Crypto Analyst Releases Stock-To-Flow Model Indicator For Bitcoin Bull Run

Crypto Analyst Releases Stock-To-Flow Model Indicator For Bitcoin Bull Run

Tyler Durden

Mon, 06/01/2020 – 21:30

Authored by Turner Wright via CoinTelegraph.com,

Updating its popular BTC price model, crypto analyst PlanB predicts the cryptocurrency could see a rally to $100K by 2021.

image courtesy of CoinTelegraph

Crypto analyst PlanB released a key indicator for its stock-to-flow price prediction model which could signal a Bitcoin bull run to $100,000 by 2021 has just begun.

PlanB confirmed on Twitter on May 31 that the red dot — indicating a price increase — was now present in its stock-to-flow (S2F) model, a price prediction model for Bitcoin (BTC).

The S2F model treats BTC as a commodity like gold or silver, evaluating the existing supply of the cryptocurrency against the amount mined. 

Though many have predicted BTC bullish behavior in the wake of the May 11 rewards halving, PlanB’s model marks when a run would occur with a red dot. Under this model, the chart shows a BTC price of $100,000 by the end of 2021. 

Stock-to-flow model

Cointelegraph reported in April that PlanB had used its new cross-asset S2F model — S2FX — to predict a BTC price of $288,000 by 2024. Crypto analyst Harold Christopher Burger used the same data to forecast a rally to $1 million by 2025.

The S2F model does have its detractors. Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has expressed some reservations about stock-to-flow, calling it part of the 95% of crypto articles that are “post-hoc rationalized bullshit.”

As of this writing, BTC is priced in the $9,400s, having fallen 2% in the last 24 hours.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2AsQX6D Tyler Durden

Auto Sales Plunge 33% In May, Set For Worst Year Since 2009

Auto Sales Plunge 33% In May, Set For Worst Year Since 2009

Tyler Durden

Mon, 06/01/2020 – 21:10

US auto sales are expected to continue their historic plunge in May, further pressuring an industry that is on the brink of all out collapse due to the pandemic lockdowns, plunging used car prices and suffering from a pre-virus recessionary environment.

Sales figures for May are expected to fall 33% to just 1.05 million units, according to Cox Automotive and CNBC. Even worse, data from Bank of America indicates that demand for new vehicles could be dropping off a cliff at the same time the industry is getting ready to ramp up production again. 

The numbers show a sequential improvement from April, but still offer an ominous outlook for the auto industry heading into the second half of 2020. Cox Automotive estimates the pace for U.S. car sales to be about 11.4 million units sold by the end of the year, which would make 2020 the worst year for car sales since 2009. These numbers compare to 17.4 million cars sold in 2019. 

And it may not be because drivers are staying home anymore. Bank of America data from gas stations shows that drivers are back on the road again. “We estimate that gas consumption (in gallons) was still down about 30% YoY in April, but improved to -14% for the week ending May 23rd (latest available),” the bank wrote in a May 29 note. 

May’s numbers are in focus since the month kicks off summer sales season, traditionally the point in the year when dealers try to move inventory to make room for new models. Last weekend, some dealers offered incentives like 0% financing and 84 month financing offers to try and entice buyers into showrooms. 

Some of the most generous incentives, offered around the time the virus started, are already being roped in as sales dead-cat bounce off their 2020 monthly lows. Auto analysts are blaming a lack of readily available inventory for the drop in sales, which is hilarious since the country is suffering from an unprecedented glut. 

“At a minimum, selection may become more limited as the desired model may be in stock but not in the consumer’s preferred color or trim, potentially resulting in the consumer delaying purchase, switching brands, or moving into the used-vehicle market,” Cox Automotive explains.

Jessica Caldwell, Edmunds’ executive director of insights, said: “We can safely say that April was the bottom for auto sales during the coronavirus pandemic. There’s still a long road to recovery ahead, but May auto sales are a really encouraging sign for the industry.”

But experts that are sure the bottom is in are focused on manufacturing without any regard as to whether or not demand is going to pick up. 

Thomas King, president of the data and analytics division and chief product officer at J.D. Power, said Thursday: “The good news is that in general manufacturing is restarting. Even with our diminished sales pace, we are still in an environment where the industry is selling more vehicles than it produces.”

With manufacturing picking up, we’ll see how long that lasts. Meanwhile, Bank of America notes that spending in auto parts is ramping up, indicating that OEM demand could be slipping as car owners may be more inclined to fix their current cars instead of buying new ones. 

