Morgan Stanley Unleashes Doom: “Both The Fed, And The Trade War Puts Have Now Expired”

At the end of June we reported a startling finding by Goldman Sachs: while the S&P 500 rose 7% from its trough on June 3 through the end of the month, valuation expansion accounted for 90% of the rally in response to the Fed’s becoming “impatient” and signaling an easing cycle has begun.

What about for the full 2019? The answer comes today courtesy of Morgan Stanley’s bearish equity strategist, Michael Wilson who writes that since 2019 has been a game of deteriorating fundamentals versus a pivoting Fed and hope for a resolution to the US-China trade uncertainties, a whopping 94% of the year to date performance in the S&P 500 has been driven by rising valuations while the other 6 percent is due to rising forward 12 month EPS. Wilson, always the bearer of even worse news, then adds that based on his own EPS forecasts – which are far below those of consensus – “well over 100 percent of the move in the S&P 500 has come from rising valuations.”

This means that any stock market upside in 2019 is entirely due to the Fed’s dovish pivot coming at a time of declining earnings, and makes Trump’s bizarre feud with the Fed even more perplexing: had it not been for Powell, Trump would be nursing the first bear market in a decade right now.

Of course, this being a Morgan Stanley report, there is a punchline, and it’s hardly bullish. In this case, it is that as Wilson writes, “the Fed meeting on July 31st was a sell the news event because it had been so telegraphed, and priced. The fact that the Fed arguably disappointed with only a 25bps cut means they are now behind the curve; until they get in front of it, multiples are unlikely to expand again.”

In short, according to Wilson, “the Fed put expired on July 31st.”

Further elaborating his thoughts, Wilson writes that trade escalation has not been the only thing keeping the market from new highs since August 1st. While he notes that “there seems to be a significant percentage of investors who believe the equity markets would/could have kept making new highs had trade tensions not been re-escalated on August 1st” he disagrees “as we saw bonds rally and stocks sold off immediately after the Fed decision and the rally in the morning of August 1st, before the President’s tweet that announced new tariffs, was being led by defensive sectors and rates were still falling.”

These are bearish, not bullish, internals that were on display even before the tweet on August 1st.

But wait, there’s more.

In his ongoing attempts to read the market’s tea leaves (and find misery and pain), Wilson says that it is “probably more insightful to discuss how markets traded after the administration attempted to de-escalate the trade situation.”

On Tuesday last week, it was announced that half of the tariffs to be imposed on September 1st would be delayed until December. Unsurprisingly, equity markets rallied sharply that day but on fairly light volume and what appeared to be more short covering rather than new committed buyers. Sure enough, the very next day the market gave up all of the previous day’s gains with the major US averages down 3 percent.

This, Morgan Stanley correctly points out, was the first time markets have not responded positively in a sustained manner to what amounted to a de-escalation of the trade situation. And in conjunction with the end of the Fed put, Wilson believes it effectively means the Trade put has also expired.”

So with both of these two puts now allegedly expired, Morgan Stanley thinks investors are now left to face the risks that have been glossed over all year because stocks were rising–namely falling earnings estimates and disappointing economic data. In short, “we think many have been misinterpreting the signals from the market to be a bullish signal for growth when in fact the market has been signaling since April that growth was likely to disappoint.”

The bank’s chief US equity strategist also warns that using the S&P 500 as a barometer for the health of the economy and broad corporate profits growth is inappropriate when global growth is slowing so rapidly and small business profits are seeing even greater pressure.

Specifically, as he notes, “the S&P 500 is the most defensive, highest quality and liquid stock market in the world so if it is outperforming so strongly, it is likely a bad sign for future growth.” Meanwhile, the dramatic underperformance of the small cap Russell 2000 and cyclical sectors all year was a clear indication that things were not improving, nor were they likely to this year.

Which brings us to the real punchline from MS – which as expected was especially gloomy – namely that with the Fed and Trade puts now expired, Wilson warns that “it’s pretty clear that others will now have to acknowledge that the likelihood of a second half recovery has diminished significantly.”

And to confirm that, the bearish strategist writes that perhaps there is no better example of the beginning of this acknowledgement than what Eastman Chemical’s (EMN) CEO had to say after the company reported disappointing earnings late last month:

“Everyone in April and through the beginning of May thought that the economy was going to get better in the back half of the year, trade war was going to sort of settle, certainly not escalate. Now we’re just in a very different world where I don’t think that’s true…There’s not a lot of signs of economic recovery coming in the second half.”

Always happy to take a victory lap on a downtick (just as Marko Kolanovic will only publish reports when the S&P is green), Wilson mocking notes that he “would take exception to the phrase that everyone was thinking this way in April” but overall agrees that this captures the shift in mood between April and July by many companies, especially those levered to economic growth.

