Tag: finance

Having already collapsed in March, analysts expected further terrible weakness in both housing starts and building permits in April as the impact of lockdowns really escalated, and the data did indeed come in ugly.

• Housing Starts fell 30.2% MoM in April (worse than the 26.0% drop expected and accelerating considerably from the 22.3% drop in March). This is a record drop.

• Building Permits fell 20.8% MoM in April (better than the 25.9% expected)

Source: Bloomberg

The SAAR chart is a bloodbath with Starts at their lowest since Feb 2015 and Permits lowest since Jan 2015

Source: Bloomberg

Multi-family Starts dominated the drop… down over 40% to the lowest since April 2013, single family starts were down 25.4% to 650K, lowest since March 2015

Single-family permits plunged 24.3% to 669K, lowest since March 2015, and multi-unit permits dropped 12.4% to 373K, lowest since Feb 2017.

As a reminder, applications to build are a proxy for future construction, and the biggest drops were in the Northeast (-45.5% for single-family) and West (-33.2% for single-family).

US equity futures tried, and failed, to stage a major breakout into 3,000 overnight, with the E-mini rising as high as 2,976 ahead of the European open (on virtually zero volume), before paring all gains alongside a drop and European stocks as investors weighed the return of the trade war against positive coronavirus news, while disappointing results from Home Depot weighed on sentiment and not even a huge beat by Walmart managed to reverse the mood.

What is more concerning is that now that the S&P has tried, and failed, to break out above the 2950 resistance level, a triple-top appear has formed, which suggests that the most likely next move is a retest of the support.

The Stoxx Europe 600 Index remained lower however as investors shrugged off both news of a $546 billion recovery fund for the region and a surprise jump in German investor confidence, with the ZEW Economist Sentiment surging to 51 from 28.2, beating expectations of a 32.0 print and far above the deeply negative print just two months ago.

European sentiment slumped after French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire said that the European recovery fund proposed by France and Germany won’t be available until 2021 and still faces hurdles in “difficult” negotiations in coming weeks. “It probably couldn’t be available before the start of 2021,” Le Maire says speaking at the National Assembly finance committee. Le Maire says it will take time because procedures still need to be finalized and the fund will be linked to the EU budget. The finance minister also said Franco-German agreement on the fund was necessary but not sufficient and the two countries must still convince reluctant countries including Austria, Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands.

Earlier in the session, Asian stocks were green across the board lifted by momentum from the US, and led by materials and industrials, after rising in the last session. All markets in the region were up, with South Korea’s Kospi Index gaining 2.2% and Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index rising 1.9%. The Topix gained 1.8%, with Soshin Electric and Sony Financial rising the most. The Shanghai Composite Index rose 0.8%, with Fujian Start Group and Shanghai Lingyun Industries Development posting the biggest advances.

Stock started off the week with a bang after Moderna fueled hopes for a coronavirus vaccine, but investors are struggling to maintain the optimism as they continue to monitor efforts to both contain the pandemic and restart economies. Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell is scheduled to speak on the state of the recovery Tuesday, amid expectations he’ll press for further fiscal support to address the steepest downturn since the Depression.

“Short-lived bounces in stock prices even while markets establish new lows are not unheard of,” Ashwin Alankar, head of global asset allocation at Janus Henderson, said in a note. “Forward-looking metrics such as earnings revisions and options prices, on the other hand, sound a more cautious tone both for the economy and stock prices.”

Meanwhile, headwinds remain for stocks, not least a deteriorating U.S.-China relationship. In a further sign of tightening scrutiny on capital flows to the Asian nation, Reuters reported late on Monday that the Nasdaq is set to unveil new rules for initial public offerings including tougher accounting standards that will make it more difficult for some Chinese companies to list on the exchange.

In rates, the 10Y Treasury was unchanged after yields blew out on Monday, while European government bonds were mixed, with peripheral yields falling on the recovery fund news.

In FX, the Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index fell; the euro and European peripheral bonds extended gains in the wake of a proposal by France and Germany to distribute money to member states. The yen fell to a one-week low against the dollar after the news that the Bank of Japan will discuss details of a funding program to demonstrate its resolve to support struggling businesses. The New Zealand dollar advanced, supported by purchases against the Aussie. Sterling strengthened after the U.K. announced plans for 30 billion pounds ($37 billion) in tariff cuts after Brexit.

China’s yuan fell to a two-month low against a basket of trading partners’ currencies, as the central bank’s reference rate stays close to the weakest since 2008. The Bloomberg replica of the CFETS RMB Index — which tracks the yuan against 24 currencies — declined 0.27% to 93.5, the lowest level since March 12. That comes as the People’s Bank of China kept the yuan’s fixings versus major exchange rates low. The authorities cut its reference rate versus the euro by the most in seven weeks Tuesday, while the fixing against the dollar was close to the weakest since 2008. But the yuan has been steady in the spot market, with the currency fluctuating within a narrow band of less than 0.85% on either side this month. That’s partly because traders expect the Chinese exchange rate to be stable ahead of the annual parliamentary meeting, which starts this week

In commodities, West Texas crude’s ascent kept it well above $32 a barrel, rising for a 4th day, though it came off highs touched in Asian trade. West Texas Intermediate crude increased 2.9% to $32.73 a barrel. In terms of underlying fundamentals, on the demand side, participants continue to eye reopening economies for any signs of potential risk of reclosures. Meanwhile looking at supply, OPEC+ cuts are underway, with eyes on the June 8th JMMC meeting for further details as to whether current cuts will be extended as per source which floated potential extension to year-end as opposed to a wind-down of agreed curbs. Meanwhile, unsurprisingly, OPEC+ cut oil exports sharply in the first half of May, according to trackers – which boils down to a function of lower supply and lower demand. WTI July meanders around 31.50/bbl whilst its Brent counterpart failed to reclaim USD 35/bbl to the upside, with both contracts contained within ~USD 2/bbl intraday bands. Elsewhere, spot gold trades flat in recent trade after failing to nurse some of yesterday’s sentiment-induced losses, with the yellow metal now waiting for the Powell/Mnuchin double testimony as a scheduled potential catalyst. Copper prices have given up overnight gains as the sentiment in Europe somewhat soured as US-Sino tensions remain elevated, whilst the EU still has to overcome obstacles before launch of their Recovery Fund, touted to be implemented January 2021.

Home Depot and Walmart are among companies reporting earnings

Market Snapshot

• S&P 500 futures down 0.4% to 2,937.75
• STOXX Europe 600 down 0.7% to 339.38
• MXAP up 1.7% to 148.14
• MXAPJ up 1.7% to 477.86
• Nikkei up 1.5% to 20,433.45
• Topix up 1.8% to 1,486.05
• Hang Seng Index up 1.9% to 24,388.13
• Shanghai Composite up 0.8% to 2,898.58
• Sensex up 0.8% to 30,281.28
• Australia S&P/ASX 200 up 1.8% to 5,559.52
• Kospi up 2.3% to 1,980.61
• German 10Y yield fell 2.1 bps to -0.488%
• Euro up 0.1% to $1.0925
• Italian 10Y yield fell 18.8 bps to 1.5%
• Spanish 10Y yield fell 8.2 bps to 0.651%
• Brent futures little changed at $3479/bbl
• Gold spot up 0.1% to $1,734.98
• U.S. Dollar Index down 0.1% to 99.56