The bank thinks that many Americans spend their stimulus checks on fixing their cars:

“This data remained weak in the first two weeks of April, but took a sharp uptick in mid-April as stimulus checks began to reach US consumers. This benefit has lingered since mid-April, and auto parts demand now has additional support from increased driving activity as US markets begin to reopen for business. Daily auto parts spending was up approximately 23% YoY on average during the week ending May 23rd (latest available) according to the aggregated card data.”

The industry is expected to have a lost a total of 1.2 million to 1.6 million total sales as a result of the pandemic. 

King concluded: “Many of those will be recovered in the future, but some of them will be lost. Many consumers have lost the accountability to purchase a new vehicle or no longer need one because they no longer commuting to work.” 

We’ll take the “under”…

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

“To Whom Will We Entrust The Truth Now That It No Longer Exists?”

“To Whom Will We Entrust The Truth Now That It No Longer Exists?”

Tyler Durden

Mon, 06/01/2020 – 21:03

Authored by Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management

“Protests are being manipulated by domestic terrorists and international forces trying to destabilize the nation,” declared Minnesota Governor Waltz, calling out the National Guard. George Floyd’s video raced through social media, and for an instant, America mourned in collective outrage.

But no sooner had protests begun, then violence started. Waltz said white supremacists and drug cartels were responsible. Many believe that’s true.

Trump tweeted, “It’s Antifa and the Radical Left.” Others believe that’s true. Some believe both. A few believe none of it.

There are as many truths today as there are tribes. “Everything we do is focused on creating an environment in which people will have their best chance to keep their job or maybe get a new one,” explained Jerome Powell.

“Fed policies absolutely don’t add to inequality,” continued the Chairman. And some think that’s true. Many others believe the opposite. And each tribe finds ample supporting studies to support their respective realities, while unemployment claims surpassed 40mm (1-in-4 workers) and the S&P 500 completed a 36% rally from the lows.

“Mr. President don’t hide behind the Secret Service. Go talk to demonstrators seriously. Negotiate with them, just like you urged Beijing to talk to Hong Kong rioters,” taunted Hu Xijin, editor-in-chief for the Global Times, a Chinese government-controlled paper.

Some of China’s 1.4bln citizens see a moral equivalent between HK/US protestors, while others just as clearly don’t. And as images of American riots captivated the world, Beijing imposed a national security law on Hong Kong, protests erupted, hundreds were arrested.

China denounced Taiwan’s offer to resettle HK citizens, saying it was seeking to “loot a burning house” and sow discord. “Bringing black, violent forces into Taiwan will bring disaster to Taiwan’s people,” warned Beijing. And as Xi Jinping told his military officers “to step up preparations for armed combat,” some thought this was true.

* * *

Anecdote

“Nothing is so painful to the human mind as a great and sudden change,” wrote Mary Shelley in 1818, exploring our humanity through her hideous creation, Frankenstein. And ever since, we’ve leapt from one change to the next, those periods in between marked by an eerie calm that we desperately embrace, mistaking stability for reality.

“We’ll continue to point out incorrect or disputed information about elections globally, and we will admit to and own any mistakes we make,” declared Jack Dorsey, Twitter CEO, tormented by the staggering consequences of his creation. Social media has emerged as the principal battleground for what will surely be the most bitterly contested presidential election in modern American history. And this will likely be followed by a constitutional crisis in a devastatingly divided nation.

Misunderstanding our own nature, we convinced ourselves the internet would be a force for unambiguous good, connecting humanity to a singular truth, inoculating us from our lies. But instead, our reality splintered into a million dimensions.

Truth has died, replaced by a widening range of alternative realities, each one as vivid as the next to its inhabitants. So Dorsey is in search of something that no longer lives. His reality is another’s fantasy, as sure as the sky is blue, and those who would defend one, by definition, threaten the other.

“Internet platforms are not arbiters of truth,” declared Mark Zuckerberg, defending his hideous creature from the villagers, their pitchforks. And no doubt, few would want to inhabit a world where Zuckerberg defined reality.

“I have love in me the likes of which you can scarcely imagine and rage the likes of which you would not believe. If I cannot satisfy the one, I will indulge the other,” warned Frankenstein, Shelley’s eternal monster, alive within us all. And we are left to ponder a paradox as the consequences of this great and sudden change become manifest. To whom will we entrust the truth now that it no longer exists?