Wilson concludes that, without going through an exhaustive list, he has “heard similar commentary from the likes of Cisco (CSCO), Caterpillar (CAT), Macy’s (M) and Advanced Auto Parts (AAP) just in the past week representing a fairly wide range of end markets and customers.” Of course there have been positive earnings reports too, including Walmart (WMT) which put up strong numbers last week and did not note any slowdown. However, Walmart is a discounter and does better in economic slowdowns relative to other retailers.

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

Peter Navarro Says the ‘Data’ Show Americans Aren’t Paying Trump’s Tariffs. In Fact, They Show the Opposite.

After a roller-coaster week on Wall Street raised fears of a recession, top White House economic advisor Peter Navarro was dispatched to Sunday’s political talk shows to calm investors’ jittery nerves.

But all Navarro accomplished was demonstrating—yet again—how little the Trump administration seems to understand a trade war that’s proving to be anything but “good and easy to win.”

In an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper, Navarro claimed that the economy remains “very strong” and dismissed worries about U.S. Treasury bonds’ odd behavior last week. But when pressed by Tapper about the impact that the trade war is having—which includes not just the monetary cost of the tariffs but heightened instability and uncertainty for American businesses—Navarro veered into fantasyland.

“The tariffs are hurting China. China is bearing the entire burden of the tariffs,” Navarro said. “Look at the data. There is no evidence whatsoever that American consumers are paying any of this.”

Perhaps Navarro should look at the data too.

He could start with The Wall Street Journal, which last week reported on a Goldman Sachs analysis of consumer price index data released by the Labor Department. That analysis found that consumer goods affected by tariffs have increased in price by about 3 percent since February 2018, while goods not subject to tariffs have fallen in price by about 1 percent.

If he wanted to dig a little deeper, Navarro could look at the May 2019 paper published by economists at Harvard, the University of Chicago, and the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. That analysis of the trade war found that China was absorbing about 5 percent of the tariffs’ costs while American consumers were getting hit by the other 95 percent.

Or he could dig up a March 2019 paper published by the Centre for Economic Policy Research, a London-based think tank, that found the Trump’s tariffs were draining about $1.4 billion out of the U.S. economy every month. That’s above and beyond the actual direct cost of paying the tariffs.

“We find that the U.S. tariffs were almost completely passed through into U.S. domestic prices, so that the entire incidence of the tariffs fell on domestic consumers and importers,” wrote Mary Amiti, Stephen J. Redding, and David Weinstein, the three researchers who authored the paper.

If he’s still not convinced, Navarro could pick up a more specific case study, like this April 2019 review of the Trump administration’s tariffs on washing machines. In 2018, researchers at the University of Chicago and the Federal Reserve found, those tariffs generated $82 million for the U.S. Treasury—but cost consumers about $1.2 billion.

In fact, the tariffs on imported washing machines ended up increasing the retail price of not just washing machines but dryers too—even though dryers were not subject to the new import taxes imposed by the Trump administration in January 2018. The new tariffs caused a spike in consumer prices for both household appliances after a years-long decline.

The data are pretty clear. Tariffs are taxes on imports that translate into higher prices for American businesses and consumers. Navarro’s claims that Americans aren’t paying for them are economically illiterate nonsense. It would be one thing for the Trump administration to claim—as it has on some occasions—that the tariffs are a necessary burden for Americans to bear in pursuit of better trade deals, or as a means to getting China to change its bad behavior. But simply lying about the basic realities of the trade war serves only to undermine whatever strategy the White House is pursuing.

If Navarro’s not convinced by the data, maybe he would be convinced by…Peter Navarro.

Last week, after announcing that new tariffs on Chinese imports would be postponed until mid-December to avoid soaking American consumers during the holiday shopping season, Navarro said the maneuver was “a Christmas present to the nation.”

But why would that be a Christmas present to Americans if Americans aren’t paying for the tariffs?

It’s remarkable that the Trump administration has been able to ignore economic reality for as long as it has. But it’s now becoming clear—on the stock market, in the polls, and from the White House’s own jumbled messaging—that the economists were right all along: Tariffs are taxes, and Americans are footing the bill.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2YXv5vA
via IFTTT

Trump: Google Should Be “Sued” For Manipulating Election In Favor Of Hillary

President Trump tweeted Monday morning that Google parent Alphabet should be “sued” for artificially inflating the number of Hillary Clinton supporters from 2.6 million to 16 million – though he doesn’t offer much context for the information.

The Tweet took some of the wind out of Alphabet’s sails on a day where markets were broadly recovering.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

Kunstler: The New Normal Is Not Normal

Authored by James Hoawrd Kunstler via Kunstler.com,

There Is No Normal

The wheel of time rolls forward, never retracing its path, but because it is a wheel, and we are riding in it, a persistent illusion persuades us that the landscape is recognizably the same, and that our doings within the regular turning of the seasons seem comfortably normal. There is no normal.