Top Overnight News

• President Donald Trump escalated a spat with the World Health Organization, threatening to permanently freeze U.S. funding unless there’s sweeping reform. An experimental vaccine from Moderna Inc. showed early signs it can create an immune-system response to fend off the virus
• Nasdaq is set to unveil new rules for initial public offerings including tougher accounting standards that will make it more difficult for some Chinese companies to list on the exchange
• Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell said the central bank is prepared to use its full range of tools and leave the benchmark lending rate near zero until the economy is back on track
• New Zealand’s central bank sees no need to adjust its monetary stimulus in the wake of the government’s stronger-than-expected fiscal spending package in last week’s budget
• Australia’s central bank board held a further discussion on risks to financial stability including a briefing on the resilience of households during its May policy meeting, when both the cash rate and bond-yield target were kept unchanged at 0.25%
• Oil’s rally extended to a fourth day as a combination of recovering demand, production cuts and promising test results for a coronavirus vaccine brightened the outlook for energy prices
• Argentina’s Exchange Bondholder Group is recommending the government give investors who hold discount bonds a contingent recovery instrument linked to the nation’s GDP, the group said on its website
• The U.K. set out its post-Brexit tariffs plan, cutting import duties on many products while protecting industries such as automotive and agriculture in global trade beyond Europe
• Optimism that economies may recover faster than expected should boost European stocks, tighten Mediterranean bond spreads and buoy the euro; yet options pricing and technical charts show these currency gains may prove fleeting, with developments in the crisis yet to prove game-changers
• Patients who test positive for the coronavirus weeks after recovering from Covid-19 probably aren’t capable of transmitting the infection, research from South Korea shows

Asian equity markets were higher across the board as the region took impetus from the global stock rally spurred by several bullish factors including the reopening of economies, coronavirus vaccine hopes and stimulus efforts after Germany and France proposed a EUR 500bln recovery fund. As such, ASX 200 (+1.8%) shrugged off the increasing Aussie-Sino tensions from China’s import duties on Australian barley and briefly climbed above the 5600 level with upside led by the energy sector after the gains in oil prices and as its top-weighted financial sector also outperformed. Nikkei 225 (+1.5%) coat-tailed on the recent favourable currency moves which helped participants overlook the weak earnings from the likes of Panasonic, while SoftBank shares eventually slumped as plans to tap into its Alibaba and T-Mobile stakes to raise funds failed to offset selling pressure from a record FY loss. Hang Seng (+1.9%) and Shanghai Comp. (+0.8%) conformed to the upbeat tone as China continued to tout more favourable policies including SOE reforms, interest rate liberalization, further opening up and lower tariffs, with the gains in Hong Kong exacerbated after rule changes in the Hang Seng Index which paves the way for the inclusion of Chinese internet giants such as Alibaba, Xiaomi and Meituan Dianping. Finally, 10yr JGBs are lower amid spillover selling in T-notes as the demand for safe havens was sapped by the heightened global risk appetite, while the BoJ presence in the market for JPY 770bln also did little to inspire a turnaround in JGBs.

Top Asian News

• China Mulls Relief as Deadline Nears on $211 Billion in Bad Debt
• China Mulls Targeting Australian Wine, Dairy on Virus Spat
• Sony Plans to Take Finance Arm Private for About $3.7 Billion
• Mitsui Is Said to Weigh Stake Sale in Indonesia’s Paiton Energy

European equities have shaved gains since the open and now reside in a sea of red [Euro Stoxx 50 -0.9%] – as the strained relations between US and China continue to hover as a grey cloud on investor sentiment. Meanwhile, despite Germany and France proposing a EUR 500bln European Recovery Fund, the unanimous approval itself could prove to be complex. Netherlands, Austria, Denmark, and Sweden are not fond of the fund being distributed as grants, whilst the touted launch in 2021 may further strain peripheries hit harder by the pandemic such as Italy and Spain. On that note, FTSE MIB (-1.4%) and IBEX (-2.3%) are the marked underperformers thus far whilst core indices see broad-based losses between 0.1-0.4%. Trade updates aside, today marks the first session since the European short-selling ban was remove, as per yesterday’s announcements, potentially providing price action with some influence. Sectors are mostly in the red; breakdown also sees broad-based losses across most sectors, but financials fare better on initial optimism on the EU recovery fund. In terms of individual movers: Thyssenkrupp (+5.4%) holds onto opening gains after it said it is mulling the sale of their steel and warships divisions. Sources also noted that talks with Tata Steel never broke off and both the Cos is still in talks about consolidation. Handelsblatt reported that SSAB and Baoshan Iron & Steel were interested in a majority of the steel unit. Meanwhile, Wirecard (-1.6%) extended on losses amid source reports Germany’s accountancy watchdog FREP last year opened a probe into the Co. following allegations of accounting fraud. Carnival (-0.5%) is weighed on after being downgraded to Junk at Moody’s.

Top European News

• European Lockdowns Knock Car Sales Into Record Monthly Drop
• German Investor Confidence Jumps on Hopes Worst of Pandemic Over
• U.K. Catering Firm Compass Plans $2.5 Billion Share Sale
• Sweden Plans Record 30-Fold Jump in Borrowing to Fight Crisis

In FX, the Kiwi has extended recovery gains in wake of commentary from RBNZ Deputy Governor Bascand indicating no rush to deliver more monetary stimulus via an expansion of QE or adopting NIRP, as the Bank waits so see how data pans out before deciding whether it needs to adjust policy further. Nzd/Usd topped out just shy of 0.6100 and Aud/Nzd has retreated sharply through 1.0800 as Aud/Usd respects resistance at recent peaks around 0.6570 and the Aussie reflects on reports that China may add more exports to the higher tariff list on top of barley. Note, no added insight on the RBA front from minutes overnight that merely reiterated the grounds for maintaining rates and asset purchases at present levels while monitoring the impact or recent actions including the introduction of YCC. Meanwhile, the Pound has regained some poise across the board following latest negative interest rate chat from the BoE via Tenreyro and irrespective of UK data revealing a bigger than forecast jump in the claimant count alongside slightly softer than expected wages, with Cable back up above 1.2200 and briefly nibbling stops at 1.2266 and Eur/Gbp easing from 0.8950+ even though the Euro remains elevated independently on additional fiscal support to combat the adverse effects of COVID-19.

• EUR – The single currency is consolidating towards the top of a circa 1.0956-03 range vs the Dollar and contributing to a depressed DXY around 99.500 in advance of US housing data, testimony from Fed chair Powell and comments from Rosengren. As noted above, another financial recovery fund for the Eurozone and agreement between Germany and France to issue joint EU debt as a means of paying for the Eur500 bn pot has given the Euro a boost amidst formative signs of an improvement in ZEW’s forward-looking economic sentiment indices.
• JPY – A previously unscheduled BoJ meeting to discuss bank funding measures preannounced in April and timetabled for this Friday prompted a bit more Yen weakness against the Greenback within 107.60-30 parameters, but the headline pair may be capped ahead of decent option expiry interest between 107.65-75 in 1.5 bn into the NY cut.
• NOK – The Norwegian Krona has pared gains alongside crude prices and waning risk appetite, with perhaps some acknowledgment of remarks from Norges Bank Governor Olsen repeating that the depo rate has likely reached its lower bound, but there is more room in terms of economic policy.
• EM – Usd/Try has now breached 6.8000 to the downside and reports that the CBRT has arranged swap lines with the BoE and BoJ are helping the Lira continue its retracement, while the Idr has been very volatile following the BI’s unchanged rate decision that confounded consensus for a 25 bp cut.
• RBA Minutes stated that members assessed the best course of action was to maintain current policy setting and monitor economic and financials outcomes closely as support package had been introduced only recently, while it noted that the board determined it would not raise cash rate until progress is made towards full employment and inflation targets. Furthermore, the RBA agreed that policy package was working broadly as expected but is prepared to scale up government bond purchases again if necessary, to achieve the yield target. (Newswires)
• RBNZ Deputy Governor Bascand said RBNZ could extend and expand asset purchase programme further but added they will see how data plays out and provide more stimulus if required. Bascand added no decision has been made to buy foreign assets or launch negative rates which are among the many options available to the committee, while he reiterated they asked banks to be ready to transact negative rates in wholesale markets by year-end. (Newswires)

In commodities, WTI and Brent futures trade mixed after intially eking mild gains in what seems to be a breather from yesterday’s pronounced upside – whilst WTI June heads into its futures expiry with its head above USD 30/bbl. In terms of underlying fundamentals, on the demand side – participants continue to eye reopening economies for any signs of potential risk of reclosures. Meanwhile looking at supply, OPEC+ cuts are underway, with eyes on the June 8th JMMC meeting for further details as to whether current cuts will be extended as per source which floated potential extension to year-end as opposed to a wind-down of agreed curbs. Meanwhile, unsurprisingly, OPEC+ cut oil exports sharply in the first half of May, according to trackers – which boils down to a function of lower supply and lower demand. WTI July meanders around 31.50/bbl whilst its Brent counterpart failed to reclaim USD 35/bbl to the upside, with both contracts contained withing ~USD 2/bbl intraday bands. Elsewhere, spot gold trades flat in recent trade after failing to nurse some of yesterday’s sentiment-induced losses, with the yellow metal now waiting for the Powell/Mnuchin double testimony as a scheduled potential catalyst. Copper prices have given up overnight gains as the sentiment in Europe somewhat soured as US-Sino tensions remain elevated, whilst the EU still has to overcome obstacles before launch of their Recovery Fund, touted to be implemented January 2021.