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

What ‘Academic’ Antifa Wants

What ‘Academic’ Antifa Wants

Tyler Durden

Mon, 06/01/2020 – 20:50

Update (2000ET): Right on cue, as Andy Ngo reports below, the mainstream media joins the #DefendAntifa narrative against Trump’s orders with an op-ed in The Washington Post from none other than Mark Bray:

*  *  *

Authored by Alexander Riley via Campus Reform,

In a fully sane culture, the category ‘Antifa professor’ would be a contradiction in terms. The calling of the college professor entails a deep commitment to the power of facts and arguments to change minds. Antifa, on the other hand, is a loose collection of half-educated malcontents who entirely reject the logic of intellectual debate. They aim not to change the minds but rather to crush the skulls of those with whom they disagree, in the manner of sociopathic criminals throughout human history. 

Yet contemporary American higher education has produced a number of ‘Antifa professors’ who are currently holders of academic positions. They are engaged in the paradoxical business of making what they purport is an intellectual case for a thuggishly anti-intellectual movement. They include such figures as Michael “Dead cops are good” Isaacson and George “All I want for Christmas is White Genocide” Ciccariello-Maher. 

Among this cast, Mark Bray distinguishes himself as the only one who has produced an Antifa handbook. (As a matter of principle, I will not link to the book–the entire text can be found for free online, should you want a look without having to put any money in Bray’s pocket). He has appeared on “Meet the Press” and been written about in The Chronicle of Higher Education, in both cases with significant coddling.

I had not paid any attention to him until he was recently invited to speak at Bucknell University, where I teach, by the Humanities Center. This gave me the excuse to look closely at his book on Antifa. I am glad to have done so, for it provides a useful blueprint for the whole movement of “academic Antifa,” and now I have a much firmer sense of just how dangerous that movement is. 

The task to which the “Antifa professors” have set themselves is the same one the Communist International took up in the 1930s when it advanced the ideological line that essentially all parties and ideologies to the right of Marxism-Leninism were de facto fascist because, like the fascists, they opposed the coming to power of Marxist communist regimes. Clearly, some chicanery is required to make a case that not x=x, that is, non-fascists are fascists, with the goal of justifying treating both groups equally, that is, violently. Here’s how Bray eliminates the boundary between real fascists and assorted individuals and groups he dislikes that show absolutely no discernible connection to fascism:

“From Tom Hanks in Saving Private Ryan…to Indiana Jones, nothing seems to delight American moviegoers more than killing Nazis…But would those same moviegoers consider it just as heroic to fight Nazis before… Hitler even took power in 1933? How would America respond to a cinematic depiction of communist…organizations…when they fought the Nazi[s]…in the 1920s and ‘30s? I like to imagine most Americans would sympathize with these militant formations because they know that the story ultimately ends in the gas chambers. So why then are so many Americans allergic to…the prospect of physically confronting fascists and white supremacists…?…Antifa argue that we should always remember that few took seriously the small bands of followers around Mussolini and Hitler when they started their ascent, and therefore we should remain vigilant against any and every manifestation of fascistic politics.” (Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook, pp. 170-171, 172)

Did you get that? Anyone who agrees that the killing of Nazis by soldiers in a war is justified ought to understand “physically confronting fascists and white supremacists,” e.g., at college campuses as an equivalent moral imperative.  What precisely is meant by “physically confronting,” we are not told. Should fascists and white supremacists merely be physically prevented from speaking? Should they be beaten? What if they insist on speaking despite efforts to prevent them from speaking, or defend themselves against Antifa beatings? How much is Antifa morally permitted to amplify “physical confront[ation]” in such cases? All of this is left conveniently unclear by Mr. Bray.

Something even more crucial is left just as unclear here. How is it to be determined that the individuals Antifa desires to “physically confront” are indeed “fascists and white supremacists”? If they are actual Nazis, wearing swastikas and overtly announcing their violent and racist desires to expel “racial enemies,” the work is easy. But this is an infinitesimally small group, perhaps a few thousand in a country of 320 million (around 0.003%), and Mr. Bray is in no way content to restrict the category nearly so significantly:  