There is for us, at this moment in history, an especially harsh turning (so Strauss and Howe would say) as our journey takes the exit ramp out of the high energy era into the next reality of a long emergency. The human hive-mind senses that something is different, but at the same moment we’re unable to imagine changing all our exquisitely tuned arrangements — especially the thinking class in charge of all that, self-enchanted with pixeled fantasies. The dissonance over this is driving America crazy.

The wheel hit a deep pothole in 2008 turning onto the off-ramp and has been wobbling badly ever since. 2008 was a warning that going through the motions isn’t enough to sustain a sense of purpose, either nationally or for individuals trying to keep their lives together ever more desperately. The cultural memory of the confident years, when we seemed to know what we were doing, and where we were going, dogs us and mocks us.

The young adults feel all that most acutely. The pain prompts them to want to deconstruct that memory. “No, it didn’t happen that way,” they are saying. All those stories about the founding of this society — of those Great Men with their powdered hair-doos writing the national charter, and the remarkable experience of the past 200-odd years — are wrong! There was nothing wonderful about it. The whole thing was a swindle!

They are feeling the wheel’s turning most painfully, since they know they will see many more turnings in the years ahead, and the direction of the wheel is vectoring downward for them. The bottom-line is less of everything, not more. That is a new ethos here in America and it’s hardly comforting: Less income, fewer comforts, more literal hardships, fewer consolations for the universal difficulty of being alive. No wonder they are angry.

It’s this simple. We landed in the New World five hundred years ago. It was full of good things that human beings had barely begun to exploit, laid out like a banquet. There was plenty of good virgin soil for growing food, the best timber in the world, clean rivers and great lakes, ores full of iron, gold, and silver, and down deep a bonanza of coal and oil to drive the wheel through very flush times. The past century was particularly supercharged, the oil years.

Imagine living through the very start of all that, the blinding, fantastic newness of modernity! Look back at the stories and images around Teddy Roosevelt and his times, and the confidence of that era just astonishes you, An emergent cavalcade of wonders: electricity, telephones, railroads, subways, skyscrapers! And in a few more years movies, cars, airplanes, radio. Even the backstage wonders of the day were astonishments: household plumbing for all, running hot water, municipal water and sewer systems, refrigeration, tractors! It’s hard to conceive how much these developments changed the human experience of daily life.

Even the traumas of the 20th century’s world wars did not crush that sense of amazing progress, at least not in North America, spared the wars’ mighty wreckage. The post-war confidence of American society achieved a level of in-your-face laughable hubris — see the USA in your Chevrolet! — until John Kennedy was shot down, and after that the delirious moonshot euphoria steadily gave way to corrosive skepticism, anxiety, acrimony, and enmity. My generation, booming into adulthood, naively thought they could fix all that with Earth Day, tofu, and computers, and keep the great wheel rolling down into an even more glorious cybernetic nirvana.

Fakeout. That’s not where the wheel is going. We borrowed all we possibly could from the future to pretend that the system was still working, and now the future is at the door like a re-po man come to take away both the car and the house. The financial scene is an excellent analog to our collective psychology. Its workings depend on the simple faith that its workings work. So, it is easy to imagine what happens when that faith wavers.

We’re on the verge of a lot of things coming apart: supply lines, revenue streams, international agreements, political assumptions, promises to do this and that. We have no idea how to keep it together on the downside. We don’t even want to think about it. The best we can do for the moment is pretend that the downside doesn’t exist. And meanwhile, fight both for social justice and to make America great again, two seemingly noble ideas, both exercises in futility. The wheel is still turning and the change of season soon upon us. What will you do?

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

Stocks Extend Gains As Trump Urges Fed: Cut Rates 100bps, Restart QE

Despite the “strongest economy in the world,” it appears President Trump is not satisfied.

Our Economy is very strong, despite the horrendous lack of vision by Jay Powell and the Fed, but the Democrats are trying to “will” the Economy to be bad for purposes of the 2020 Election.  Very Selfish! Our dollar is so strong that it is sadly hurting other parts of the world…”

And for the first time, Trump also called for more QE…

The Fed Rate, over a fairly short period of time, should be reduced by at least 100 basis points, with perhaps some quantitative easing as well. If that happened, our Economy would be even better, and the World Economy would be greatly and quickly enhanced-good for everyone!”

The result – adding to equity market gains…

on the 2nd biggest short-squeeze of the year…

Ceratinly piling more pressure on Powell to offer up any number of momentum igniting strawmen at this week’s Jackson Hole speech.

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

‘Highly Unstable Nut Job’ Scaramucci Assembling Team Of Ex-Officials To Trash-Talk Trump

The very short-lived White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci told CNN on Monday that he’s assembling a team of Trump-hating conservatives, including former Cabinet officials, to divide the Republican party and kick President Trump off the GOP ticket in 2020. 

