Illinois Is the Canary In The Pension Coal Mine

Reason.com’s Mike Riggs talks with Illinois Policy Institute’s Adam Schuster about how to fix the state’s pension debt crisis…

Illinois is running out of time to fix its public sector pension problem. A new report from Moody’s Investors Service identified the Prairie State as one of the two most likely to suffer during an economic downturn. Illinois towns and cities are already paring back government services to pay for generous benefits packages for retirees, and Chicago’s pension debt alone is larger than that of 41 states. That arrangement can’t last forever.

“The worst-case scenario is there’s another national recession, which would cause our pension funds to lose a bunch of their assets again,” says Adam Schuster of the Illinois Policy Institute.

“As the assets shrink, the pension funds go into a financial death spiral. We might end up with some kind of Puerto Rico–style pseudo-bankruptcy or federal bailout. Everybody in the nation is now on the hook for Illinois politicians’ irresponsible decisions.”

The best-case scenario would involve repealing an automatic 3 percent raise that pensioners receive each year of their retirement and requiring workers to pay more into their own plans. Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker would prefer to scrap Illinois’ flat income tax and replace it with a progressive tax scheme, which could cause even more people to flee the state. In May, Schuster spoke to Reason‘s Mike Riggs about the pension conundrum.

Q: If somebody had been paying attention 30 years ago, could they have anticipated this pension problem? 

A: Thirty years ago would be just about enough time to stop some of the mistakes. We changed the state constitution in 1970 to add a pension protection provision, which essentially says that as of the day of hire, an employee’s benefit formula cannot be changed in any way. So it doesn’t only protect benefits that somebody has already earned. It protects the future growth rate of those benefits for life and gives the state legislature no flexibility to change them.

Q: What happened next?

A: In 1990, Illinois implemented a guaranteed 3 percent compounding cost of living adjustment. So a person’s pension goes up by 3 percent every year regardless of how much inflation there is in the economy. It basically doubles the size of somebody’s pension over the course of 25 years.

We also had a series of governors, both Republican and Democratic, who habitually shorted the system by putting in less than the required contribution. The reason they did that is that the required contributions were unaffordable and never would have been affordable because we overpromised the benefits.

Q: Do Illinois taxpayers know what’s going on? 

A: I think there is pretty widespread knowledge about the problem, but there’s also a defeatist apathy. We’ve had five straight years of population loss. We’re losing our prime working-age adults, and poll results say that the No. 1 reason they’re leaving is that the taxes are too high here. And the No. 2 reason they’re leaving is job opportunities are better elsewhere, which is related to No. 1.

Q: What do public sector union leaders say about the pension crisis? How about union members?

A: I appreciate that you make that distinction, because I’ve found there is a huge disparity in how they react to this kind of thing. Union leaders, who are involved in politics and lobbying, are against having this conversation at all. But when I talk to regular rank-and-file union members, they actually think the plan we put forward is a very fair and very reasonable compromise.

Q: What is the short version of your plan?

A: It would amend our constitution so that instead of protecting the future growth rate, it would only protect the pension benefit that somebody has earned to date. So if you retired today, your annuity would be protected, but it would give the legislature flexibility to change retirement ages for younger workers and to change that 3 percent cost of living adjustment, for example.

Q: What happens if Illinois does nothing?

A: I don’t know if you followed at all the story of Harvey, Illinois, but it’s a South Chicago suburb, and they have one of the highest effective property tax rates in the nation. Even still, their police and fire pensions are so underfunded that in order to make their pension payment, they had to lay off dozens of current police officers and firefighters.

Q: That’s what people pay taxes for: government services! 

A: Harvey was the canary in the coal mine. Down in Peoria, they’ve had to lay off municipal workers, people who plow the streets. In Rockford, they’re being told they need to sell their city water system. Municipalities around the state are laying off public safety workers today to pay for yesterday’s pensions.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Z1efqO Tyler Durden

Radical Feminist Raves: “We Need To Kill All Men”

Somebody must’ve not been paying attention in biology class.

A rant from feminist YouTube star named Jenny McDermott has gone viral on Twitter over the past few days. In it, McDermott tells her audience that, to create the ideal conditions for the survival of the human race, we must kill all men and male babies.

“We need to kill all men. I am sick of being  a baby factory that produces more men who will in the future subjugate me. The solution to that is to kill any man that you see in the streets just any swinging dick. We want the species to go on but we only want it to go on with women in it.”

Don’t believe us? Here’s the clip. And (at least as far as we can tell) it’s not a deep fake.

