled as a share of disposable income at the aggregate level and have also risen substantially for middle and upper-middle wealth groups. Therefore, a 1% move in stock prices now has a much larger impact on wealth levels for most groups.

To be sure there is no arguing that the rich have gotten richer, or as Goldman puts it, “stock ownership has become more concentrated.” Indeed, the wealthiest 0.1% and 1% of households now own about 17% and 50% of total household equities respectively, up significantly from 13% and 39% in the late 80s.

Furthermore, as the left panel of the next chart shows, household equity holdings have more than tripled as a share of disposable income at the aggregate level since the late 80s. Combining these aggregate holdings with the group-level ownership shares from the chart above, it emerges that equity holdings as a share of income have risen substantially for not only the upper-middle and upper wealth groups, but also the “middle”.

Therefore, according to Goldman, “the hit to the wealth level from a 1% decline in stock prices is now about 3 times larger than in the late 80s for the top-10% of households and a third larger for those in the 50-90th percentiles.” The hit is even greater if one includes household holdings through pension funds and life insurances, which now stand at 30% and 10% of disposable income respectively.

The Second reason why Goldman is concerned about the impact of sliding stock on the propensity to spend is that equity price moves also have a meaningful effect on the spending of wealthy households. Goldman finds evidence for this claim in that spending on luxury goods largely purchased by wealthy households is highly sensitive to stock prices.

As evidence, Goldman presents the next chart which shows that equity price moves do have a meaningful effect on the spending of wealthy households: the PCE share spent on jewelry and watches is highly correlated with moves in the stock market (left panel). Using regressions of spending growth on stock price changes, Goldman confirms this strong relationship more formally for jewelry and watches, pleasure boats and pleasure aircrafts (right panel). Intuitively, it does make sense that even the top 0.01% will spend less on “pleasure boats and pleasure aircrafts” if they are watching the market go down in flames. Curiously, this correlation has only increased in the past two decades when the market sprinted higher because when focusing on a sample since 1995, the bank found large effects of the stock market on luxury spending while the effects are actually weaker in earlier decades.

In other words, Goldman’s analysis suggests that the wealth effect from the stock market is unlikely to have fallen substantially over the past 30 years despite the rise in wealth inequality because i) equity holdings have risen sharply, and especially for the richest Americans, and ii) because equity price moves still have a meaningful effect on the spending of wealthy households.

As a result, Goldman summarizes that “a 1% move in stock prices now has a much larger impact on wealth levels for most groups” and finds that the since the wealth effect is alive and well – much to the delight of former Fed Chair Ben Bernanke who in an WaPo op-ed explicitly advocated artificially boosting the stock market to stimulate the “wealth effect” – and by implication, there is now a substantial negative wealth effect on real PCE, which Goldman expects to slow to 2¼-2½% this year, despite healthy labor income growth, an elevated saving rate, and cheaper oil.

As a result of this analysis, Goldman concludes that stock market wealth effects, i.e. a continued drop in equities, could subtract about 0.5% off real GDP growth this year, a number which will only grow as stocks continue to slide, and is – some could argue – the most salient reason why the Fed’s put was triggered at around 2,300 because any further drops would have had a significantly adverse impact on the economy.

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

Authored by Eduardo Neret via Campus Reform,

A Villanova University marketing professor blasted Gillette for the razor company’s “The Best Men Can Be” ad, which referenced “toxic masculinity.”

The professor, Charles Taylor, criticized Gillette’s new “The Best Men Can Be” ad campaign, in an op-ed for Forbes. A spin-off of the company’s old “The Best a Man Can Get” campaign, “The Best Men Can Be” was launched with a now-viral commercial that highlights behaviors in boys and men such as bullying, sexual harassment, and sexism.

In the ad, Gillette calls out “toxic masculinity” and attributes this concept to men as a whole with a YouTube description reading “bullying. Harassment. Is this the best a man can get?”

“The use of the term ‘toxic masculinity’ in the ad was a flat-out mistake,” Taylor noted in his op-ed.

“While only mentioned quickly and briefly, the use of this term, which many men associate with a one-sided critique and stereotype of an entire gender [sic].”