Scaramucci, a registered Republican whose political donations span both sides of the aisle, said “I’m in the process of putting together a team of people that feel the exact same way that I do. This is not a ‘Never Trump’ situation, this is not just screeching rhetoric. This is, ‘OK, the guy’s unstable, everyone inside knows it, everyone outside knows it, let’s see if we can find a viable alternative.” 

“Moreover, I’ve got to get some of these former Cabinet officials in unity to speak up about it,” he added. 

While refusing to name the former officials because “I don’t think it’s fair to those people,” Scaramucci predicted “in middle or late fall there will be a trove of people that will come together in unity to say this is what’s going on. This is how the person’s acting. This is why there’s nobody inside the White House he’s taking any advice from.” 

As CNBC noted on Friday, Scaramucci and Republican never-Trumper Bill Kristol have been discussing alternatives to Trump

Anti-Trump pundit and veteran Republican operative Bill Kristol confirmed to CNBC in a few brief text messages that he has spoken to Scaramucci since the SkyBridge Capital founder had a public falling out with Trump this summer. Asked whether he has spoken to Scaramucci about trying to find another presidential candidate to replace Trump on the top of the GOP ticket next year, Kristol said: “Yup.” –CNBC

The ongoing spat

Tensions between President Trump and his former communications director have been brewing for weeks. In July, Scaramucci called Trump a racist for criticizing “the Squad” of minority progressive Democrat women. Last week, the Skybridge Capital founder panned President Trump’s trip to El Paso to visit shooting victim following a mass shooting. 

Trump hit back over Twitter, tweeting “Anthony Scaramucci, who was quickly terminated (11 days) from a position that he was totally incapable of handling, now seems to do nothing but television as the all time expert on ‘President Trump,'” 

“Like many other so-called television experts, he knows very little about me.”

And while Scaramucci announced his team of disaffected never-Trumpers on CNN, Trump hit him with two Monday morning tweets. 

Anthony Scaramucci is a highly unstable “nut job” who was with other candidates in the primary who got shellacked, & then unfortunately wheedled his way into my campaign,” tweeted Trump, adding “I barely knew him until his 11 days of gross incompetence-made a fool of himself, bad on TV. Abused staff, got fired. Wrote a very nice book about me just recently. Now the book is a lie? Said his wife was driving him crazy, “something big” was happening with her. Getting divorced. He was a mental wreck. We didn’t want him around. Now Fake News puts him on like he was my buddy!”

Let’s see how long Scaramucci’s new shtick works for him. 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/31LO5tY Tyler Durden

The latest sign that absolutely nothing makes sense

In the latest sign that absolutely nothing makes sense anymore, WeWork filed formal regulatory paperwork with the Securities and Exchange Commission last week, officially notifying the world that it will soon be going public.

If you haven’t heard of WeWork (or it’s parent– ‘The We Company’), it’s a real estate company that owns practically zero real estate.

Instead, they lease vast amounts of office space in commercial buildings on long-term contracts, and then sub-lease that space to individual tenants– often small businesses– with short-term contracts.

It’s essentially the same business model as Regus– which provides virtual office services, business addresses, and short-term office space, in pretty much every major city around the world.

Yet Regus is actually profitable. Its parent company, UK-based International Workspace Group, reported a profit of nearly 300 million British pounds (about $350 million USD) for the first six months of 2019. And the company consistently makes money.

WeWork, on the other hand, consistently burns cash and has no expectation of making money “in the foreseeable future” according to its own SEC filing.

In fact, WeWork lost almost $1 billion in the first six months of 2019, putting it on pace to lose even more money than the $1.9 billion it lost in 2018.

WeWork currently has around 10 million square feet of office space, and hopes to grow to 40 million in total.

But Regus already has nearly 60 million square feet of office space worldwide. And it’s still expanding.

So Regus is MUCH larger and turns a healthy profit. WeWork is smaller and loses tons of money.

You’d think that Regus would be a much more valuable company. But no. Regus is valued at less than $5 billion. While WeWork is going public at a valuation of nearly $50 billion– ten times higher.

Much of this excess is due to WeWork’s legendary silver-tongued and messianic co-founder/CEO, Adam Neumann.

Neumann has actually been able to convince people that WeWork is a technology company, as a way to justify its absurdly high valuations.

In addition to extolling their ‘culture of inclusivity’ and ‘energy of an inspired community’, the company’s SEC filing refers to their ‘extensive technology’ more than 120 times.

Of course, there’s never any description of the technology, or what it actually does.

There’s also not a SINGLE line item in WeWork’s financial statements that shows ANY research and development.

For technology companies, this is ALWAYS an important item in their financials.

Google spent $16 BILLION on research & development last year, amounting to roughly 14% of its revenue. Amazon spent $22 billion, 12% of its revenue. Facebook spent $7.8 billion, nearly 20% of its revenue.

And even stodgy old Johnson & Johnson, which doesn’t even pretend to be a tech company, spent more than $10 billion (13.8% of revenue) on research & development in 2018.

