Sham of the Year

Time has
picked the pope
as its person of the year, thus angering those
readers who are certain that the title should have gone to some
other figure (usually Edward Snowden). My position this year is the
same as every year. As I put
it
 back in 2002, after the magazine gave its honor to a
trio it dubbed “The Whistleblowers”:

The year they picked "You."My hat goes off to Time—not for its
selection, but for once more inspiring so many people to discuss
the world’s single vaguest annual award as though it were
meaningful and important. Even People‘s yearly
announcement of the Sexiest Man Alive—isn’t it funny how the
sexiest man alive always turns out to be famous already? What are
the odds of that?—has the advantage of being restricted to one
qualification (sexiness); if an aggrieved fan wants to dispute the
pick, she at least knows what she’s disputing. To this day, I’m not
sure how one outqualifies someone else to be Man of the Year. The
magazine’s definition—”the single person who, for better or worse,
has most influenced events in the preceding year”—isn’t helpful,
since the mag regularly ignores the “single person” bit in practice
and doesn’t seem very interested in the admittedly impossible task
of measuring “influence,” either.

Nonetheless, each December people behave as though there is some
platonic ideal Man of the Year out there, and that the
disinterested scientists at Time somehow misidentified it.
Last year the rap on the editors was that they only picked Rudy
Giuliani because they were too scared to select Osama bin Laden.
(Their stated rationale was that he was “not a larger-than-life
figure with broad historical sweep,” but “a garden-variety
terrorist whose evil plan succeeded beyond his highest hopes.”)
This time the complaint is that they’ve picked three people whom
hardly anyone’s heard of and who didn’t make much of a difference
in the big picture anyway. (They are nonetheless, one presumes,
larger-than-life figures with broad historical sweep.)…The more
dissension, the bigger the buzz; the bigger the buzz, the better
for Time. What can I say? It’s a great way to sell
magazines.

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/12/11/sham-of-the-year
via IFTTT

Discovering Your Inner Hunter-Gatherer: Q&A with Paleo Manifesto Author John Durant

“When I’m talking to a libertarian and I make the point that the
USDA food pyramid is not god’s truth, they’re like, ‘Oh, right, of
course it isn’t,’ says John Durant, author of
The Paleo Manifesto: Ancient Wisdom for Lifelong
Health
. “It doesn’t require a lot of persuasion that the
official guidelines on diet are wrong.”

Durant’s book tells the story of how he discovered his inner
hunter-gatherer, and it offers practical guidelines for how to
transition to the meat-heavy low-carb diet favored by our
Paleolithic ancestors—and a surprising number of libertarians.

View this article.

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/12/11/discovering-your-inner-hunter-gatherer
via IFTTT

Discovering Your Inner Hunter-Gatherer: Q&A with Paleo Manifesto Author John Durant

“When I’m talking to a libertarian and I make the point that the
USDA food pyramid is not god’s truth, they’re like, ‘Oh, right, of
course it isn’t,’ says John Durant, author of
The Paleo Manifesto: Ancient Wisdom for Lifelong
Health
. “It doesn’t require a lot of persuasion that the
official guidelines on diet are wrong.”

Durant’s book tells the story of how he discovered his inner
hunter-gatherer, and it offers practical guidelines for how to
transition to the meat-heavy low-carb diet favored by our
Paleolithic ancestors—and a surprising number of libertarians.

View this article.

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/12/11/discovering-your-inner-hunter-gatherer
via IFTTT

China “Fixes” Pollution Problem… By Raising Danger Threshold

If you don’t like the frequency of your air-quality alerts, you don’t have to keep them. That is the message that the Chinese government has made loud and clear as Bloomberg reports, Shanghai’s environmental authority took decisive action to address the pollution – it cynically adjusted the threshold for “alerts” to ensure there won’t be so many. In a move remininscent of Japan’s raising of the “safe” radioactive threshold level, China has apparently decided – rather than accept responsibility for the disaster – to avoid it by making the “safe” pollution level over 50% more polluted (up from 75 to 115 micrograms per cubic meter) – almost 5 times the WHO’s “safe” level of 25 micrograms.

 

 

Via Bloomberg,

As the smog that has choked Shanghai for much of the last week reached hazardous levels, the city’s environmental authority took decisive action to address the frequent air-quality alerts: It adjusted standards downward to ensure that there won’t be so many.