If McDermott wants to live in a world with no men, she should try moving to this remote polish town of Miejsce Odrzanskie, where, by some fluke of fate, there hasn’t been a man born in nearly a decade, according to the New York Times.

Now, we know the media’s focus lately has been on the angry ‘incel’ men who have perpetrated several high profile mass shootings over the past few years. And though some might cry ‘false equivalence’, there is an equally depraved, equally violent contingent of the feminist movement that doesn’t just want to push men to change their behavior – it wants to get rid of all men.

There’s only one problem: How will they continue the species with only women after the great male holocaust has been completed?

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

Where Do College Graduates Go For Jobs?

Submitted by Andrew Foote Via US Census

Thinking about college? You may want to consider where you will likely locate to land your first job after you graduate and in what industry.

A good way to do this? Check out the U.S. Census Bureau’s Post-Secondary Employment Outcomes (PSEO), which shows where college graduates get jobs and in what industries.

On top of that, it does it by institution and type of degree.

The data address a major gap in education statistics by providing a much clearer picture of how graduates transition from school to employment.

The PSEO project tabulates employment flows and earnings outcomes by institution, degree level, and degree field, and provides counts of employment by employer industry sector and Census Division.

PSEO does this by linking university transcript data to the Census Bureau’s Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) records. Those records list job histories covered by unemployment insurance by employer, which is then linked to industry and location information on the employers.

“Up until now, individual states could only measure earnings and employment outcomes for persons who worked in the same state where they were educated,” said John Abowd, the Census Bureau’s chief scientist and associate director for Research and Methodology.

“Thanks to this pilot,” he said, “states, universities, and prospective students have the opportunity to see employment outcomes by program of study, by region and industry.”

What PSEO Offers

Currently, the PSEO statistics include data from the University of Texas System, Colorado Department of Higher Education, University of Michigan-Ann Arbor, and University of Wisconsin-Madison.

The figures below show where graduates with bachelor’s degrees from four flagship institutions work by Census Division.

Do Graduates Find Jobs Nearby?

There are significant differences in the geographic dispersion of employment for graduates.

UT-Austin, for example, sees most of its students stay in the state, while University of Michigan graduates disperse across a wide geographic area.

University of Colorado Boulder and UW-Madison are somewhere in the middle of these two extremes.

First Post-Graduation Jobs Don’t Always Match Field of Study

In addition to geographic dispersion, PSEO allows users to see the industry sector of employment for graduates.

The graphs below look at industry employment for all bachelor’s recipients in Colorado in three specific fields of study.

It’s clear that graduates in communications are more likely to land jobs in professional services, information and retail industries while social science graduates are more likely to end up in education and health.

Business majors are heavily concentrated in finance/insurance and professional services.

Important to the analysis of career paths, PSEO also measures how specific majors transition into highly-related fields.

The figure below measures the share of graduates from health programs who enter the health industry sector one year after graduation.

Surprisingly, individuals with master’s degrees in health are much less likely to end up working in the health industry than those with shorter-term certificate and associates degrees.

Instead, master’s graduates in health also end up in Education (22.2%) and Public Administration (7.2%).

All these tabulations are available on the PSEO website for download, as well as additional documentation. The Census Bureau is currently developing a data visualization tool for the employment flows data, which is scheduled for release in the coming months.

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

As Nation Grieves Mass Shootings, Scaramucci Goads Trump Into Public Spat

Weeks after Anthony Scaramucci called President Trump a racist for criticizing “the Squad,” the former White House communications director went on MSNBC Thursday night to criticize Trump’s trip to El Paso to visit shooting victims.

So, look, the president didn’t do well on the trip,” Scaramucci told a panel on Chris Matthews’ “Hardball, adding “He probably would be mad at somebody for saying that … Maybe he’ll tweet something negative about somebody for saying he didn’t do well.” 

“But the facts are he did not do well on the trip because if the trip is being made about him and not the demonstration of compassion and love and caring and empathy for those people,” Scaramucci added. “Then it becomes a catastrophe for him, the administration, and it’s also a bad reflection on the country.”

Trump came under fire from the left last week after a video emerged of him talking with pro-Trump hospital staff about his popularity in El Paso, and making his signature ‘thumbs up’ gesture while taking a picture with the family of a shooting victim.

Continuing on, Scaramucci then said that White House employees are “a bunch of cowards” for being too afraid to confront Trump with grievances – instead leaking them to the press.  

Three days later, Trump hit back – tweeting on Saturday: “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.”