WeWork claims to be a tech company, even though all they really have is a reservation system that is slightly less impressive than what Enterprise Rent-a-Car uses.

They keep saying how important technology is to their business (as if technology isn’t important to EVERY business in 2019. Duh.)

But WeWork doesn’t even investment enough money in R&D to register a single footnote in their financial statements.

This proves, beyond all doubt, that it’s just a big, giant farce.

The biggest farce of all, though, is WeWork’s mission to “elevate the world’s consciousness.” That’s straight out of the company’s SEC filing.

Jeez I thought this was supposed to be a real estate company.

This reminds me of when Snapchat went public a few years ago; investors thought Snapchat was a sexting social media app for pedophiles teenagers.

But according to its own SEC filing, Snapchat claimed to be a camera company… which was incredibly bewildering to investors.

WeWork has totally blown Snapchat away on the absurdity scale with this nonsense about consciousness.

What does that even mean?

Business is about focusing capital, energy, and brainpower to achieve specific, tangible outcomes that support a coherent strategy.

You’re supposed to be able to measure those outcomes… otherwise it’s impossible to tell whether or not management is properly executing the plan.

How exactly does one measure ‘global consciousness’? How do you know if your plan to elevate said consciousness is working?

And most importantly, how are you supposed to make money elevating consciousness? Because that doesn’t strike me as an especially profitable venture.

But that’s exactly the point. We’re living in a world now where profits don’t matter.

I mean… there’s more than $10 TRILLION worth of bonds in the world with negative yields. Banks are even loaning money to borrowers at negative interest rates.

And some of the most popular (and expensive) investments in the world lose billions of dollars each year with no end in sight.

You don’t need a PhD in economics to realize that there’s something wrong with this picture.

Source

from Sovereign Man https://ift.tt/2Z1kdg5
via IFTTT

After Allegations Of Druggings And Rape, Epstein-Pal And His Modeling Agencies Come Into Focus

Following the death of Jeffrey Epstein, his seedy network of friends and potential co-conspirators alike have come into the spotlight. 

One associate, considered to be Epstein’s closest pal, is modeling maven Jean-Luc Brunel – who has recently been accused of pimping underage women around the world through his Mc2 and Karin modeling agencies, while former models have accused the 72-year-old of drugging and date-raping girlsaccording to the Daily Beast

How close were Brunel and Epstein?

Brunel was one of the financier’s most frequent male associates. The agent appears more than 15 times on flight logs from Epstein’s private plane, jetting everywhere from Paris to New York, often in the presence of young women. He visited Epstein nearly 70 times in jail, according to visitor logs, and several more times while the financier was on house arrest in Palm Beach. According to one of Epstein’s housemen, Brunel was comfortable enough to whip up his own meals in the financier’s kitchen, and was one of Epstein’s most frequent callers. –Daily Beast

Brunel’s name appeared in a cache of court documents unsealed earlier this month, having called and left a message to let Epstein know that he “just did a good one – 18 years” who reportedly told him “I love Jeffrey.” 

“He has a teacher for you to teach you how to speak Russian,” reads another note from September 2005, which adds “She is 2 X 8 [16] years old not blonde. Lessons are free and you can have 1st today if you call.”

Epstein also extended a $1 million letter of credit to Brunel which was used to invest in Paris-based Elite Models. According to the Beast, “The venture, E Management, was first registered by Epstein’s attorney, who listed its address as 457 Madison Avenue—the same as Epstein’s investment firm, J. Epstein & Co.”

Brunel says the venture fell apart after Elite Models learned of Epstein’s sex-trafficking allegations – with the agent even suing Epstein in 2015 for tarnishing their reputation and causing a “tremendous loss of business.” 

At least two people say Brunel not only knew about the sex trafficking, he was actively participating in it.

Virginia Roberts (now Giuffre)—one of the first alleged victims to speak out against Epstein after he was granted a sweetheart plea deal—claimed in legal filings that Brunel was one of many powerful men she was forced to sleep with in her years as Epstein’s “sex slave.” She also accused Brunel of using his agency to find foreign girls, obtain visas for them, and “farm them out to his friends, including Epstein.”

“A lot of the girls came from poor countries or poor backgrounds, and he lured them in with a promise of making good money,” Giuffre said in a 2015 affidavit. “Jeffrey Epstein has told me that he has slept with over 1,000 of Brunel’s girls, and everything that I have seen confirms this claim.” –Daily Beast

My assumption was that Jean-Luc Brunel got the girls from Eastern Europe (as he procured many young foreign girls for Epstein). They were young and European looking and sounding,” said Guiffre while describing an orgy she says she was forced to participate in on Epstein’s ‘pedo island.’ 