US Event Calendar

• 8:30am: Housing Starts, est. 900,000, prior 1.22m; Housing Starts MoM, est. -25.99%, prior -22.3%
• 8:30am: Building Permits, est. 1m, prior 1.35m; Building Permits MoM, est. -25.93%, prior -6.8%

DB’s Jim Reid concludes the overnight wrap

Hopes that the virus will be well and truly beaten surged yesterday as markets got very excited about the potential for a vaccine. There was also the encouragement of new solidarity over the recovery fund in Europe but there wasn’t a lot of new news here but markets just used it as a good excuse to extend the rally. On the vaccine hopes, Moderna announced yesterday that they’d found a promising candidate in their trials. They said that their vaccine produced antibodies that can help with Covid-19 in all eight initial participants. They also said that there weren’t any major safety issues and that the company expects to start a Phase 3 trial in July. In response, the company’s shares ended the day up +19.96%, the eighth best performer in the Russell 1000 index. United Airlines, TripAdvisor, and Park Hotels, who would all benefit greatly from a vaccine, were a few of the small number of companies ahead of them in the index.

The other major news yesterday came from Chancellor Merkel and President Macron, who agreed to support a €500bn recovery fund, which Merkel said would have the ability to borrow money. Macron indicated that the fund would not be reimbursed by the beneficiaries, which would mean that the fund would be financed through grants rather than loans or that the fund would directly invest in member states, thereby acting as grants. The mix of grant and loans was a point of contention at the last meeting and so we will see what support for such an arrangement looks like when the full European Commission comes together next week. I don’t think it’s any surprise that Merkel and Macron support such a fund so it shouldn’t be huge news, but the market liked it. As noted, there are other players to convince but a show of unity here is no bad thing.

All of the major equity indices rallied on both sides of the Atlantic, with the S&P 500 up +3.15% in its best performance in over a month and back above recent closing highs after the difficulties last week. In addition the Dow Jones (+3.85%) and the NASDAQ (+2.44%) also advanced. It was a broad-based rally, with every sector and over 92% of the companies in the S&P moving higher. The covid laggards clearly outperformed on the day with autos (+9.23%), Energy (+7.55%) and Banks (+7.18%) leading the way.

Over in Europe meanwhile, the STOXX 600 (+4.07%) and the DAX (+5.67%) both had their strongest days in over a month. Energy stocks led the rally, buoyed by the strong performance of oil prices as both WTI (+8.12%) and Brent (+7.11%) climbed to 2-month highs of $31.82/bbl and $34.81/bbl respectively. Copper was also up +2.62% while palladium rose by +6.15% to just under $2,000/oz. Gold came off its 7-year high however, down -0.64%, while the dollar index (-0.73%) had its worst day in over a month.

The momentum has continued for the most part in Asia this morning with the Nikkei (+1.81%), Hang Seng (+1.79%), ASX (+1.96%) and Kospi (+2.02%) all posting decent gains. That being said, in China the Shanghai Comp (+0.53%) and CSI 300 (+0.64%) have underperformed while futures on the S&P 500 are flat. That could be in response to the news that Nasdaq is expected to tighten IPO rules including tougher accounting standards that may make it difficult for companies from countries including China to list according to a story on Bloomberg. Elsewhere this morning, yields on 10y USTs are down -2.7bps to 0.70% while in commodities oil is trading flat.

Over in sovereign bond markets yesterday, there was a major narrowing of peripheral spreads in Europe that accelerated late in the day after the news of the recovery fund came out. The spread of Italian ten-year yields over bunds fell by -25.4bps to 214bps, the largest one-day tightening since mid-March after the ECB unveiled their Pandemic Emergency Purchase Programme. There was similarly a tightening in the spread of Spanish (-9.1bps), Portuguese (-9.1bps) and Greek (-13.9bps) yields over bunds. Sovereign bond yields in core countries saw notable rises however, with yields on 10yr Treasuries up +8.3bps to climb back above 0.7% again, while yields on 10yr bunds were also up +6.4bps. In a further positive sign, Bloomberg’s index of US financial conditions eased to its most accommodative level since early March.

In terms of other news yesterday, UK overnight interest-rate swaps began to price in the chance of rates going below zero by the Bank of England’s December meeting. It comes after the BoE’s chief economists’ comments over the weekend, who said that the BoE was looking at further unconventional monetary policies such as negative rates. Like the US, the UK didn’t experiment with negative rates after the financial crisis, so such a move would be unchartered territory in the history of the Bank of England, which dates all the way back to 1694. Later on, we got some comments from the MPC’s Silvana Tenreyro, who said that the longer the lockdown was in place, the longer stimulus would be needed and didn’t close the door on negative rates. For reference, our economists are expecting a further £125bn of QE at the June meeting.

In terms of other central bank speakers yesterday, the Atlanta Fed’s Bostic added to his colleagues’ comments that the second quarter was likely going to be “tough”, but that a number of the job losses would be temporary. He espoused the need for the reopening of the economy to be thoughtful, and that the eventual recovery would hinge on consumer confidence returning. He also indicated that he would not be looking to penalize the decisions of banks during the crisis, saying that banks have been encouraged by the Fed to deploy capital during this time and “reduce the stresses” businesses and people are feeling.

There was barely any economic data to speak of, though the NAHB’s housing market index from the US for May did show a recovery from the 7-year low it reached in April, rising to 37 (vs. 35 expected). We’ll get some more hard data on the US housing market for April today though.

To the day ahead now, and the highlight is expected to be Fed Chair Powell’s testimony before the Senate Banking Committee. The text of his speech was released last night and didn’t contain too many surprises and is more a reflection of what the Fed has done but the Q&A will probably be the most interesting part. Other speakers include the Fed’s Rosengren and Kashkari, as well as the ECB’s chief economist Lane, while the Indonesian central bank will be deciding on interest rates. In terms of data, there’ll be Germany’s ZEW survey for May, UK employment data for the three months to March, and US housing starts and building permits for April. Finally, we’ll get earnings releases from Walmart and Home Depot.

Summary:

• Chinese ambassador in Canberra says notion that WHO investigation satisfies Australia’s call for “independent” probe is “a joke”
• Trump threatens to permanently pull funding and end membership of WHO
• Brazil overtakes UK to become world’s 3rd-largest outbreak
• India’s case total passes 100k
• Navajo Nation now home to “biggest outbreak in the US” per CNN
• Singapore plans to start phased reopening on June 2
• Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa mosque set to reopen after Eid

* * *

The big news on Tuesday is the meeting of the World Health Assembly, which is expected to back a WHO-sponsored inquiry into China’s handling of the early days of the coronavirus outbreak. Last night, President Trump delivered a threatening letter where the US warned it could permanently cut funding and even cancel its membership in the WHO.

In response, China accused the US of trying to divert the world’s attention from President Trump’s handling of the outbreak by playing a “blame game” with Beijing. The White House has leveled similar accusations at Beijing. But even more tellingly, China’s ambassador in Canberra slammed Australia’s call for an independent investigation into China’s handling of the early days of the outbreak as “a joke”. The ambassador claimed the the investigation about to be authorized by the WHA doesn’t resemble the type of inquiry that Australia has called for. This gloating comes after President Xi said he’d welcome a comprehensive review, but only after the outbreak has subsided.