 

It was a cynical move, surely made to protect the bureau’s image in the face of unrelenting pollution that only seems to grow worse, despite government promises to address it. At this advanced stage in China’s development, nobody in the country (or elsewhere) — not even the loyal state news media — seems to believe that the problem is solvable, at least not any time soon. Even worse, nobody — not the state and certainly not the growing number of middle-class consumers (and car buyers) — seems ready to take responsibility for the mess.

 

 

If you can’t fix it, you might as well try to avoid responsibility for it, the thinking seems to go. It therefore comes as no surprise that Shanghai’s Environmental Protection Bureau decided to lower the benchmark for alerting the public about pollution risks. It will now issue alerts only when the concentration of the most dangerous particulates in the city’s air, known as PM2.5 (particulates smaller than 2.5 micometers in diameter) reach 115 micrograms per cubic meter. The previous standard was 75 micrograms per cubic meter. (The World Health Organization recommends not exceeding 25 micrograms per cubic meter in a 24-hour period.)

 

 

The state-owned English-language China Daily explained the decision in tone that almost obscured the absurdity of the maneuver: “The bureau said it believes the original standard is too strict, given that haze is common in the Yangtze River Delta region in winter.

 

 

On social networks like Weibo and Wechat, Beijingers now show photos of blue skies and white clouds as if they’re on vacation.” This show-off behavior left a bad taste, he concedes, before concluding with a final sentence that ought to serve as a rallying cry in China: “I really hope that someday people will resume reacting to blue skies and white clouds in a ‘normal’ manner.”

 

That’s a hope that probably won’t be fulfilled in this decade or even the next.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/N_3CCAogWeo/story01.htm Tyler Durden

China "Fixes" Pollution Problem… By Raising Danger Threshold

If you don’t like the frequency of your air-quality alerts, you don’t have to keep them. That is the message that the Chinese government has made loud and clear as Bloomberg reports, Shanghai’s environmental authority took decisive action to address the pollution – it cynically adjusted the threshold for “alerts” to ensure there won’t be so many. In a move remininscent of Japan’s raising of the “safe” radioactive threshold level, China has apparently decided – rather than accept responsibility for the disaster – to avoid it by making the “safe” pollution level over 50% more polluted (up from 75 to 115 micrograms per cubic meter) – almost 5 times the WHO’s “safe” level of 25 micrograms.

 

 

Via Bloomberg,

As the smog that has choked Shanghai for much of the last week reached hazardous levels, the city’s environmental authority took decisive action to address the frequent air-quality alerts: It adjusted standards downward to ensure that there won’t be so many.

 

It was a cynical move, surely made to protect the bureau’s image in the face of unrelenting pollution that only seems to grow worse, despite government promises to address it. At this advanced stage in China’s development, nobody in the country (or elsewhere) — not even the loyal state news media — seems to believe that the problem is solvable, at least not any time soon. Even worse, nobody — not the state and certainly not the growing number of middle-class consumers (and car buyers) — seems ready to take responsibility for the mess.

 

 

If you can’t fix it, you might as well try to avoid responsibility for it, the thinking seems to go. It therefore comes as no surprise that Shanghai’s Environmental Protection Bureau decided to lower the benchmark for alerting the public about pollution risks. It will now issue alerts only when the concentration of the most dangerous particulates in the city’s air, known as PM2.5 (particulates smaller than 2.5 micometers in diameter) reach 115 micrograms per cubic meter. The previous standard was 75 micrograms per cubic meter. (The World Health Organization recommends not exceeding 25 micrograms per cubic meter in a 24-hour period.)

 

 

The state-owned English-language China Daily explained the decision in tone that almost obscured the absurdity of the maneuver: “The bureau said it believes the original standard is too strict, given that haze is common in the Yangtze River Delta region in winter.

 

 

On social networks like Weibo and Wechat, Beijingers now show photos of blue skies and white clouds as if they’re on vacation.” This show-off behavior left a bad taste, he concedes, before concluding with a final sentence that ought to serve as a rallying cry in China: “I really hope that someday people will resume reacting to blue skies and white clouds in a ‘normal’ manner.”

 

That’s a hope that probably won’t be fulfilled in this decade or even the next.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/N_3CCAogWeo/story01.htm Tyler Durden

A.M. Links: NSA Uses Cookies To Track Targets, Budget Deal Announced, Pope is TIME’s Person of the Year

  • The latest reporting on the documents leaked by Edward Snowden
    reveals that the
    NSA uses cookies
    to track targets. 
  • Lawmakers unveiled a budget
    deal
    yesterday that would avoid another partial government
    shutdown.
  • India’s Supreme Court has ruled that a colonial-era law

    criminalizing homosexuality
    is constitutional.