To which Scaramucci replied on Sunday “For the last 3 years I have fully supported this President. Recently he has said things that divide the country in a way that is unacceptable. So I didn’t pass the 100% litmus test. Eventually he turns on everyone and soon it will be you and then the entire country.”

Amazing.

“I’m not Steve Bannon, I’m not trying to suck my own cock. I’m not trying to build my own brand off the fucking strength of the president. I’m here to serve the country.” -Anthony Scaramucci

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2yTOX3q Tyler Durden

A Currency War Will Only Weaken Growth And Strengthen Gold

Authored by Daniel Lacalle,

A few months ago many of us read about the conspiracy theory of “the nuclear option”, according to which China could generate a huge debt crisis in the United States and destroy the US economy if it sold its treasury holdings.

I already commented on it in this website (read).

China is an can become a greater economic leader, but the Chinese yuan cannot be a global reserve currency while maintaining capital controls and exchange rate fixing.

This week we have verified that the reality is very different. China has reduced its holdings of U.S. bonds by $ 100 billion since the September 2018 highs and the result is that the U.S. treasury bond has strengthened without the need for Federal Reserve repurchases, while China has been forced to devalue the yuan when the country’s capital flight intensified (more than $40 billion in the first half, according to the IIF, registering the highest figure in ten months in June).

Maintaining misguided capital controls does not prevent capital flights nor strengthen its financial account. The recent imbalances in money supply growth and subsequent bailouts of troubled lenders that triggered the devaluation show that China has an important dollar shortage that cannot be solved keeping outdated policies of intervention in the currency and capital markets. Despite China’s undoubted importance in the global economy, the yuan is only used in 4% of global transactions, according to the BIS, that means less than the Australian dollar or the Swiss franc.

The devaluation of the yuan above 7 per US dollar shows that its financial and monetary systems are overstretched. China has gone from needing two units of debt to create one unit of GDP in 2008 to requiring 6.75 units of debt to generate the same growth (source: Bloomberg and Apple Tree Capital). The foreign currency reserve ratio compared to the broad money supply is less than 12%, when the Asian crisis of 1997 was generated once the same ratio fell below 25%.

Some maintain that the Chinese currency is heavily backed by gold, but the reality is that the country’s total gold reserves do not reach 0.25% of the country’s money supply.

The underlying problem is that China´s central bank has implemented a much more aggressive monetary policy than that of the United States without having the dynamism, financial account and US capital freedom. A mistake that the eurozone must learn, and fast.  For China, the opportunity to present itself as a global financial contender would have arrived from implementing a sound money policy, not multiplying the mistakes of other fiat currency policymakers. If China had implemented a sound money policy, there would have been no need for capital controls as the country would receive massive inflows, not outflows. In fact, the soft landing of the economy and the transition from a state-owned low productivity model to a service and technology model would have been faster and more successful.

Capital controls have weakened the Chinese financial system and made it almost impossible for the yuan to become a world reserve currency that dethrones the US dollar. You cannot dethrone a king when you make the same mistakes but multiplied.

What is China’s biggest weaknesses in a trade war? You cannot win a trade war with high debt, capital controls and US exports dependence: A massive Yuan devaluation and domino defaults would cripple the economy.

Unfortunately, it may now be too late as imbalances evidenced by overcapacity and rising debt are probably too high to offset with solid money policies. Now, many countries face the almost inevitable prospect of more currency devaluations, which has triggered pre-emptive responses all around the world. A currency war?

What is a currency war?

A currency war is a conflict between nations trying to artificially devalue their domestic currency in order to be more competitive internationally but also to hurt their opponents. Using the currency to make the other nations less competitive while at the same time weakening their power.

It is based on a myth.

That devaluation helps competitiveness and that having a strong currency is negative. Devaluation is not a tool for exports, it is a tool for cronyism, and destroys the purchasing power of salaries and savings to benefit low productivity sectors and the government. It is a transfer of wealth from citizens to the government.

The decision of the US Administration to consider China a currency manipulator is very relevant and can have significant implications for markets and the global economy, including:

  • Excluding Chinese firms from US government procurements.

  • Block or stop trade deals.

  • Calling for heightened IMF surveillance.

  • Sanctions to firms trading Yuan and actions at the IMF to take away China’s currency status.

It is very easy to prove that a country is not a currency manipulator. Eliminating capital controls and exchange rate fixing. The US would have never been able to consider China a currency manipulator if the yuan was not artificially fixed daily and capital restrictions had been eliminated.

The problem is that China needs, on the one hand, a strong currency that guarantees the purchasing power of wages and savings in a country where inflation is already underestimated in official figures (read) and, on the other, a weak yuan to artificially make weak sectors appear competitive and increase exports.