“To claim the WHA’s resolution a vindication of Australia’s call is nothing but a joke,” the ambassador said.

After passing the 1.5 million confirmed case threshold yesterday, globally, there have now been more than 4.8 million confirmed cases of COVID-19 and more than 318,500 people have died, according to Johns Hopkins University. Nearly 1.8 million people have recovered.

Some of the latest local updates include Russia, which reported 9,263 new cases and 115 new deaths on Tuesday morning, bringing its case total to 299,941 and 2,837 deaths. In Germany, where the gradual economic reopening has continued unabated, public health officials reported just 513 news cases, bringing Germany’s total to 175,210 cases, while reporting another 72 deaths, bringing the total to 8,007 deaths. Last night, Brazil passed the UK to become the country with the third-largest outbreak in the world after reporting another ~13k cases.

Additionally, India passed the 100k official-case threshold just days after extending its extremely stringent lockdown for another 2 weeks. Health officials reported 4,970 new cases, bringing India’s total to 101,139 cases and 132 deaths, bringing the death toll to 3,163. While India has overtaken China on the ‘official’ numbers, it’s widely believed the outbreak in the mainland was much worse than the official numbers reflect, and more than 40 new cases have been reported in Wuhan and the northeastern Jilin province over the past couple of weeks, resulting in intense new shutdown measures.

As western European states continue to loosen their travel restrictions, Spain has lifted a ban on all direct flights and ships from Italy, though travelers from Italy will have to comply with a two-week quarantine like other foreign visitors until Spain’s state of emergency is officially lifted.

Over in the US, CNN has apparently decided to focus on the plight of the Navajo Nation out west, claiming in a piece published last night that the Native American community is now home to the biggest outbreak in the country (a designation CNN once used to describe a meatpacking plant in South Dakota).

The Navajo Nation reported 69 new coronavirus cases and two additional deaths on Monday, according to a news release from the Navajo Nation president and vice president, which brought the nation’s case total to 4,071, along with 142 deaths, out of a population of roughly 200k. Of course, the rate of ~2,035 infections per 100k would put the nation’s infection rate well above that of most US states. But we suspect this isn’t really an apples-to-apples comparison.

Moving on to the big news in Washington DC on Tuesday: Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Fed Chairman Jerome Powell will testify before the Senate on the coronavirus response: Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell will testify starting at 10amET before the Senate Banking Committee, where they will deliver “The Quarterly CARES Act Report to Congress” – testimony that’s mandated as per the $2.2 trillion stimulus bill.

Meanwhile, Ivanka Trump will meet with industry leaders, including Apple CEO Tim Cook, Lockheed Martin CEO Marilyn Hewson and IBM executive Ginni Rometty, via Zoom on Tuesday.

As the outbreak in his country rages out of control, Russian PM Mikhail Mishustin has returned to his post after taking nearly 3 weeks off to recover from the virus, during which time the outbreak in his country has careened out of control.

We haven’t heard much from Singapore in a few days as the city-state’s strict new lockdown and testing campaigns appeared to finally cut down on the number of migrant workers falling ill from the virus. Singapore reported just 451 (higher than Monday’s lower but well below the city-state’s peak) new coronavirus cases on Tuesday, as the dissipation of this second wave of migrant worker infections faded. However, Singapore’s government has issued a warning about the increased risk of patients catching dengue fever due to the lockdown, the latest indication of how the shutdown in non-emergency health services could lead to ancillary health crises around the world.

Singapore also apologized to 357 COVID-19 patients who received an erroneous text message saying they had again tested positive for the virus, when they hadn’t. Singapore’s leadership also announced on Tuesday plans to begin a 3-stage reopening on June 2.

In Jerusalem, the Al-Aqsa Mosque will reopen to worshippers after the Eid holiday, according to a statement from its governing body.

“The council decided to lift the suspension on worshippers entering the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque after the Eid al-Fitr holiday,” according to a statement from the Waqf organisation said.

Finally, in Hong Kong, Chief Executive Carrie Lam said Tuesday that social distancing measures prohibiting gatherings of more than eight people would be extended in a transparent attempt to quash resurgent anti-Beijing protests, which have reemerged as the coronavirus outbreak in the autonomous region have subsided.

Walmart reported blowout Q1 results, boosted not only by record high pickup and delivery as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, but also a 74% increase in online sales, as US consumers scrambled to stockpile products during the pandemic lockdown.

Walmart reported EPS of $1.18, beating expectations of $1.12, on Revenue of $134.622BN, also well above the $132.79BN expected, even as the company withdrew its full-year guidance due to the “significant uncertainty” surrounding the length and intensity of the coronavirus’s impact.

The retailer reported revenue growth of 8.6% in the quarter, the highest since the financial crisis.

Even though total transactions declined by 5.6%, the surge in the average ticket by 16.5% meant that comp sales rose by a whopping 10.0%, smashing expectations of 8.6% and the highest in almost two decades. It was “as a result of the health crisis and related stay-at-home mandates, customers consolidated store shopping trips with larger average baskets and shifted more purchases to eCommerce.”

As the company details, while February comp sales grew 3.8%, in mid-March, stock-up trips surged with March comp sales increased 15.4%. Store sales slowed during the first half of April but reaccelerated mid-month as customers spent government stimulus money resulting in a 9.5% April comp sales increase.

E-commerce sales were strong growing 74% and contributed approximately 390 basis points to segment comp sales growth.  The company also reported that “food and consumables sales were strong and grocery pickup and delivery reached all-time high sales volumes” and store pickup and delivery, ship to home, ship from store, and marketplace channels were strong throughout the quarter.

Sam’s Club Q1 US comparable sales ex-gas were also impressive, rising +12%, and smashing the estimate of +7.8%. According to a breakdown of the key performance highlights, in addition to the record stockpiling of paper ” Broad-based strength, including paper goods, laundry & home care and health & beauty”, the company saw a surge in spam sales as “canned protein, pasta and coffee/breakfast performed well.”

Some other observations from the report, via Bloomberg:

• Walmart will shutter the Jet.com online business, which it acquired four years ago, an unsurprising move as Walmart has been integrating Jet into its broader web unit over the past year.
• While Walmart’s sales are up, there’s concern that everyday items like food and toilet paper are less profitable than merchandise like clothing. Fulfillment costs also erode the profitability of online orders. Walmart said gross profit margins narrowed due to a shift to lower-margin categories and web sales along with markdowns and other investments to lower prices. But the e-commerce business lost less money than it did in the year-ago quarter.
• The “significant uncertainty” surrounding the length and intensity of the coronavirus’s impact prompted the retailer to withdraw its full-year guidance, given just three months ago. Still, Walmart said its “business fundamentals are strong.” Walmart incurred about $1.1 billion in additional expenses related to the coronavirus — from worker bonuses to additional cleaning and purchases of protective gear — according to Jefferies analyst Christopher Mandeville.
• The safety of Walmart’s massive U.S. workforce is also under scrutiny amid reports that some employees have died from Covid-19. Walmart started requiring all store employees wear masks in late April after earlier measures included social-distancing, plexiglass “sneeze guards” and limits on the number of customers allowed in the store at one time. The company’s executives will share more details on their response to the pandemic on a call with analysts this morning.

The CFO said that “The decision to withdraw guidance reflects significant uncertainty around several key external variables and their potential impact on our business and the global economy, including: the duration and intensity of the COVID-19 health crisis globally, the length and impact of stay-at-home orders, the scale and duration of economic stimulus, employment trends and consumer confidence.”

Finally, the company said it generated a whopping $5.3BN in free cash flow in the quarter, with operating cash flow doubling to $7BN compared to year ago, and while dividends were unchanged from a year ago, stock buybacks tumbled by 66%

On net, however, the quarter blew out expectations as can be seen in the stock price, which jumped over 3% from Monday’s close and is set to surpass the all-time high price set on April 16 of $132.33.