  • Pope Francis
     is TIME‘s Person of the Year.
    Edward Snowden was runner-up.
  • New York City Mayor
    Michael Bloomberg
    is backing legislation that would require all
    children between the ages of 6 months and 5 years who attend a
    licensed preschool or daycare to get a flu vaccine.
  • Experts claim that the gestures made by the the sign language
    interpreter at the
    Nelson Mandela memorial
    didn’t mean anything in American or
    South African sign languages.

Follow Reason and Reason 24/7 on
Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
  You
can also get the top stories mailed to
you—
sign
up here.
 

Have a news tip? Send it to us!

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/12/11/am-links-nsa-uses-cookies-to-track-targe
via IFTTT

Poll: Americans Wants to Go Back to Previous Health Care System, Disagree With Obama on Size and Power of Government

At a recent event, President Barack Obama said the health care
law is here to stay and vowed, “We aren’t going back.” But 55
percent of Americans say they’d prefer to go back to the health
care system that was in place before the Affordable Care Act, while
34 percent prefer the current health care system. 

The latest Reason-Rupe national telephone poll finds the
Affordable Care Act’s troubled launch has made 47 percent of
Americans less confident in government’s ability to solve problems.
Forty-one percent say the troubles have made no difference and 11
percent say the health care law’s launch has given them more
confidence in the government.

“This is the most transparent administration in history,”
President Obama has declared. However, 57 percent of Americans tell
Reason-Rupe that the Obama administration is not the most
transparent administration in history, while 37 percent agree with
the president’s statement.

A majority of Americans, 52 percent, say they disagree with
President Obama’s views about the proper size and power of
government, while 38 percent agree with the president.

Fifty-four percent of those surveyed feel government is
generally a “burdensome part of society that impedes the ability of
people to improve their lives,” while 41 percent feel “government
is primarily a source of good and helps people improve their
lives.”

Nearly three out of four Americans, 73 percent, believe members
of Congress do not understand health care or how health care laws
impact Americans. Just 25 percent think members of Congress
understand the consequences of the health care laws they pass.

Seventy percent of Americans oppose making young people pay more
for health care to help fund health care for older or less healthy
Americans. Six in 10 oppose requiring younger, healthier people to
help fund insurance for those with pre-existing conditions. And 57
percent believe lower cost health care plans that provide fewer
benefits than required by the Affordable Care Act should be
allowed.  

Of the 44 percent of respondents who say that they liked the
Affordable Care Act when it passed, 41 percent of them like it less
now.   Of the 52 percent who disliked the law when it was
passed, 14 percent like it more now.

When it comes to health care overall, 57 percent of Americans
disapprove of the job President Obama is doing, while 38 percent
approve. Overall, however, 47 percent say they approve of the job
President Obama is doing — four points better than the September
Reason-Rupe poll. One in five Americans, 20 percent, approve of the
job Congress is doing, down slightly from September.

Full Poll 

The full poll is online here and
additional Reason-Rupe poll resources are available here.
This is the latest in a series of Reason-Rupe public opinion
surveys dedicated to exploring what Americans really think about
government and major issues.  This Reason Foundation project
is made possible thanks to the generous support of the Arthur N.
Rupe Foundation.

The Reason-Rupe poll conducted live interviews with 1,011 adults
on mobile (506) and landline (505) phones from December 4-8, 2013.
The poll’s margin of error is plus or minus 3.7 percent. Princeton
Survey Research Associates International executed the nationwide
Reason-Rupe survey.

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/12/11/poll-go-back-to-old-health-care-system
via IFTTT

Are Stocks Cheap?

Absent the “obvious” bubble in the late 90s, the US equity market is at its most expensive valuation since right before the ’30s crash. As Bloomberg notes, thanks to the exuberance of stocks in the last quarter, Pavilion Global Markets has calculated Tobin’s Q (a valuation indicator based on market ‘price’ versus ‘asset value’ for non-financial companies) has only been higher at the peak of bubble exuberance. Still want to BTFATH? Afraid of missing out?

The index posted a dramatic 7.5% rise in Q4 so far pressing it to near-record levels absent the euphoria of the late 90s.