“[W]e must recognize the relationship between two…registers of anti-fascism: analytical and moral. The analytical…consists of mobilizing historically informed definitions…of fascism to craft anti-fascist strategy [for]…facing ideologically fascist groups…The moral register developed out of the rhetorical power of…calling someone or something fascist…[Here] the anti-fascist lens is applied to phenomena that may not be fascist, technically speaking, but are fascistic. For example, were the Black Panthers wrong to call cops who killed black people with impunity “fascist pigs” if they did not personally hold fascist beliefs or if the American government was not literally fascist? At a Madrid Antifa demonstration, I saw a rainbow flag with the slogan “homophobia is fascism.” Does the existence of non-fascist homophobes invalidate the argument?…[T]he moral register of anti-fascism understands how ‘fascism’ has become a moral signifier that those struggling against a variety of oppressions have utilized to highlight the ferocity of the political foes they have faced and the elements of continuity they share with actual fascism…The challenges of defining fascism make the line between these two registers blurry…a key component of anti-fascism is to organize against both fascist and fascistic politics in solidarity with all those who suffer and struggle” (Antifa, pp. 134, 135)

And a few pages along, Bray elaborates further:

“[M]ilitant anti-fascism is but one facet of a larger revolutionary project. Many Antifa groups organize not only against fascism, but aim to combat all forms of oppression such as homophobia, capitalism, patriarchy, and so on. In that way, they see fascism as only the most acute versions of larger systemic threats. When I spoke with members of Pavé Brûlant [Burning Pavement] in Bordeaux, they continually stressed that all major political parties…manifested fascistic traits… It’s surreal to watch liberal pundits lambast anti-fascists for disrupting a fascist speech, when their revolutionary socialist ideology advocates the global expropriation of the capitalist ruling class and the destruction…of all existing states by means of an international popular uprising that most believe will necessitate violent confrontation with state forces. If they are critical of ‘no platforming,’ wait ‘til they hear about class war” (Antifa, pp. 158, 159).

It is not then only “fascists and white supremacists” who can be legitimately met with Antifa violence. It is also individuals or groups Antifa has defined as “homophobes,” supporters of “patriarchy,” capitalism, and the police, finally, all those who participate in unnamed “variet[ies] of oppression” and thereby oppose “all those who suffer and struggle.” All these categories of potential targets, I remind you, are to be defined and determined by the members of Antifa. Mark Bray does not define them anywhere in his book with any precision at all. 

Can you imagine why he might abstain from doing this?  

I can.

It’s because “academic Antifa” wants the answer to the question “Who is a fascist?” to be “Anyone Antifa says is a fascist, that’s who.”

Bray’s invocation of the Black Panthers is particularly telling.  We should recall that by the early ’70s, factions of the Panthers were openly calling for armed struggle by blacks against the American government. One offshoot of the Black Panthers, the Black Liberation Army, orchestrated perhaps as many as thirteen carefully planned assassinations of police officers. These are Mark Bray’s ideological heroes and models.   

One last bit from Bray, just to make crystal clear where the noxious teaching of “academic Antifa”is intended to leave us:

“Our goal should be that in twenty years those who voted for Trump are too uncomfortable to share that fact in public. We may not always be able to change someone’s beliefs, but we sure as hell can make it politically, socially, economically, and sometimes physically costly to articulate them” (Antifa, p. 206)

This rather lets the cat completely out of the bag, no? If you exercise your right to vote in a way that does not meet Antifa approval, then you are a legitimate target of criminal violence. The ranks of the “fascistic” have now swollen to around 63 million, which is the number of votes Trump received in 2016.  

Those “academic Antifa” actively professing such ideas are still, at this point, a small minority in American higher education—though the fraction of the college professoriate they represent could easily be higher than the fraction of the American population that consists of white supremacists and Nazis. There are however many more working in colleges and universities who help give these ideas oxygen—by assigning books like Antifa, by inviting people like Mark Bray to speak on their campuses, by pretending that antifa are about something more sophisticated or noble than the desire for the violent destruction of the American civil sphere. 

An important step in challenging this drift in the direction of “academic Antifa” is simply to report, accurately and in detail, on what these people say, write, and believe. Virulent ideas should be exposed to clean air and bright light. Among other positive effects, this allows the people who are largely paying the salaries of individuals like Mark Bray and his professorial supporters at Dartmouth and elsewhere, that is, the parents of college students and donors to institutions of higher education, to see precisely how their money is being spent.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2yUFk8f Tyler Durden

Watch: Hundreds Of Handcuffed Perps Lined Up Outside NYC Bookings

Watch: Hundreds Of Handcuffed Perps Lined Up Outside NYC Bookings

Tyler Durden

Mon, 06/01/2020 – 20:30

As Andrew Cuomo delivers his first daily update on the coronavirus situation in his state following the riots we saw across the nation over the weekend, videos of the processing line outside a police precinct in Manhattan on Monday morning show just how many people were arrested in NYC alone, during a weekend where – according to the AP – more than 4,000 were arrested around the country on charges stemming from unlawful assembly to murder.