In a 1988 60 Minutes piece, several American models who worked with Brunel spoke of being plied with drugs and taken to parties with older men

“My sense, based upon the allegations, is that Jean-Luc was a predator, his group was a predator, and they used their tools of power and leverage to force sex from women who otherwise might not be willing to engage in it,” one of the reporters from the 60 Minutes piece told the Daily Beast

Former model Thysia Huisman was 18-years-old when she says Brunel sexually assaulted her after giving her a spiked drink.

I recall him lying on top of me, me trying to push him off,” she said in an interview. “I remember trying to move, but not really being able to. Like almost being paralysed. I heard the sound of my blouse – a black blouse – ripping. I had a black skirt, too. I felt him – this is difficult – between my legs. Pushing.”

Huisman said the rest was a blur. She woke the next morning in a kimono that wasn’t hers, with soreness on her inner thighs. “I felt we had had sex,” she said. “I knew. I know.”

She gathered her things and fled while Brunel spoke on the telephone in the living room, she said. Her modelling work never recovered and she embarked on a career in television, always behind the camera.

“I was really ashamed,” she said. Huisman said she began telling her current partner about the incident eight years ago. He confirmed to the Guardian she then told him she was “molested” by someone at her modelling agency, and added more details – including Brunel’s name – over time, explaining the full story about two years ago. –The Guardian

Another former model, Courtney Soerensen, says Brunel molested her when she was 19-years-old, and “sabotaged” her career when she rejected him. 

Courtney Soerensen, Thysia Huisman

“He would get very handsy, start groping me, try to kiss me, try to get me to lay down on the bed just to ‘try it out’” said Soerensen. “He would try to untuck my shirt, wanting to ‘see my abs’. He would grab my breasts and put his hand on my bottom. There was one time where he rubbed himself up against me.

The guy was a vile pig” says former Brunel photographer and scout Clayton Nelson. “The girls who slept with him worked. The girls who didn’t, he would tell bookers: ‘I don’t want her booked for anything’.”

Former MC2 bookkeeper Martina Vasquez has also accused Brunel of similar behavior, claiming that Brunel employed scouts who would recruit teenage models from South America, Europe and the former USSR. “The most desirable of those teens were housed in Epstein’s Upper East Side apartments and loaned out to wealthy clients for up to $100,000 a night, Vasquez alleged. If they refused to be “molested,” she said, they would not be paid. (Brunel has denied these claims and says Vasquez was fired from his agency for embezzling company funds.)” according to the report. 

Bloomberg, meanwhile, reports that MC2 Model Management had a growing list of concerned corporate clients by 2014 after Brunel’s ties to Epstein came to light. 

By 2014, Brunel’s business partner Jeff Fuller was concerned that the relationship with Epstein could be damaging. In a letter reviewed by Bloomberg News, Fuller told Brunel that he was getting a “tremendous amount of worries from our clients” about the ties to Epstein, then went on to list as clients Nordstrom Inc., Macy’s Inc., Saks Fifth Avenue, Neiman Marcus, J.C. Penney Co., Kohl’s Corp., Target Corp., Sears and Belk. –Bloomberg

Brunel has denied all allegations of impropriety.

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

UPS Quietly Using Self-Driving Trucks For Months

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk,

UPS teamed up with TuSimple in May for autonomous delivery of cargo.

Gizmodo reports UPS Has Been Delivering Cargo in Self-Driving Trucks for Months And No One Knew.

UPS announced on Thursday that its venture capital arm has made a minority investment in TuSimple. The announcement also revealed that since May TuSimple autonomous trucks have been hauling UPS loads on a 115-mile route between Phoenix and Tucson.

UPS confirmed to Gizmodo this is the first time UPS has announced it has been using TuSimple autonomous trucks to deliver packages in the state.

Around the same time as the UPS and TuSimple program began, the United States Postal Service and TuSimple publicized a two-week pilot program to deliver mail between Phoenix and Dallas, a 1,000 mile trip.

TuSimple claims it can cut the average cost of shipping in a tractor-trailer by 30 percent. In an announcement about the new partnership, UPS Ventures managing partner, Todd Lewis, said the venture arm “collaborates with startups to explore new technologies and tailor them to help meet our specific needs.”

UPS would not share the terms of the deal with Gizmodo. TuSimple did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

TuSimple puts its own autonomous tech—which relies on nine cameras and two LIDAR sensors—in Navistar vehicles.

TuSimple Video

Zero engagements in a storm.

TuSimple is now hooked up with both UPS and the US Post Office (USPS).

On February 16, I commented Self-Driving Truck Startup “TuSimple” Confident of Commercial Driverless by 2021.

The company’s cameras can see about 1,000 meters, or 3,280 feet ahead, said Chuck Price, TuSimple’s chief product officer. “From a half mile away we can spot emergency vehicles, cars broken down on the side of the road, people walking around,” said Price.

We are confident that we will have our first commercial driverless operation in late 2020 to 2021,” Mr. Price said.

Technology Not the Holdup

For now there are backup drivers. That will change within the next two years.