 

Submitted by Eleanor Creagh, Australian Market Strategist at Saxo Bank

Summary: Optimism returned to the market with US stocks soaring overnight as Powell pledged unwavering support and unlimited ammo for risk assets and Moderna’s vaccine proved promising. However the canary in the coalmine, is the deteriorating rhetoric between the US and China and this week will be all about geopolitics and whether the unstable relationship between the US and China is enough to topple the hope trade.

The shine of the overnight moves is fading in Asia trade, with regional bourses falling from session highs, US futures trading in the red, as geopolitical concerns have come to the fore, and vaccine optimism is tempered via the small sample size (45 patients).

It is not just tensions between the US and China on the rise, but Australia once again caught between superpowers is bearing the brunt of escalating tensions with China. China has moved ahead with the threatened tariffs on Australian barley imports and will impose an anti-dumping duty of 73.6% and an anti-subsidy duty of 6.9% on the commodity as diplomatic tensions between the two nations rise. A move that will no doubt incite ongoing tensions between Australia and China, as Australia, along with 62 other countries, moves in support of an independent investigation into the COVID-19 origins. China is Australia’s largest barley export market and the tariffs will impose significant pressure on Australian growers. However, the threats do not stop there and China’s embassy in Canberra has warned of a consumer boycott on Australian goods and produce, causing serious concern to dairy and wine producers fearing they could be the next targets in China’s economic coercion. The warning also eluded to a potential bypassing of Australia as a destination for both tourism and education, both tourism and education are major service export industries in Australia. A threat that holds serious repercussions for the Australian economy, as China remains the number one purchaser of both Australian goods and services exports. While de-risking via diversification of Australian exporters into other markets like India and the rest of South East Asia would support long-term goals, reduced Chinese demand for Australian goods and services poses a near term risk for the Australian economy. However the AUD struggled to bat an eyelid amidst the strong risk on sentiment, remaining driven by hopes of a sharp recovery in economic activity and tightly correlated with S&P 500 futures.

The US and China have long continued the slow-burn disentanglement and there is no going back to the pre-trade war relationship, but tensions are flaring as the COVID-19 blame game continues.

As hostilities mount it appears sentiment toward China is souring in the US, according to Pew research a record 66% of US adults held China in an unfavourable light, a survey high dating as far back as 2005. Another survey from a Washington based consultancy also confirms the shifting sentiment, reporting 40% of respondents said they won’t buy products from China. This potentially marks a new paradigm in the hostilities as the administration in Washington stoke nationalist sentiment across the broad population, fuelling a further breakdown in bilateral relations.

Although the sample size is small, the findings are cause for concern as the upcoming elections in the US may provide increased impetus to elevate geopolitical frictions if they play to US voter support (which will remain a rolling calculus). This would increase the risk of mounting hostilities and fresh tariffs on Chinese imports. On that basis USDCNY bears watching closely as a barometer of China’s intent, with depreciation potentially being a catalyst for renewed risk-off sentiment.

Meanwhile Washington’s rhetoric and actions towards China are becoming increasingly hostile as the COVID-19 pandemic fuels underlying frictions between the two superpowers.

Last week, the Commerce Department decree preventing any chipmaker using American equipment from supplying Huawei without US government approval incited the conflict between the US and China, with Huawei threatening retaliation. The end game of forcing supply chains out of China continues to be dangled with reports surfacing that the US is considering tax breaks for companies to incentive relocating supply chains from China.

In today’s trade, the news that the Nasdaq will be tightening up their IPO rules, a move that will make it harder for Chinese stocks to list, pulled US futures lower. A warning of tightening capital flows between the two nations as well as the lack of accounting transparency that has mired some previous Chinese listings. A letter from President Trump, published on twitter stipulating “the only way forward for the WHO is if it can demonstrate independence from China”, also served as reminder that the pandemic is fuelling tensions.

As it turns out, two “scoops” reported by Axios’ reporter Jonathan Swan over the last few days about President Trump’s intensifying animosity toward the WHO turned out to be correct. Though, given the escalating rhetorical clash between China and the US, it’s really not all that surprising to learn that President Trump’s weekend remarks were a mere momentary lapse – and that the White House is cranking up the pressure on the China-centric NGO as the “blame game” between China and the US continues to escalate.

In a tweet sent late last night, President Trump shared a letter the US had sent to the WHO warning the organization that the US could permanently withdraw funding and cancel its membership if the WHO didn’t meet its demands.

“It is clear the repeated missteps by you and your organization in responding to the pandemic have been extremely costly for the world. The only way forward for the World Health Organization is if it can actually demonstrate independence from China.”

“My administration has already started discussions with you on how to reform the organization. But action is needed quickly. We do not have time to waste.”

Trump’s political opponents have decried Trump’s aggressive criticisms of the WHO, and accused him of trying to slough off blame for his “poor” handling of the outbreak on China and the WHO. But these same opponents appear unable or unwilling to understand that the WHO issued a glowing report praising China’s handling of the outbreak in the early days, and – even more irresponsibly – stood by China when its scientists declared that there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission, even as the numbers in Wuhan had started to balloon.

This is the letter sent to Dr. Tedros of the World Health Organization. It is self-explanatory! pic.twitter.com/pF2kzPUpDv

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 19, 2020

Trump listed several specific examples of how the WHO failed in its duty to stop the outbreak from spreading:

• On January 14, 2020, the World Health Organization gratuitously reaffirmed China’s now-debunked claim that the coronavirus could not be transmitted between humans, stating: “Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCov) identified in Wuhan, China.” This assertion was in direct conflict with censored reports from Wuhan.
• On January 21, 2020, President Xi Jinping of China reportedly pressured you not to declare the corona virus outbreak an emergency. You gave in to this pressure the next day and told the world that the coronavirus did not pose a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. Just over one week later, on January 30, 2020, overwhelming evidence to the contrary forced you to reverse course.
• On January 28, 2020, after meeting with President Xi in Beijing, you praised the Chinese government for its “transparency” with respect to the coronavirus, announcing that China had set a “new standard for outbreak control” and “bought the world time.” You did not mention that China had, by then, silenced or punished several doctors for speaking out about the virus and restricted Chinese institutions from publishing information about it.

And here are a few other topics that the letter touches on:

Travel ban double-standard

The letter points out that Tedros “strongly praised China’s strict domestic travel restrictions, but were inexplicably against my closing of the United States border, or the ban, with respect to people coming from China. I put the ban in place regardless of your wishes,” stating that the WHO director’s “political gamesmanship on this issue was deadly, as other governments, relying on your comments, delayed imposing life-saving restrictions on travel to and from China.”

Taiwan

Shortly after Beijing made its initial report to the WHO (via the WHO’s office in Beijing) just before New Year’s, Taiwan followed up by reporting evidence of human-to-human transmission, which Beijing has continued to deny. These warnings were promptly ignored for political reasons. If the world had known the truth just a couple of weeks earlier (when the WHO should have known) action could have been taken to more swiftly shut down travel from China, as vacationers preparing for the Chinese New Year helped spread the virus around the globe.

Trump gets personal

Bringing it home, Trump slams Tedros as incompetent – writing that “Just a few years ago, under the direction of a different Director-General, the World Health Organization showed the world how much it has to offer. In 2003, in response to the outbreak of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in China, Director General Harlem Brundtland boldly declared the World Health Organization’s first emergency travel advisory in 55 years, recommending against travel to and from the disease epicenter in southern China.

“Many lives could have been saved had you followed Dr. Brundtland’s example,” said Trump.

In closing, Trump gave the WHO 30 days to commit to “substantive improvements” or he will make the temporary freeze of US funding to the organization permanent, as well as “reconsider our membership in the organization.”

* * *

Meanwhile, the WHO’s obsequiousness toward China remains a puzzling mystery for many. With the US providing 4x more funding for the organization than China, Dr. Tedros’ apparent fealty to Beijing – despite the fact that President Xi’s government deliberately lied to the WHO multiple times, the director-general still felt it appropriate to invite him to deliver the keynote at the organization’s annual meeting.

Not only has the Trump administration threatened to withdraw from the WHO, it has also opposed a resolution to set aside patent laws to allow impoverished countries to produce their own vaccines and drug companies.