Police are likely still arresting individuals based on surveillance footage and other next-level surveillance techniques that the NYPD can bring to bear when it wants to arrest a given subject. Additionally, many of the thousands who were arrested across NYC over the

The Twitter account belonging to one of the NYPD’s most powerful unions, the SBA, released an internal arrest report for Mayor de Blasio’s daughter, Chiara, who was booked for “unlawful assembly” and “object throwing” – though only the first charge was initially released to the media. The account slammed the mayor for his decision to not allow cops to use “mounted units” and other tactics, according to TPM.

But as media pundits continue to spin a narrative where all the unrest can be pinned on “foreign enemies” like Moscow and Beijing, we can’t help but ask: do these look like Russian sleeper agents – or white supremacists – to you?

Others joked that the line was longer than the toilet paper line at Costco.

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

Greenfield: How To Make Your Own Race Riot

Greenfield: How To Make Your Own Race Riot

Tyler Durden

Mon, 06/01/2020 – 20:10

Authored by Daniel Greenfield via Sultan Knish blog,

The angry rioter is a sacred figure in the progressive pantheon of social justice. But the saint of the looted convenience store is as mythical a figure as the selfless community organizer.

The race riot isn’t a bubbling stew of outrage out of which wounded souls emerge to cry out for justice. It’s a complicated criminal conspiracy in which the perpetrators rarely suffer any consequences.

Here’s how a race riot is actually put together.

3. Riots aren’t fed by outrage, but by opportunism

The rioters aren’t outraged, they’re usually bored young men, frustrated and lacking in empathy. Many of them have gang ties or a criminal record stretching back to kindergarten.

They’re the same people who commit crimes in any other non-outraged context.

The rest are there to get some attention while providing them with protective coloration. 9 out of 10 people screaming frenziedly while holding up “Black Lives Matter” signs would eagerly scream and hold up “Tiger King 4 President” or “Minneapolis Loves the KKK” signs if it got them positive attention and a shot at being on television.

Everything else you need to do know about why riots happen out can be read on a thermometer. Weather breaks up a riot faster than appeasement. It’s hard to riot when your teeth are chattering. There’s a reason that riots usually happen in the summer. The same viral video that sets a nation on fire would have been met with shrugs in the winter.

The riots didn’t happen because of outrage, but because the gathering mobs were told by everyone from CNN right up to their local Democrat politicians that angry protests were expected and would be tolerated. That was as good as throwing a match into a spreading pool of gasoline.

No one was stealing beauty supplies or starting fires in Walgreens because they were upset about George Floyd They were stealing because they believed that they could get away with it.

2. The rioters and looters aren’t burning their own community

A riot has two components. There are the bored and irritated locals who begin swarming streets because they have no jobs, it’s hot outside and there’s nothing good on television. They will loosely agree with whatever issue is on the table, but they aren’t all that worked up about it.

And then there are the outsiders.

Before the riot, community organizers, citizen reporters and assorted activists show up to coordinate, spread slogans and justify the coming violence. They want violence far more than the locals do and they taunt police and try to create incidents, but they ofte avoid personally engaging in violence.

In the early twentieth century the group stirring up riots was usually some arm of the Communist Party. Later a variety of leftist groups, like Antifa, many closely entangled with the Democratic Party took over. Most of the damage is done by looters and rioters from other areas looking for an opportunity to burn and steal. Some locals will tag after them, but they are usually responsible for the worst of the violence. Some of the looters are from out of state, others from different neighborhoods.

Being outsiders they’re unknown to the police and rarely have to worry about being identified afterwards. And they don’t care about burning down someone else’s community.

The media usually sticks to its narrative of an outraged community that engages in excesses, especially when it can’t tell apart the locals from the outsiders. Local cops can, but no one in the media listens to them. Arrest records often show that most of those charged in the more violent crimes aren’t locals, but the media remains immune to facts that conflict with a favorite narrative.

1. Riots are about power, not for the rioters, but for the establishment

“We must not reprimand our children for outrage when it is the outrage that was put in them by an oppressive system,” Al Sharpton had said, in the aftermath of the murder of a Jewish student by an angry black mob.

This same rhetoric was used by the inciters of the violence around the country and has been used in similar riots going back generations. Its major theme is that the rioters are free to do whatever they want. They carry no moral responsibility for their actions.