The main holdup is not technology but federal legislation.

Commercial driverless will be here by the end of 2021 if federal regulation allows, which I expect.

Then, within a few years of federal regulatory approval, most interstate highway truck traffic will be driverless.

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

The “Trade War” Is Over, Trump Just Doesn’t Realize It Yet!

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

On Tuesday, the markets bid higher following a statement from the U.S. Trade Representative’s office that tariffs will commence on September 1st, but that some products will be delayed until December 15th. To wit:

“…some tariffs will take effect on Sept. 1 as planned, ‘certain products are being removed from the tariff list based on health, safety, national security and other factors and will not face additional tariffs of 10 percent. Further, as part of USTR’s public comment and hearing process, it was determined that the tariff should be delayed to December 15 for certain articles.”

The only part the algos heard was “tariffs delayed,” which sent them into stock panic buying mode.

However, stocks crashed again on Wednesday as the yield curve inverted, sending “recession fears”through the markets.

Of course, since President Trump has pegged the success of his Presidency on the rise and fall of the markets, on Wednesday, as “tweets” about a “trade talks continuing” failed to lift the markets, he resorted to more direct measures to manipulate the markets: Via CNBC:

“Trump held the call with J.P. Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, Bank of America’s Brian Moynihan and Citigroup’s Michael Corbat, according to people with knowledge of the situation.”

This, of course, was reminiscent of the call made by Steve Mnuchin, U.S. Treasury Secretary, during the market rout last December. But most importantly, this is about the upcoming election:

“Trump has been reaching out to corporate leaders this week amid his concerns that a slowing U.S. economy could impact his reelection chances, according to a Thursday piece from the Washington Post.”

Hopefully, he will listen to them.

But even if the trade dispute was ended today, the damage is likely already done.

  • Economic growth has weakened globally

  • Corporate profit growth has turned negative.

  • Tax cuts are fully absorbed into the economy

  • Interest rates are signaling there is something “broken”

  • Yield curves are negative as “deflationary” pressures are rising

  • All of which is leading to rising recession risk.

In other words, while investors have hung their portfolios hopes of a “trade deal,” it may well be too little, too late.

Art Of The Deal Versus The Art Of War

This is all assuming Trump can actually succeed in a trade war with China.

Let’s step back to the G-20 meeting between President Trump and President Xi Jinping. As I wrote then:

“There is a tremendous amount of ‘hope’ currently built into the market for a ‘trade war truce’ this weekend. However, as we suggested previously, the most likely outcome was a truce…but no deal.  That is exactly what happened.

While the markets will likely react positively next week to the news that ‘talks will continue,’ the impact of existing tariffs from both the U.S. and China continue to weigh on domestic firms and consumers.

More importantly, while the continued ‘jawboning’ may keep ‘hope alive’ for investors temporarily, these two countries have been ‘talking’ for over a year with little real progress to show for it outside of superficial agreements.

Importantly, we have noted that Trump would eventually ‘cave’ into the pressure from the impact of the ‘trade war’ he started.

Of course, Trump caving to China was evident in the agreement made during the G-20 summit.

By agreeing to continue talks without imposing more tariffs on China, China gained ample running room to continue to adjust for current tariffs to lessen their impact. More importantly, Trump gave up a major bargaining chip – Huawei.

“One of the things I will allow, however, is — a lot of people are surprised we send and we sell to Huawei a tremendous amount of product that goes into a lot of the various things that they make— and I said that that’s OK, that we will keep selling that product.” – President Trump

Oh…so all the spying, technology stealing, etc. doesn’t matter now?

As I stated then, it was only Trump who was surprised. Not by the amount of product sold to Huawei, but rather by the pressure applied by U.S. technology firms to lift the ban. While Trump appeased his corporate campaign donors, he Trump gave up an important “pain point” on China’s economy.

Yes, China agreed to buy more agricultural products from U.S. farmers, which was crucially important as the “rust belt” were big supporters of Trump during the 2016 campaign, but China had no intention of following through. As I wrote on May 24, 2018:

China has a long history of repeatedly reneging on promises it has made to past administrations.

By agreeing to a reduction of the ‘deficit’ in exchange for ‘no tariffs,’ China removed the most important threat to their economy as it will take 18-24 months before the current administration realizes the problem.”

What the current administration fails to realize is that China is not operating from short-term political-cycle driven game plan. Their goal is very different. To wit:

  1. China is playing a very long game. Short-term economic pain can be met with ever-increasing levels of government stimulus. The U.S. has no such mechanism currently, but explains why both Trump and Vice-President Pence have been suggesting the Fed restarts QE and cuts rates by 1%.

  2. The pressure is on the Trump Administration to conclude a “deal,” not on China. Trump needs a deal done before the 2020 election cycle AND he needs the markets and economy to be strong. If the markets and economy weaken because of tariffs, which are a tax on domestic consumers and corporate profits, as they did in 2018, the risk off electoral losses rise. China knows this and are willing to “wait it out” to get a better deal.