Taylor went on to add that corporations should never alienate a substantial portion of their consumer base, which Gillette’s campaign “unnecessarily” did. Taylor also warned that without modification or apology, Gillette’s campaign would go down in history as an “all-time marketing blunder.”

“The shame of all of this is that Gillette surely could have devised a campaign focusing on positive encouragement of good behaviors without making sweeping generalizations about men and what it is to be masculine,” Taylor continued. At the time of publication of this article, the ad had over twelve million views on Gillette’s official YouTube page and nearly three times as many “thumbs down” as “thumbs up.”

While Taylor told Campus Reform that he hasn’t witnessed similar unnecessary and divisive political rhetoric on Villanova’s campus, he reiterated that companies “generally should stay away from controversial hot button issues as it really does not make sense to alienate the target market.” 

“Ads built around non-controversial topics framed in a positive way absolutely can work.  Budweiser’s depiction of its hurricane relief efforts or Toyota’s support of Special Olympians from last year’s Super Bowl are good examples of this. The moment the company appears to take a side, however, they are taking a big risk,” the professor told Campus Reform.

“It absolutely is not the case that any publicity is good publicity – press that contributes to alienating and losing consumers is not a good thing.”

Gillette’s ad also redirects viewers to a statement on its website that further explains the reasoning behind the campaign. The company states that it is now a “new era of masculinity,” and it “is clear that changes are needed.”

Despite criticisms claiming that the company itself stereotypically depicted men in the ad, Gillette pledged “to actively challenge the stereotypes and expectations” of what it means to be a man. The company will also donate $1 million per year for the next three years to nonprofits that “inspire, educate and help men of all ages achieve their personal ‘best’ and become role models for the next generation.”

Taylor speculated that one possible motive for the ad was an attempt by Gillette to resonate with millennials. However, he told Campus Reform that the problem with this is that “not all millennials share the same political view.” 

Gillette isn’t the only razor company to take on the issue of masculinity, though. In 2017, Harry’s tweeted on International Men’s Day, lamenting that it was even “a thing.” 

“Now more than ever, being a man demands introspection, humility, and optimism. To get to a better tomorrow, we need to take a look at today, and at the misguided stereotypes that got us here in the first place,” the tweet read. The now-deleted ad also crossed out phrases such as “be tough,” “be a rock,” “be a man,” and “be the breadwinner,” according to National Review.

Harry’s deleted the year-old tweet following the Gillette backlash.

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

Get ready for round two of crazy weather in California

Another Pacific storm is expected to strike California on Wednesday afternoon, bringing a threat of mudslides to the area of the most destructive wildfire in state history and a blizzard warning in the Sierra Nevada.

The Butte County Sheriff’s Office issued a flood evacuation warning Tuesday for Pulga, a small town northeast of Paradise. The notice read: “if you are in this area, you should evacuate to higher ground.”

Most of Butte County area was included in a flood watch by the National Weather Service (NWS), which warns of 3 inches of rain in the valley and up to 6 inches in the foothills between Wednesday and Thursday.

Unlike the storm from earlier this week, this new round of rain is slow and steady, forecasters said, which could trigger mudslides.

“If flooding occurs, this can quickly become a dangerous and life-threatening situation,” the Butte County Sheriff’s Office warned.

A series of storm systems will bring very heavy rain to lower elevations of California and some surrounding states. Areal flooding and flash flooding, including burn scar mud and debris flow, will be possible through Thursday. pic.twitter.com/QlKIoKDrSc

— NWS (@NWS) January 16, 2019

This could be the strongest storm of the year with torrential downpours triggering flash floods in the San Francisco Bay Area. 

Flood and high wind watches were posted for the Sacramento area, with NWS warning of widespread power outages, downed trees, and difficult driving conditions.

The storm is expected to bring blizzard conditions to the higher elevations of the Sierra Nevada through Thursday, with meteorologists predicting as much of five feet of snow in higher elevations and wind gusts of up to 100 mph on ridgetops.

Intense snow is also expected for the mountains in Northern California and north into the Cascades.

A week of storms has left officials worried about the potential danger for thousands of people living in foothill and canyon areas devastated by last year’s wildfires.

Rainfall records could be broken in areas such as San Jose and Riverside, where 1.42 inches and 1.37 inches of rain are expected, respectively, according to NWS.