Devaluing is not a tool to export, it is a tool to disguise structural imbalances and always harms much more than it benefits.

Unfortunately, in the United States, there are voices that want to “weaponize the dollar” (politically intervene the currency) defending the obsolete and pointless policy of devaluation,  which would be the biggest mistake in history and put the US economy and its status as a reserve currency at risk.

If the world gets into a currency war, with the assault on wages and savings that devaluation entails, no one wins.

A currency war is a war against citizens, their salaries and their savings, to benefit inefficient and indebted sectors.

A currency war would devastate the purchasing power of salaries and suppress investment and consumption decisions. When governments attack the currency, the economic agents’ reaction is not to invest and consume more, but a generalized slump in spending and capital allocation.

If a country enters a currency war, it disproportionately hurts its own citizens. If China and the US do it, it will likely lead to a severe global crisis .

A currency war is not about who wins, but who loses the most. And if countries embark on an assault on their citizens’ wealth via devaluation the message to the world is only one: buy reserve of value assets and hide.

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

Benghazi Car Bomb Attack Targets UN Officials, Leaving 2 Dead & 10 Wounded

The expanding chaos of the renewed war in Libya, increasingly a ‘failed state’ if there ever was a prime example of one, now approaching a decade on from its so-called “liberation” in 2011 by US-NATO forces, keeps providing daily and weekly reminders of the Obama-Hillary Clinton legacy of ‘humanitarian intervention’. 

On Saturday what is being reported as either a car bomb or possibly a roadside bomb ripped through a neighborhood in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi near United Nations offices.

The blast killed two UN staff, identified as United Nations Libya mission (UNSMIL) guards, with an additional ten people wounded, some among them children, according to Reuters.

The vehicle was detonated outside a busy shopping mall at a peak time of traffic, given locals are preparing to celebrate the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha.

The Associated Press reported the following details:

The place is close to the offices of the U.N. Support Mission in Libya. Footage circulated online shows what appear to be burnt U.N.-owned vehicles, while thick smoke rising in the sky.

No one claimed responsibility for the terror attack in the immediate aftermath, and it appears the UN staff and vehicles were specifically targeted

The death toll from the renewed civil war which has involved Gen. Khalifa Haftar’s Benghazi-based LNA attempting to seize the capital of Tripoli from the UN-backed GNA is now in the thousands, with over 105,000 displaced over the past half-year of conflict, according to UN numbers. 

Though long ignored in the mainstream media, Libya increasingly looks like Iraq circa 2005, with a recent significant uptick in mass casualty causing bombings and terror attacks in crowded cities. 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2yQ4cu4 Tyler Durden

Stocks “Are One Shoe-Drop Away” From Realizing Bonds Are Right

Authored by Sven Henrich via NorthmanTrader.com,

In this weekend’s market update I want highlight a few observations that crystalize a theme that has emerged in this market: It keeps repeating key structures and patterns as it’s fighting a battle for control and the outcome of this battle will ultimately determine everything.

Let’s start by taking note of some key developments in the last few weeks.

Firstly in July markets went on to break out toward the Sell Zone which we’ve identified as a potential key market pivot. As it turns out markets repeated precisely what they did last year: New highs were not sustained and the breakout has failed. Again.

Last week’s flush was actually quite intense, especially in the after-hours session on Monday. $ES ended up dropping 8% from the highs in a matter of a few days. This sort of bottom falling out should concern everyone about liquidity. Like in 2018 there was zero support built on the way up in June and July, price levels were simply sliced through before the oversold bounce emerged.

Note these markets have been acting in confines of very precise structures, channels and patterns and they keep repeating themselves. And we can see this in many index charts and products.

Here’s the $DJIA as an example:

And almost a like for like replay of the initial October correction which of course raises an important question: Will history repeat itself?

Note the $VIX of $VIXplosion fame has been replaying patterns over and over again and is acting very technically as we saw the outlined $VIX 24/25 target get hit perfectly last week with an immediate reaction from there. These patterns and targets provide massive edges for active participants to decide when and were to react and get engaged:

Note also $SPX filled several open gaps last week which I suggested on July 3rd would see filling:

And so markets keep following key structures as volatility is building a rising trend:

As you can see in the chart above $SPX also follows structures cleanly and showed a strong reaction off of that broadening wedge trend line we’ve been talking about for months and I’ve added the 10 year yield in comparison in the updated chart below:

Note the 10 year yield has given back the entire run since the US election in 2016.