 

Chart: Bloomberg


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/Xm74MHkAbAg/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Two-Thirds Say American Dream Is Over

A stunning 64% of American say the US no longer offers everyone an equal chance of ‘getting ahead’, according to a new poll by Bloomberg. The widening gap between rich and poor – as we have previously noted as wide as during the roaring 20s – has eroded faith in the American dream. The lack of faith, Bloomberg reports, is especially pronounced among those making less than $50,000 a year with 73% of those saying the economy is unfair. As class warfare is stoked, by none other than the President himself in his recent speech, noting economic trends have “jeopardized middle-class America’s basic bargain, that if you work hard, you have a chance to get ahead,” man-of-the-year Pope Francis recently commented, “such an economy kills.”

 

Inequality wider than during the Roaring 20s…

 

Via Bloomberg,

Everyone on both sides of the aisle talks about the American dream,” says Sekac. “Right now, that’s not something everyone in this country can aspire to.”

 

Still, respondents are almost evenly split on the need for government action to narrow the income gap: 45 percent say new policies are needed, while 46 percent say it would be better to allow the market to operate freely even if the gap gets wider.

 

 

More people who are of color get opportunities now than they did,” but a lack of education holds too many back, says David Bakker, 56, a model-train builder in Baltimore.

 

In the Bloomberg poll, 68 percent of Americans say the income gap is growing, while 18 percent say it is unchanged and 10 percent say it’s shrinking.

 

 

While the public is divided over whether the government should take steps to close the income gap, support for greater action is strongest among lower-income Americans, with 52 percent saying officials should do something and 35 percent putting their faith in the market.

 

 

“The government keeps taking and taking and taking from us,” she says. “Eventually, people are going to strike back.”

 

 

By 56 percent to 35 percent, they endorse [The Pope’s] criticism of “trickle-down” economics, which provides tax cuts for the wealthy as a means to spur job growth. And 66 percent say they have a favorable view of the pontiff compared with just 13 percent who view him unfavorably.

 

 

“If we don’t address it, it’ll just continue to deteriorate, the gap will just continue to get bigger,” says Marini. “And who knows what that will lead to in 10 or 15 years? Social unrest? Economic unrest?”


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/rXNxP-Zeivc/story01.htm Tyler Durden

(Part VI) How Likely Are Bail-Ins? Bank of England Says U.S. “Could Do Today”

Today’s AM fix was USD 1,255.25, EUR 912.05 and GBP 765.49 per ounce.
Yesterday’s AM fix was USD 1,245.75, EUR 906.13 and GBP 757.76 per ounce.

Gold rose $21.90 or 1.77% yesterday, closing at $1,262.50/oz. Silver soared $0.53 or 2.67% closing at $20.40/oz. Platinum climbed $15.25, or 1.1%, to $1,386.99/oz and palladium also rose $1.50 or 0.2%, to $735.20/oz.


Gold in U.S. Dollars, 5 Years – (Bloomberg)

Gold neared a three week high after climbing the most in 7 weeks, on strong physical buying in China and a weak dollar. Gold has recovered from a 5 month low on December 6 to reach $1,268/oz yesterday, its highest price since November 20. Physical demand, especially from Asia seems to be outweighing the jitters regarding the Federal Reserve’s much mooted ‘tapering’.

 
Silver in U.S. Dollars, 5 Years – (Bloomberg)

Shanghai Gold Exchange’s spot contract, rose for a third day to 15,224 kilograms yesterday showing continuing robust demand in the emerging global economic powerhouse.

Markets may have already priced in the possibility of a December tapering as prices did not show any weakness after last week’s stronger than expected non-farm payrolls data. Rather, gold has risen and hedge funds have rushed to cover their short positions ahead of the Fed meeting next week and due to growing concerns of a short squeeze.

However, market participants may again be proved wrong regarding tapering as there is a real risk that the Fed’s $85 billion bond buying programme continues. There is even a chance that the Fed’s bond buying programme increases due to the very fragile U.S. economy. 

The dollar index is trading near a six-week low today as investors evaluate the uncertain outlook for the U.S. economy and dollar in 2014.

BOE Says U.S. “Could Do Today” And U.S Authorities Doing Simulation Exercises
The U.S. already has in place plans for bail-ins in the event of banks failing. Indeed, the U.S. has conducted simulation exercises with the U.K. in recent weeks and will do so again in 2014.

On October 12, Art Murton, the FDIC official in charge of planning for resolutions, and the Bank of England’s Deputy Governor Paul Tucker, both confirmed that the U.S. system is ready to handle a big-bank collapse.

The Bank of England’s Tucker, who has worked with U.S. regulators on the cross-border hurdles to taking down an international firm said that “U.S. authorities could do it today — and I mean today.” 


The Bank of England

“A global financial system will not survive if we don’t crack this problem”, said Tucker.