The rain should subside by Thursday afternoon, said Bonnie Bartling, a weather specialist with the NWS in Oxnard.

“This one is going to be a little bit different,” Bartling said.

“We’re going to tap into subtropical moisture, which means we’re going to have some decent rainfall and gusty winds off and on.”

The same storm system is expected to hit the Midwest, Mid-Atlantic, and the North East later this week into the weekend, fueled by arctic air from a polar vortex.

“A strong storm has impacted California over the past few days, leading to nearly 2 inches of rainfall in Los Angeles and feet of snow across the Sierra Nevada.

This same system will traverse the United States through the weekend, bringing impactful along the I-80 and I-70 corridors Friday across the Mid-Continent, then deliver a major winter storm to portions of the Northeast. While specifics are still to be determined, the signal for a large, impactful storm along the East Coast is quite strong,” said Vallee Weather Consulting meteorologist Ed Valle.

People who live in the Mid-Atlantic and or the North East now is the time to prepare for the second round of winter weather that could rear its ugly head this weekend.

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

By Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com,

Best-selling author of “The Age of Anomaly,” economist Andrei Polgar, says the world is set up to be blindsided in the next financial disaster.

Polgar points out, “Right now, after so many years after the ‘Great Recession,’ not only are people comfortably unaware, but even worse yet, the entire idea of financial preparedness has been discredited…”

“I have noticed this because I have been on many shows promoting my book… People are not that interested in financial preparedness. A common element was always this: People have made predictions, and they didn’t pan out. Other analysts have made gloomy predictions, and they didn’t pan out. So now, the general public has essentially been numbed.

One of the big issues I talk about with my book is sustainable financial preparedness, and it’s a tough sell. It’s a tough sell because people are even worse than just ignorant in an uncomfortable way; they are downright dismissive with anything that has to do with financial preparedness. So, on top of all the problems with our economy, and on top of all the political issues you are well aware of, we also have this general state of not even apathy, even worse, contempt… of financial preparedness in general.”

Polgar says, “Market crashes are cyclical. Of course, we are going to have one, and I am not afraid of the idea of a market crash…”

“I am afraid of what happens when the chain is broken or, to put it differently, when the status quo no longer works….

Your readers comment about being comfortably ignorant. That makes perfect sense. People have in their mind, yeah, there is going to be a crash, but central banks and governments will have it all under control.”

Polgar predicts, “The next crash will be the worst the world has ever seen… because problems have kept accumulating.”

“Now, we have come to accept the unsustainable as status quo. We look at the GDP ratio of Japan that is over 200% and we say it’s all fine. We look at Italy with 130% debt to GDP and say it’s fine. We look at France, Belgium and the United States with debt to GDP at around 100%, and we say it’s fine…they’re going to do more of the same and hopefully that’s going to work. That’s what keeps me up at night. What happens when that chain breaks?…

If things are this bad right now when, for better or worse, nothing is burning, what do you think is going to happen when we are going to have to deal with all our problems,  when we have to deal with the unsustainable nature of our system? Things are already unbelievably bad here in Europe. We are buried under excessive bureaucracy. We have, for the most part, a pretty spoiled population, and this is true for other Western populations…

In Romania, at least we understand that sometimes systems fail, whereas in the Western world… way too many individuals are just getting by as it is. They are overly indebted. They are overly dependent on the system functioning flawlessly. If a small crack appears, then these people will not be able to cope with it.”

In closing, Polgar says, “The system will break from bottom to top…”

“As bad as things are in the Western world, I see much more pain initially in emerging markets…Developed countries like the United States will be the last to fall…

The baseline scenario I am afraid of is… having our usual market crash followed by a loss of confidence of central banks and governments to keep it under control. To simplify it, we will have deflation first followed by a loss of control that ultimately leads to an inflationary spiral.”

Join Greg Hunter as he goes One-on-One with economist Andrei Polgar, the best-selling author of “The Age of Anomaly.”

To Donate to USAWatchdog.com Click Here

You can find out about Andrei Polgar by going to his website AndreiPolgar.com. There you can buy his book from a variety of booksellers. You can also go to Polgar’s YouTube Channel and enjoy dozens and dozens of original economic videos for free.

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