Beijing rebutted Trump’s letter TUesday morning as a spokesman for China’s Foreign Ministry slammed the move as “futile” and called on the US to stop the “blame game” over who is responsible for the outbreak.

China urged “a few US politicians to stop the blame game” when asked about the letter US President Donald Trump sent to the World Health Organization on Monday.”

“The US letter is full of vagueness, it tries to mislead the public to smear China and shift the blame away from its own incompetent response, currently Covid-19 is still spreading in the US, the most pressing task is solidarity and cooperation to save lives. We urge a few US politicians to stop the blame game and together defeat the virus,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian told reporters Tuesday.”

We suspect Dr. Tedros doesn’t see it that way.

Tedros reading this pic.twitter.com/FizdiCbhQ0

— Quoth the Raven (@QTRResearch) May 19, 2020

Read the entire letter below:

The World Health Organization consistently ignored credible reports of the virus spreading in Wuhan in early December 2019 or even earlier, including reports from the Lancet medical journal. The World Health Organization failed to independently investigate credible reports that conflicted directly with the Chinese government’s official accounts, even those that came from sources within Wuhan itself.

By no later than December 30, 2019, the World Health Organization office in Beijing knew that there was a “major public health” concern in Wuhan. Between December 26 and December 30, China’s media highlighted evidence of a new virus emerging from Wuhan, based on patient data sent to multiple Chinese genomics companies. Additionally, during this period, Dr. Zhang Jixian, a doctor from Hubei Provincial Hospital of Integrated Chinese and Western Medicine, told China’s health authorities that a new coronavirus was causing a novel disease that was, at the time, afflicting approximately 180 patients.

By the next day, Taiwanese authorities had communicated information to the World Health Organization indicating human-to-human transmission of a new virus. Yet the World Health Organization chose not to share any of this critical information with the rest of the world, probably for political reasons.

The International Health Regulations require countries to report the risk of a health emergency within 24 hours. But China did not inform the World Health Organization of Wuhan’s several cases of pneumonia, of unknown origin, until December 31, 2019, even though it likely had knowledge of these cases days or weeks earlier.

According to Dr. Zhang Yongzhen of the Shanghai Public Health Clinic Center, he told Chinese authorities on January 5, 2020, that he had sequenced the genome of the virus. There was no publication of this information until six days later, on January 11, 2020, when Dr. Zhang self-posted it online. The next day, Chinese authorities closed his lab for “rectification.” As even the World Health Organization acknowledged, Dr. Zhang’s posting was a great act of “transparency.” But the World Health Organization has been conspicuously silent both with respect to the closure of Dr. Zhang’s lab and his assertion that he had notified Chinese authorities of his breakthrough six days earlier.

The World Health Organization has repeatedly made claims about the coronavirus that were either grossly inaccurate or misleading.

On January 14, 2020, the World Health Organization gratuitously reaffirmed China’s now-debunked claim that the coronavirus could not be transmitted between humans, stating: “Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCov) identified in Wuhan, China.” This assertion was in direct conflict with censored reports from Wuhan.


On January 21, 2020, President Xi Jinping of China reportedly pressured you not to declare the corona virus outbreak an emergency. You gave in to this pressure the next day and told the world that the coronavirus did not pose a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. Just over one week later, on January 30, 2020, overwhelming evidence to the contrary forced you to reverse course.

On January 28, 2020, after meeting with President Xi in Beijing, you praised the Chinese government for its “transparency” with respect to the coronavirus, announcing that China had set a “new standard for outbreak control” and “bought the world time.” You did not mention that China had, by then, silenced or punished several doctors for speaking out about the virus and restricted Chinese
institutions from publishing information about it.

• Even after you belatedly declared the outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on January 30, 2020, you failed to press China for the timely admittance of a World Health Organization team of international medical experts. As a result, this critical team did not arrive in China until two weeks later, on February 16, 2020. And even then, the team was not allowed to visit Wuhan until the final days of their visit. Remarkably, the World Health Organization was silent when China denied the two American members of the team access to Wuhan entirely.

• You also strongly praised China’s strict domestic travel restrictions, but were inexplicably against my closing of the United States border, or the ban, with respect to people coming from China. I put the ban in place regardless of your wishes. Your political gamesmanship on this issue was deadly, as other governments, relying on your comments, delayed imposing life-saving restrictions on travel to and from China. Incredibly, on February 3, 2020, you reinforced your position, opining that because China was doing such a great job protecting the world from the virus, travel restrictions were “causing more harm than good.” Yet by then the world knew that, before locking down Wuhan, Chinese authorities had allowed more than five million people to leave the city and that many of these people were bound for international destinations all over the world.

• As of February 3, 2020, China was strongly pressuring countries to lift or forestall travel restrictions. This pressure campaign was bolstered by your incorrect statements on that day telling the world that the spread of the virus outside of China was “minimal and slow” and that “the chances of getting this going to anywhere outside China [were] very low.”

• On March 3, 2020, the World Health Organization cited official Chinese data to downplay the very serious risk of asymptomatic spread, telling the world that “COVID-19 does not transmit as efficiently as influenza” and that unlike influenza this disease was not primarily driven by “people who are infected but not yet sick.” China’s evidence, the World Health Organization told the world, “showed that only one percent of reported cases do not have symptoms, and most of those cases develop symptoms within two days.” Many experts, however, citing data from Japan, South Korea, and elsewhere, vigorously questioned these assertions. It is now clear that China’s assertions, repeated to the world by the World Health Organization, were wildly inaccurate.

• By the time you finally declared the virus a pandemic on March 11, 2020, it had killed more than 4,000 people and infected more than 100,000 people in at least 114 countries around the world.

• On April 11 , 2020, several African Ambassadors wrote to the Chinese Foreign Ministry about the discriminatory treatment of Africans related to the pandemic in Guangzhou and other cities in China. You were aware that Chinese authorities were carrying out a campaign of forced quarantines, evictions, and refusal of services against the nationals of these countries. You have not commented on China’s racially discriminatory actions. You have, however, baselessly labeled as racist Taiwan’s well-founded complaints about your mishandling of this pandemic.

• Throughout this crisis, the World Health Organization has been curiously insistent on praising China for its alleged “transparency.” You have consistently joined in these tributes, notwithstanding that China has been anything but transparent. In early January, for example, China ordered samples of the virus to be destroyed, depriving the world of critical information. Even now, China continues to undermine the International Health Regulations by refusing to share accurate and timely data, viral samples and isolates, and by withholding vital information about the virus and its origins. And, to this day, China continues to deny international access to their scientists and relevant facilities, all while casting blame widely and recklessly and censoring its own experts.

• The World Health Organization has failed to publicly call on China to allow for an independent investigation into the origins of the virus, despite the recent endorsement for doing so by its own Emergency Committee. The World Health Organization’s failure to
do so has prompted World Health Organization member states to adopt the “COYID-19 Response” Resolution at this year’s World Health Assembly, which echoes the call by the United States and so many others for an impartial, independent, and comprehensive review of how the World Health Organization handled the crisis. The resolution also calls for an investigation into the origins of the virus, which is necessary for the world to understand how best to counter the disease.

Perhaps worse than all these failings is that we know that the World Health Organization could have done so much better. Just a few years ago, under the direction of a different Director-General, the World Health Organization showed the world how much it has to offer. In 2003, in response to the outbreak of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in China, Director General Harlem Brundtland boldly declared the World Health Organization’s first emergency travel advisory in 55 years, recommending against travel to and from the disease epicenter in southern China. She also did not hesitate to criticize China for endangering global health by attempting to cover up the outbreak through its usual play book of arresting whistleblowers and censoring media. Many lives could have been saved had you followed Dr. Brundtland’s example.

It is clear the repeated missteps by you and your organization in responding to the pandemic have been extremely costly for the world. The only way forward for the World Health Organization is if it can actually demonstrate independence from China. My Administration has already started discussions with you on how to reform the organization. But action is needed quickly. We do not have time to waste. That is why it is my duty, as President of the United States, to inform you that, if the World Health Organization does not commit to major substantive improvements within the next 30 days, I will make my temporary freeze of United States funding to the World Health Organization permanent and reconsider our membership in the organization. I cannot allow American taxpayer dollars to continue to finance an organization that, in its present state, is so clearly not serving America’s interests.

Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

A police force in the UK faced humiliation after trying to enlist the public’s help in a manhunt for a trucker who committed the dastardly crime of kissing a woman on the cheek.

“We are appealing for help to identify a man who kissed a woman on the cheek to thank her for helping when his lorry became stuck under a low bridge,” said the tweet from Derbyshire Police, asking potential witnesses if they were in the location when the incident occurred.

Within hours, the tweet was deleted however, with the force explaining, “The post drew a significant number of comments that were counterproductive to the nature of the appeal.”

Respondents had bombarded the tweet threat with jokes and assertions that kissing someone on the cheek wasn’t a crime.

“Giving someone a kiss on the cheek isn’t a crime nor is it sexual assault,” said one.

This was a real tweet from a British police force. pic.twitter.com/2hsu6W1nYf

— Raheem Kassam (@RaheemKassam) May 17, 2020

However, the force asserted that the incident was a crime under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and that the female ‘victim’, a woman in her 70’s, was “very distressed, especially at a time when close contact with strangers is to be avoided.”

Despite removing the tweet, police are still inviting members of the public to get in touch if they can help find the dangerous assailant.

It’s a shame similar enthusiasm wasn’t shown by other police forces throughout the UK during the innumerable grooming scandals involving Muslim men and underage girls, some of which were deliberately covered up by authorities for years.

This isn’t the first time Derbyshire Police have been criticized for their draconian approach to law enforcement.

They previously faced heat for bragging about using a surveillance drone to identify and publicly shame dog walkers in remote countryside during the early days of the lockdown.

Derbyshire Police were also ridiculed after they dyed a blue lagoon black in order to deter people from gathering there.

*  *  *

My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me. Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

As the COVID-19 pandemic rages on, the media continues to rattle off statistics at full force.

However, as Visual Capitalist’s Jenna Ross notes, without a frame of reference, numbers such as the death toll can be difficult to interpret. Mortalities attributed to the virus, for example, are often measured in the thousands of people per day globally—but is this number a little or a lot, relative to typical causes of death?

Today’s graphic uses data from Our World in Data to provide context with the total number of worldwide daily deaths. It also outlines how many people who die each day from specific causes.

Worldwide Deaths by Cause

Nearly 150,000 people die per day worldwide, based on the latest comprehensive research published in 2017. Which diseases are the most deadly, and how many lives do they take per day?

Here’s how many people die each day on average, sorted by cause:

Cardiovascular diseases, or diseases of the heart and blood vessels, are the leading cause of death. However, their prominence is not reflected in our perceptions of death nor in the media.

While the death toll for HIV/AIDS peaked in 2004, it still affects many people today. The disease causes over 2,600 daily deaths on average.

Interestingly, terrorism and natural disasters cause very few deaths in relation to other causes. That said, these numbers can vary from day to day—and year to year—depending on the severity of each individual instance.

Total Daily Deaths by Country

On a national level, these statistics vary further. Below are the total deaths from all causes for selected countries, based on 2017 data.

China and India both see more than 25,000 total deaths per day, due to their large populations.

However, with 34.7 daily deaths per million people each day, Russia has the highest deaths proportional to population out of any of these countries.

Keeping Perspective

While these numbers help provide some context for the global scale of COVID-19 deaths, they do not offer a direct comparison.

The fact is that many of the aforementioned death rates are based on much larger and consistent sample sizes of data. On the flipside, since WHO declared COVID-19 a pandemic on March 11, 2020, daily confirmed deaths have fallen in a wide range between 272 and 10,520 per day—and there is no telling what could happen in the future.

On top of this variance, data on confirmed COVID-19 deaths has other quirks. For example, testing rates for the virus may vary between jurisdictions, and there have also been disagreements between authorities on how deaths should even be tallied in the first place. This makes getting an accurate picture surprisingly complicated.

While it’s impossible to know the true death toll of COVID-19, it is clear that in some countries daily deaths have reached rates 50% or higher than the historical average for periods of time:

Time, and further analysis, will be required to determine a more accurate COVID-19 death count.

Authored by Mike Whitney via The Unz Review,

In a pandemic, there is no substitute for immunity, because immunity provides the best protection against reinfection. That’s why Sweden set its sights on immunity from the very beginning. They crafted a policy that was designed to protect the old and vulnerable, prevent the public health system from being overwhelmed, and, most important, allow younger, low-risk people to interact freely so they’d contract the virus and develop the antibodies they’d need to fight future infections. That was the plan and it worked like a charm. Now Sweden is just weeks away from achieving herd immunity (which means that future outbreaks will not be nearly as severe) while the lockdown nations– that are just now easing restrictions– face an excruciating uphill slog that may or may not succeed. Bottom line: Sweden analyzed the problem, figured out what to do, and did it. That’s why they are closing in on the finish line while most of the lockdown states are still stuck at Square 1.

As of this writing, none of the other nations have identified immunity as their primary objective which is why their orientation has been wrong from the get-go. You cannot achieve a goal that you have not identified. The current US strategy focuses on stringent containment procedures (shelter-in-place, self-isolation) most of which have little historical or scientific basis. The truth is, the Trump administration responded precipitously when the number of Covid-positive cases began to increase exponentially in the US. That paved the way for a lockdown policy that’s more the result of groupthink and flawed computer models than data-based analysis and nimble strategic planning. And the results speak for themselves. The 8-week lockdown is probably the biggest policy disaster in US history. Millions of jobs have been lost, thousands of small and mid-sized businesses will now face bankruptcy, and the future prospects for an entire generation of young people have been obliterated. The administration could have detonated multiple nuclear bombs in the country and done less damage than they have with their lunatic lockdown policy.

At present, 24 states have begun the process of reopening their economies. There is no uniform criteria for lifting restrictions, no standardized approach to opening one sector over the other, and no plan for dealing with the inevitable surge of new cases and deaths. It all looks like another disaster in the making but we’ll reserve judgement until the results are in. What we know for certain is that no one in the Trump administration gave the slightest thought to the problems that might arise from eventually lifting the restrictions. We know that because we know that there was no “exit strategy”, just make-it-up-on-the-fly and hope for the best.

In contrast, Sweden won’t need an exit strategy because it never shut down its economy or quarantined its people to begin with. So the transition to normal life and stepped-up economic activity is not going to be as difficult. That’s the benefit of strategic planning, it anticipates the problems one might encounter on the path one’s goal. Here’s a clip from an interview with Swedish an infectious disease clinician, Johan Giesecke, , who served as state epidemiologist of Sweden as well as Chief Scientist at the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Giesecke helps explain why the Swedish approach is different. It’s a matter of perception as well as analysis:

“What we are seeing is a rather mild infection spreading around the globe. I think there is relatively little chance of stopping this whatever measures we take. Most people will become infected by this and most people won’t even notice. We have data now from Sweden that between 98 and 99% of the cases have had a very mild infection or didn’t even realize they were infected. So we have the spread of this mild disease around the globe and most of it is happening where we don’t see it because it happens among people who don’t get very sick and , spread it to someone else who doesn’t get very sick… What we looking at (with the official number of cases and deaths) is a thin layer at the top of people who do develop the disease and an even thinner layer of people who go into intensive care and an even thinner layer of people who die. But the real outbreak is happening where we don’t see it.” (“Swedish scientist Johan Giesecke asks Australia how it plans to lift its lockdown without deaths”, you tube…52 second mark to 1:48)

Giesecke’s analysis veers from the conventional view of the virus which explains why the Swedish response has been so different. For example, he says: “I think there is relatively little chance of stopping this whatever measures we take.”

This gets to the root of the Swedish approach. Sweden is not trying to suppress the infection which they see as a force of nature (like a tsunami) that cannot be contained but only mitigated. From the beginning, the Swedish approach has been to “control the spread of the virus”, not to suppress it through containment strategies. There’s a fundamental difference here, and that difference is expressed in the policy.