The 2010 Dodd-Frank Act empowered the  Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) to seize a company or bank and dismantle it if regulators think a bankruptcy would pose a significant threat to the financial system.

This resolution authority hasn’t been tested, and the FDIC Chairman Martin J. Gruenberg, said his agency will disclose a full description of its approach by year-end — opening the idea to public comment.

Gruenberg said that China, Switzerland, Germany and Japan are among nations close to reaching arrangements with U.S. regulators with regard to dealing with mechanisms for failed banks.

U.S. regulators are working with German and Swiss counterparts on joint white papers similar to agreements already in place with the U.K. for how banks governed by multiple jurisdictions could be unwound by their host nations, Gruenberg said in remarks prepared for a speech in Washington on October 13. The FDIC will secure memorandums of understanding on bank resolutions with China and Japan soon, he said.

“It is critical that home and host jurisdictions understand well the approach to resolution of their counterpart and work together to develop a cooperative approach,” he said.

Germany and Switzerland share the U.S. preference for a so-called single point of entry, in which the host nation takes over a failed bank’s holding company, imposes losses on shareholders and lets healthy subsidiaries stay open. The approach depends on long term debt held in the parent to absorb losses and capitalise a healthy bridge company, Gruenberg said.


Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC)

The agency is consulting with the Federal Reserve on a future rule to set a minimum and importantly it has conducted and is conducting simulation exercises.

U.S. regulators will run simulation exercises with U.K. counterparts this year and in 2014, Gruenberg said.

Gruenberg appeared to warn that the UK was vulnerable to bail-ins when he said that
“Nearly 70 percent of the on- and off-balance sheet assets of our major institutions are held in the U.K,” he said. “There is no close second.”

How Likely Are Bail-Ins?
There are differing opinions as to the severity of the on-going financial crisis, and whether it has turned a corner. There are two very broad ‘schools of thought’.

The first school believes that the U.S. Federal Reserve, along with partner central banks internationally, has successfully stabilised the global financial system through low interest rates and quantitative easing, while the EU has managed to help recapitalise banks and avoid bank insolvencies in the European Union and and the breakup of the European Monetary Union (EMU).

The second school is more skeptical of this view and believes that many banks globally remain vulnerable to insolvency because they are being kept on life-support due to extremely accommodating central bank measures including near zero percent interest rates and quantitative easing. Banks are also being supported through the use of almost fictional, though internationally endorsed, accounting treatment for their asset books, such as mark-to-model valuations for their over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives exposures and by failing to have realistic valuations on problematic property loan portfolios.

Many sovereigns nations remain vulnerable to sovereign debt crises. The Eurozone debt crisis and other sovereign debt crises have been solved for the moment through various forms of ultra loose monetary policies, quantitative easing or debt monetisation.

All short term panaceas have not addressed the root cause of the global debt crisis – too much debt.

Indeed, the concern is that the solution of socialising the debt and transferring it to the sovereign and taxpayers, has simply bought some time and may make the crisis much worse in the long term.

We believe the second school will be proved right in the coming months and years; therefore, depositors with deposits in certain banks, or planning to place deposits, must look at the likelihood of and how likely that bank is to get bailed in.

This likelihood would be a function of the strength of the individual bank, which jurisdiction that bank is governed by, which financial systems and economies the bank is exposed to, the extent to which the bank has potentially problematic property or derivatives exposure, and whether deposits are insured by deposit protection schemes
, and to what extent are they insured.

In practice, the financial markets would normally do this analysis, but the previous approach of bail-outs and across the board central bank support appears to have clouded the analysis.

The movement by international monetary and financial institutions towards a bail-in regime and the extent of preparation for bail-ins suggest that bail-ins will happen should banks get into trouble again.

Recent statements by Mario Draghi suggest that depositors might be bailed-in in the future.

In a letter on the July 30th to Joaquín Almunia, the Vice President of the European Commission, Draghi suggested that bondholders might be spared in future, for fear that once burned bond investors may not return.

This would strongly suggest that sovereign governments would be required to make a decision as to whether they would absorb losses or instead force bailins on depositors. As do the preparations being put in place by the Bank of England and the FDIC.

Download our Bail-In Guide: Protecting your Savings In The Coming Bail-In Era(11 pages)

Download our Bail-In Research: From Bail-Outs to Bail-Ins: Risks and Ramifications –
Including 60 Safest Banks In The World List 
 (51 pages)


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/Pfkk0Ch11n0/story01.htm GoldCore