And what they want is to smash and steal anything they can get their hands on. This isn’t outrage. It’s textbook amoral behavior. The riot doesn’t release anger; it frees the perpetrators of their morality.

The real purpose of a riot isn’t to benefit the rioters. It’s to benefit those who incite the riot. The rioters and looters react in response to riot-friendly conditions created from above. If you build the political infrastructure for a riot, the rioters and looters will come.

Sharpton’s riots weren’t about helping anyone except himself. By associating himself with violence, he sold the idea that he was an influential figure in the black community. Whether or not Sharpton was actually popular, his rise to the top of the political establishment became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Riots are about perception, not reality. The ringleader tries to keep his hands clean while convincing the establishment that he can turn the violence on or off any time he wants to.

The last decade of riots are the product of a new generation of Sharptons, ambitious activists feeding hate, of the New Black Panther Party’s obsession with becoming relevant, of the ragged hipster ends of Occupy Wall Street drifting from occupation to occupation, of radical white lefties and groups like Black Lives Matter that exist to suck up funding and sympathy from their white lefty allies.

It’s an old and cynical game that has been played in and around the Democratic Party for too long.

The answers to the rioting can’t be found in its streets. The problem didn’t come from there. It came from a corrupt political establishment that lights the fuse for its own power and profit.

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

India’s Electricity Generation Plunges As Worst Economic Downturn In Decades Unfolds 

India’s Electricity Generation Plunges As Worst Economic Downturn In Decades Unfolds 

Tyler Durden

Mon, 06/01/2020 – 19:50

India has announced plans to ease a strict national lockdown even as the spread of COVID-19 shows no signs of abating. Restaurants, hotels, malls, and places of worship could reopen in the near term. Despite reopening plans, India’s economy is rapidly deteriorating, which has led to a significant decline in electricity generation. 

Even before the two-month lockdown, India’s economy was decelerating and now faces the worst recession in four decades. The country’s economy could contract by at least 5% this fiscal year.  

Economic paralysis has led to a collapse in electricity generation across the country, plunging 14.3% in May, compared with a 24% decline in April, a new Reuters analysis of government data showed. 

The report said electricity demand was higher among households, as consumption among industries and commercial places was still widely depressed. Factories account for 50% of India’s annual electricity demand, which suggests operating capacity is still low.

India’s economic downturn will result in a decline in the country’s electricity demand for the next several years. Global rating and research agency CRISIL recently said it could take upwards of three years for the economy to get back to growth activity seen in 2019. This means India will not see a V-shaped economic recovery, but rather one that is more of a U or L-shaped. 

CRISIL believes India’s economy will suffer a 10% permanent loss to real GDP thanks to the pandemic-induced downturn. 

India will need fiscal support from the government this year to counter the recession. If policy support is limited, it means the downturn will increasingly get worse in the back half of 2020. 

Here’s what a recent UBS note said about India’s troubling situation:  

“While there is no doubt that India is facing a significant economic shock, the pace of recovery, if any, will be determined by the economic policy choices taken to ensure that the significant secondary impacts (job losses, reduced income levels, corporate defaults, rising NPLs (non-performing loans), rating downgrade, etc.,) can be contained,” UBS said in a report.

A few months before the virus outbreak spread across the world, we noted in late 2019 that India’s economy was collapsing in a piece titled “India In “Very Deep Crisis,” Witnessing “Death Of Demand,” Warns Former Indian FM.” 

It just so happens that the global economy was slowing before the pandemic began — which has allowed governments and central banks to scapegoat the virus and deflect any attention from their failed policies to boost economic growth. 

 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3gDIKNH Tyler Durden

Budget Office Finds US Economy Won’t Return To Normal Until 2030

Budget Office Finds US Economy Won’t Return To Normal Until 2030

Tyler Durden

Mon, 06/01/2020 – 19:32

There goes the V-shaped recovery.

In its first official forecast incorporating the impact from the coronavirus shutdowns, today the Congressional Budget Office said that over the 2020–2030 period, cumulative GDP will be $15.7 trillion, or 5.3%, less in nominal dollars than what the agency projected in January. Putting that number in context, the nominal GDP of the US today is $21.5 trillion, in other words over the next decade, the Coronavirus will have wiped out almost one full year of output potential from the US economy.

In real, or inflation-adjusted dollars, some $7.9 trillion in economic activity over the next decade will be lost even with the trillion of rescue funding being poured in to offset the pandemic’s impact.