  3. China is not going to jeopardize its 50 to 100-year economic growth plan on a current President who will be out of office within the next 5-years at most. It is unlikely as the next President will take the same hard-line approach on China that President Trump has, so agreeing to something that won’t be supported in the future is doubtful.”

A War Trump Can’t Win

While President Trump thought “trade wars would be easy to win,” they aren’t, and the domestic economic pain will likely be more than he bargained for. Such is already evident as corporate profits continue to come under pressure.

“Despite a near 300% increase in the financial markets over the last decade, corporate profits haven’t grown since 2011.”

But, if you think China is going to acquiesce any time soon to Trump’s demands, you haven’t been paying attention. China previously launched a national call in their press to unify support behind China’s refusal to give into Trump’s demands. To wit:

“Lying behind the trade feud is America’s intention to stifle China’s development. The U.S. wants to be a permanent leader in the world, and there is no way for China to avoid the ‘storm’ through compromise.

History proves that compromise only leads to further dilemmas. During previous trade tensions between the U.S. and Japan, Japan made concessions. As a result, its political stability and economic development were adversely affected, with structural reform being suspended and hi-tech companies being severely damaged.

The only way for a country to win a war is through development, not compromise. To achieve development, China will open its door wider to the world and fight to the end.”

These were Xi Jinping’s mandates.

While China agreed to purchase more agricultural products from the U.S., there was nothing committing China to do anything. Since buying agricultural products would have boosted support for Trump, it should be of no surprise that China failed to follow through.

June 19, 2018:

“The U.S.- China confrontation will be a war of attrition: while China has shown a willingness to make a deal on shrinking its trade surplus with the U.S., it has made clear it won’t bow to demands to abandon its industrial policy aimed at dominating the technology of the future.”

China has no intention of giving in.

They are not going to compromise as they know time is growing extremely short for President Trump as the election cycle heats up.

The problem for Trump will be the mounting economic, and corporate, pressure the Administration will face. That pressure is what led to the latest mistake.

Trump’s Latest Mistake

Trump’s latest move to delay tariffs is another critical error with respect to dealing with China. As I wrote last time, Trump may well be following his “Art Of The Deal” tactics, but Xi is clearly operating on the foundation of Sun Tzu’s “The Art Of War.”

“If your enemy is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him. If your opponent is temperamental, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant. If he is taking his ease, give him no rest. If his forces are united, separate them. If sovereign and subject are in accord, put division between them. Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected.

As noted above, China has been attacking the “rust-belt” states, which are crucial to Trump’s 2020 reelection. As noted  by MarketWatch:

“China has lashed back with tariffs on $110 billion in American goods, focusing on agricultural products in a direct and painful shot at Trump supporters in the U.S. farm belt.”

Trump caved to corporate pressures over Huawei at the G-20 summit, and has now caved to pressures from retailers heading into the critical shopping season(The tariffs on electronics, apparel, shoes, and other items are specific goods which will impact consumers the most during the critical holiday shopping season. 

“We’re doing this for the Christmas season. Just in case some of the tariffs would have an impact on U.S. customers.” – President Trump

Not “just in case.” 

As noted above, this was directly is response to his calls with corporate leaders early last week. Those tariffs would have further crushed sentiment and the profits of companies who are dependent on the holiday shopping season for a bulk of their annual revenue. 

From China’s perspective, this is another “nail in the coffin” of Trump’s negotiating strength.

While the U.S. will now expect China to reciprocate by buying U.S. agricultural products in the coming weeks, China has no incentive to do so.

Why does China have to agree to anything, given that Trump is now negotiating with himself to keep his corporate donors happy?

For China, this is a big “win.”

Chinese experts said the sudden postponing of impending tariffs showed that the maximum pressure tactics of the US are losing their bite when it comes to China. These measures are set to greatly reduce the weight of US tariffs, as electronics goods alone account for about $130 billion.

The US has realized that its maximum pressure strategy to force China back to the negotiating table has not worked as expected. Washington knows that only through talks can the two sides reach a deal,’ Wang Jun, chief economist at Zhongyuan Bank, told the Global Times on Tuesday.”

With Trump’s own economy working against him, China doesn’t have to do much, but wait.

Yes, China will gladly have meetings to talk about “trade” as they now know that following each meeting they will walk away with more time.

Time is all they need.

When Trump is out of office, the next administration will abandon the “trade war” as the first order of business.

However, with the “yield curve” plummeting, there is a rising possibility, China may not have to wait that long.

As I wrote last time:

“While Trump is operating from a view that was a ghost-written, former best-seller, in the U.S. popular press, XI is operating from a centuries-old blueprint for victory in battle.”

Trump has already lost the “trade war,” he just doesn’t realize it, yet.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2OZBWA7 Tyler Durden