Second, “We have data now from Sweden that between 98 and 99% of the cases have had a very mild infection or didn’t even realize they were infected.” In other words, this is highly-contagious infection that poses little or no threat to most people. That suggests the economy can be kept open without endangering the lives of low-risk groups. The added benefit of allowing certain businesses to remain open, is that it creates a controlled environment in which the infection can spread rapidly through the healthy population who, in turn, develop the antibodies they need for future outbreaks. This all fits within Sweden’s plan for managing, rather than avoiding, the virus.

Finally, “What we looking at is a thin layer at the top of people who do develop the disease and an even thinner layer of people who go into intensive care and an even thinner layer of people who die.” The vast majority of people who die from Covid are over 65 with multiple underlying conditions. It’s a terrible tragedy that they should die, but destroying the lives and livelihoods of millions of working people in a futile attempt to stop an unstoppable force like Covid, is foolish and unforgivable. The appropriate response is to protect the old and infirm as much as possible, carefully monitor the rise in cases to prevent the public health system from cratering, and keep the economy operating at a lower level. And that’s exactly what Sweden has done.

FAUCI vs. PAUL: Operation “Obfuscate Immunity”

Not surprisingly, the issue of immunity came up during Dr Anthony Fauci’s testimony on Capitol Hill on Tuesday. There was a heated exchange between Fauci and Senator Rand Paul who challenged the infectious disease expert on the misleading information that the WHO has been spreading in the media. Here’s an excerpt from the transcript:

Senator Rand Paul: “Dr. Fauci, Studies show that the recovering COVID-19 patients from the asymptomatic to the very sick are showing significant antibody response. Studies show that SARS and MERS, also coronaviruses, induce immunity for at least 2 to 3 years, and yet the media continues to report that we have no evidence that patients who survive coronavirus have immunity. I think actually the truth is the opposite. We have no evidence that survivors of coronavirus don’t have immunity and a great deal of evidence to suggest that they do….

You’ve stated publicly that you’d bet it at all that survivors of coronavirus have some form of immunity. Can you help set the record straight that the scientific record, as it is being accumulated, is supportive that infection with coronavirus likely leads to some form of immunity, Dr. Fauci?”

Dr. Anthony Fauci: “Thank you for the question, Senator Paul. Yes, you’re correct that I have said that, given what we know about the recovery from viruses such as coronaviruses in general, or even any infectious disease with very few exceptions, that when you have antibody present it very likely indicates a degree of protection.

I think it’s in the semantics of how this is expressed. When you say has it been formally proven by long-term natural history studies, which is the only way that you can prove, one, is it protective, which I said and will repeat, it’s likely that it is, but also what is the degree or titer of antibody that gives you that critical level of protection and what is the durability. As I’ve often said and again repeat, you can make a reasonable assumption that it would be protective, but natural history studies over a period of months to years will then tell you definitively if that’s the case.” (Real Clear Politics)

This is a critical exchange that helps to underscore what an elusive and calculating political character Fauci really is. You will notice that his answer is completely scripted, completely circuitous and carefully avoids any mention of the word “immunity”.

Rand Paul’s question couldn’t be more straightforward: Do Covid survivors have immunity or not? Yes or no?

And, the answer is: “Yes, they do. Covid survivors do have immunity.”

But Fauci doesn’t deliver that answer, after a long-winded rumination, Fauci finally offers the most opaque response he can conjure up, he says, “you can make a reasonable assumption that it would be protective.” In other words, he carefully avoids a definitive answer. But, of course, that’s understandable since the WHO has been spreading false rumors about herd immunity trying to muddy the science since it doesn’t jibe with their pro-vaccine agenda. That’s what this is all about, bashing natural immunity to clear the way for a vaccine. Check out this clip from an article at Business Insider:

“…leaders at the World Health Organization Monday expressed outrage at the idea that some people might have to die in pursuit of a far-fetched virus-fighting strategy called herd immunity.

“This idea that, ‘well, maybe countries who had lax measures and haven’t done anything will all of a sudden magically reach some herd immunity, and so what if we lose a few old people along the way?’ This is a really dangerous, dangerous calculation,” the WHO’s Executive Director of Health Emergencies Mike Ryan said on a call with reporters.

Ryan didn’t mention any specific countries by name, but it was hard not to think about the high death rate in Swedish nursing homes as he mentioned that “in some countries, over half of the cases have occurred in longterm care facilities,” where people haven’t been “properly shielded.”…

“Humans are not herds,” Ryan said. “I think we need to be really careful when we use terms in this way around natural infections in humans, because it can lead to a very brutal arithmetic which does not put people, and life, and suffering at the center of that equation.”

Ryan was audibly troubled by the idea that the world would accept an infection spreading through a population, and even killing some people, to provide a kind of herd protection, especially one which scientists don’t even know exists. He said that’s not a calculus that any “responsible” country should be willing to take.” (“Humans are not Herds”, Business Insider)

As you can see, the Gates Vaccine Gestapo has launched a propaganda campaign aimed at discrediting, obfuscating and ridiculing other methods for achieving immunity that don’t coincide with their grandiose ambitions to use vaccines as an entry-point for enhanced global tracking, surveillance and social control. Is anyone surprised by this?

But the fact remains that–as Paul says, “recovering COVID-19 patients …show significant antibody response (and will likely have) immunity for at least 2 to 3 years.” Here’s more from Sweden’s chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell who made this comment in an interview last week:

“It is quite certain that immunity does exist…. For all the cases we have had in Sweden, there has not been one single person who had this disease twice. And we have a very strict identification system. So there is no way we would miss a person who had it twice. I haven’t heard any reports from any countries where there has been a certified case who has actually had this twice. There’s been rumors about it. But in the end, they have been disclaimed.” (“Key quotes: Sweden’s top epidemiologist challenges conventional wisdom on COVID-19” ijnet)

Repeat: “there has not been one single person who had this disease twice.”

The science is clear, immunity is real and Sweden is on its way to achieving herd immunity within the month.

Sweden’s public health experts have loosened the grip of a vicious pandemic and delivered the Swedish people to a place of safety and security where they can get on with their lives without fear of contracting a lethal infection.

Hurrah for Sweden!

A post-corona world will be filled with many challenges and surprises. All international travelers who dare step onto an airplane and into another country better take a crash course in each countries’ social distancing rules. Why? Well, you could end up in jail if you don’t wear a mask in certain Middle Eastern countries. 

Anyone who is traveling to Kuwait and Qatar in the near term must really pay attention to the new social distancing rules released on Sunday. Each countries’ health authorities made a very strict rule that no mask-wearing will result in a hefty fine and possibly even jail time, reported Reuters.

If caught with no mask in Kuwait, one could face three months in jail and 5,000 dinars ($16,200) fine. In Qatar, the penalty is a bit harsher, one could face up to three years in jail and 200,000 riyals ($55,000) fine. 

Stricter penalties in both countries come amid a recent rise in COVID-19 cases in the region. Kuwait and Qatar have both extended nationwide lockdowns. Qatar tightened restrictions on commercial activities on Monday and closed all shops through the end of May. 

A surge in virus cases prompted the Saudi government to re-impose a 24-hour curfew during the Eid al-Fitr holiday slated for later this month. 

“A total curfew will be imposed in all cities and regions across the Kingdom,” from 23 May until 27 May, the Saudi Ministry of Interior said in a statement last week. 

On a per-capita basis, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and UAE have some of the highest COVID-19 cases in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. 

JPMorgan’s latest data suggests parts of Asia could be experiencing the beginning phases of the second virus wave. This would suggest other regions of the world could follow later this year. 

Countries entering second wave phase 

Country positioning on the pandemic curve 

While some MENA countries are strict on mask-wearing, other countries in Europe, specifically Sweden, have discouraged citizens from wearing masks. Sweden alleges mask-wearing is useless against the virus. 

Not all countries are equal in mask-wearing — if you’re traveling internationally, it would be good to catch up on each countries’ social distancing rules.