Comparing its interim, May 2020 projections to the last official forecast made in January 2020, the CBO said that the level of nominal GDP in the second quarter of 2020 would be $790 billion (or 14.2%) lower than the agency had previously forecast in January 2020 (a number which unfortunately will only grow larger with time especially if the Atlanta Fed’s 52% GDP drop forecast is accurate). Subsequently, the difference between those projections of nominal GDP narrows from $533 billion (9.4% lower in the latest projection) ) by the end of 2020 to $181 billion (2.2 percent lower) by 2030.

In real terms, the difference between those projections of real GDP shrinks, to $422 billion in 2019 dollars (7.6% lower in the more recent projection) by the end of 2020 and roughly disappears by 2030. In other words, it will take a decade for the impact of the coronavirus to fully fade away and for the economy to return to its pre-coronavirus normal.

The difference between the CBO’s January baseline and the nominal and real cumulative GDP projections is shown below. Curiously, while on a real basis the economy takes a decade to revert to normal, in nominal dollars it appears the US can’t ever recover its previous trendline.

The permanent loss in output in the US economy was shown by BofA two weeks ago when the bank laid out the pre-covid trend growth and compared it to is base case recovery.

“Business closures and social distancing measures are expected to curtail consumer spending, while the recent drop in energy prices is projected to severely reduce U.S. investment in the energy sector,” said CBO Director Phillip Swagel in a written response to an inquiry from Senator Chuck Schumer. “Recent legislation will, in CBO’s assessment, partially mitigate the deterioration in economic conditions.”

In response, Schumer quickly pivoted the conversation to get even more government stimulus money out of the current crisis, saying the CBO estimates emphasize the case for quick action on another spending bill.

“In order to avoid the risk of another Great Depression, the Senate must act with a fierce sense of urgency to make sure that everyone in America has the income they need to feed their families and put a roof over their heads,” Schumer said in a statement.

The CBO also said it was marking down its longer-run estimate for growth due to expected low levels of inflation, despite all off of the public spending and further rescue lending from the Federal Reserve, and cautioned that further adjustments to its projections are likely as more is known about the coronavirus’ path, its ultimate economic damage and the impact of congressional funding measures.

“An unusually high degree of uncertainty surrounds these economic projections, particularly because of uncertainty about how the pandemic will unfold this year and next year, how the pandemic and social distancing will affect the economy, how recent policy actions will affect the economy, and how economic data will ultimately be recorded for a period when extreme changes have disrupted standard estimation methods and data sources,” Swagel wrote.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3eGtrlr Tyler Durden

Note To Rioting Americans: Why Looting A Rolex Store Isn’t Such A Great Idea

Note To Rioting Americans: Why Looting A Rolex Store Isn’t Such A Great Idea

Tyler Durden

Mon, 06/01/2020 – 19:10

As SJW blue-checks pressure Twitter to ban anonymous accounts (a trend that was set in motion long ago, and accelerated with the permanent suspension of @Zerohedge a few months back), the ever-witty @TESLACharts is a perfect example of what financial twitter would lose if financial professionals behind some of the space’s most widely-followed and respected accounts were forced to give up the medium due, in many cases, to the onerous compliance restrictions of their employers. A few weeks back, we shared a thread published by the account detailing why investors ought to steer clear of biotech darling Moderna (which is down ~$20 a share from the peak reached during the week before last), and now we’re sharing the account’s advice for rioting Americans finally deciding to take some initiative and do something to correct all this terrible “income inequality” they’ve been complaining about since Nov. 9, 2016.

When looting on Fifth Ave., “protesters” might want to skip over the Rolex outlet.

Intuitively, luxury goods should seem like a smart target for criminals since they retain their resale value so well, and because that value can be extremely high (when compared with staples or basic discretionary goods). However, that there are a few practical caveats that looters should consider before trying to muscle their way to a brand new submariner.

The same is true for Apple laptops and other Apple products, as well as most other pricey electronics (with the exception of televisions and a few other items).

So, what’s an amateur looter to do? Well, they can start by listening on.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3cnjAzp Tyler Durden

That’s One Way To End A Lockdown

That’s One Way To End A Lockdown

Tyler Durden

Mon, 06/01/2020 – 18:50

Via The American Institute for Economic Research,

There’s an old 18th-century saying about the best-laid plans of mice and men. From such plans the most prestigious public health professionals working with the most powerful people, deploying for the first time a new way to control diseasewe now stand in the midst of rubble. 

It seems hard to believe. It was only a few months ago that the United States had a strong economy and a bright future. How we went from domestic peace and prosperity in February 2020 to the madness – cities on fire, military rule, curfews, economic desperation – we see today will be the subject of historical reconstruction for many decades hence. We are already seeing the first drafts written now. 

The people in the streets are said to be protesting or rioting, but in other ways this has elements of a rebellion. It’s a rebellion against controls over the population that should never have been imposed – based on law, precedent, and human rights. The American people put up with it for more than two months, even as the strictures and regulations were building a nationwide powderkeg. 

The disgusting murder of George Floyd, a man forcibly disemployed under lockdown and passing a counterfeit $20 bill to escape poverty, was all too familiar. It was the fuse that lit up that powder. The outrage against such police abuses stretches back decades and is reason enough for people from coast to coast to scream: enough. 

At the same time, there is much more going on here than police abuse of power. Floyd became such a powerful symbol for people of all races and classes. He could have been any one of us. The boot on the neck smacks of Orwell’s chilling prediction of life under government plans: “If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – forever.”

Americans of all classes, races, and political affiliations refuse to acquiesce to that future. Enough is enough. 

The fires that burn in our cities today were born long ago with government impositions in every aspect of our lives. The impositions date back many generations. In the course of three months, the lockdowns stacked the wood; Floyd’s murder was the match.

In mid-March 2020, for fear of a virus, schools were forcibly closed, workers and businesses were arbitrarily divided by governments into essential and nonessential, police powers were deployed to enforce human separation under the strangely clinical name of “social distancing,” stay-home orders went into effect, travel restrictions internationally and even domestically locked us down and separated us (as if viruses care about lines on a map), and hospitals shut for anything but COVID-related illnesses. 

It was a perfect central plan, the deployment of a real-life version of plans first laid out in 2006, at least on paper. The plans included no reference to legislatures, public opinion polls or elections, concern for the Bill of Rights, private property, commercial functioning, family rights, religious freedom, or basic freedoms of association – and certainly never accounted for the reality that people don’t like to be muscled by dictators local, state, and federal. 

All of this massive apparatus of compulsion and coercion, of course, became our new regime for our own good and our health, or so they have repeatedly said. What’s fascinating looking back is how little any of what we’ve done to our beloved country had anything to do with the realities of the virus called COVID-19. 

This particular virus – different from the last one and next one – turned out to be mostly brutal on older populations with comorbidities, particularly vicious in long-term care facilities. For more than 99% of everyone else, it is not much of a disease at all. People are coming to realize this, though it is rarely admitted on your television screens. When you throw out all concerns for human decency in the name of virus control, you have to keep doubling down on the rationale for the panic. Weeks stretched into months, and the excuses kept changing. 

It’s no surprise that many of the protesters and rebels on the streets were glad to tell of their incredulity to the media. The truth about this outrageous government overreach was going to leak out, despite near uniformity of a pro-lockdown position among major media. The trouble is, and perhaps this is a good thing, people have stopped believing. Even the mask mandates backfired: they were universally worn by the protestors. 

People do not believe the media, the politicians, the “public health professionals.” They stopped believing in the need to follow the plan. They have started to believe that perhaps freedom offers a better way, even in the presence of a virus. 

Now 48 days into the lockdown, and still oppressed by overly formalized models of an organized and scripted re-opening, and 48 hours after our cities lit up and streets filled with angry rebels, there are vast remaining problems. 

First, it’s not at all clear whether and to what extent any of the political elites in this country have the slightest clue about what has happened or what to do about it.

Second, the economy is now burdened with terrible debt, awful spending plans, and egregious monetary policy.

Third, we continue to live with unnecessary and burdensome regulations on our movements and rights. 

All three problems need desperately to be addressed. 

It’s also time we look toward the future, perhaps with some optimism. Hundreds of unneeded regulations have been suspended in the crisis. New forms of education and health-care delivery have been innovated and practiced. The political class is largely discredited. Many of the overly confident planners who hatched this disaster are hunkered down in hiding. People are unlikely ever to hold the mainstream media in high regard, at least not for a very long time. 

The best laid plans: inspired by myopic modelers, eschewing of expert opinions of dissident scientists, disregarding of essential rights, fueled by media fabrications and irresponsibility, imposed by governments at all levels. It’s a new chapter of The Road to Serfdom.

Let us write yet another chapter in which we learn something from this calamity and re-embrace the idea of human freedom. 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3eDaqjQ Tyler Durden