Bonds have been sending a message of slowing growth since October when the 10 year peaked at 3.25% and growth optimism was all the rage. The 10 year has been cut nearly in half since then.

While investors may take comfort, as they have in the last 10 years, that any ‘accidents’ are quickly reversed. Monday’s flush was so fast and deep it created steep oversold conditions which brought about the fierce bounce later in the week, aided and abetted by a flurry of corporate buybacks that keep putting the wool over investors’ eyes.

But all these buybacks (running on a cumulative pace of $2 trillion or so between 2018 and full year 2019) can’t hide a notable fact: Markets have gone nowhere since that January 2018 taxcutgasm.

Still held up by tech and tech alone, the broader sector performance since those January 2018 highs is rather mediocre at best and abysmal in many cases.

If the bond market is signaling that the growth optimism priced into markets since the US election has been misplaced what could this imply to stock markets?

For the answer to that question perhaps it may be worth looking at the weaklings underneath these markets, the ones I’ve been pointing toward all year, small caps, banks, transports:

Driven by large cap tech $SPX rallied away from these indices masking the underlying weakness. These sectors are not confirming new highs on markets and keep pulling from underneath. Their charts are dreadful, having lost their 200MAs again last week and confirming the channel/flag structures that have been building in the last few months:

None of these have gone anywhere in the past year and half. There is no bull market there. Bulls keep telling people to buy stocks in anticipation of Fed induced multiple expansion. Well, where is it? The recent rate cut, long anticipated, has done nothing for these sectors.

And so here we are:

The chart says we had another failed break out to new highs, we became oversold on the fast and steep reversal and we tagged the 50MA twice on the subsequent bounce and failed to close above it. $SPX is 0.31% above the January 2018 highs. It only took what? $1.5 trillion or so in buybacks since then and a complete capitulation in Fed policy and a rate cut. Impressive? Surely not.

Looking at the entire picture, perhaps this market is only one shoe drop away from coming to terms with what the bond market has has been signaling all year: The end of a cycle:

We can’t know until the data confirms it. From my perch markets remain engaged in an epic battle for control, central banks desperate to keep extending the business cycle with intervention, corporate buybacks systematically reducing share floats to keep the illusion of earnings growth going, and a political apparatus trying to control markets with jawboning and exerting political pressure on the Fed to cut rates further as currencies, bonds, commodities and fundamentals show a market under increasing stress. As of now $DJIA is back below the January 2018 highs, the broader $WLSH is back below the September highs.

For the immediate time horizon markets are at risk of seeing a technical replay of 2018. Failure to recapture 2,950-3,000 is not an option, otherwise we can see a retest of recent overnight lows around 2780 and potentially move into 2700-2750. A break below risks the broadening wedge to fully trigger and eventually target the 2100-2200 zone on $SPX which makes sense in context of the historic market cap to GDP ratios. Institutional forces want markets higher and remain an important driver of rallies in the face of deteriorating data. Yet charts show a building theme of stress, rising volatility and failed breakouts. And that’s the theme that permeates the landscape.

*  *  *

For the latest public analysis please visit NorthmanTrader. To subscribe to our market products please visit Services.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2MUgmu9 Tyler Durden

Hong Kong Police Fire Tear Gas On Protesters In 10th Week Of Demonstrations

Hong Kong has fallen into violence amid the 10th straight week of protests, as police fire tear gas on thousands of demonstrators donning yellow helmets and black clothing. 

Protesters throw back tear gas fired by the police in Sham Shui Po district in Hong Kong Sunday. Photo: Anthony Wallace/AFP/Getty Images

Flash mob-style protesters broke off from an earlier approved demonstration, causing police to deploy crowd control measures, according to SCMP

Live feed: 

In Causeway Bay, an approved rally at Victoria Park earlier morphed into an illegal march, with anti-government protesters engaging in a stand-off with police in Wan Chai, while in Sham Shui Po, clashes at a police station result in the first tear gas rounds of the day. Meanwhile, in North Point, tensions run high with the local community bracing for confrontations with protesters, while at the airport a third day of a sit-in is under way. 

Locations where rounds of tear gas have rained down on protesters are: Sham Shui Po, Wan Chai, Tsim Sha Tsui and within Kwai Fong MTR station in Kwai Chung. –SCMP

The protests were sparked by outrage over a controversial extradition bill which would have allowed suspects to be transferred to mainland China to face trial. In response, the government shelved the bill – however much like France’s Yellow Vest movement, Hong Kong’s demonstrators have expanded their cause into a general anti-government protest despite Beijing’s dire warnings that a nearby military contingent will use deadlier measures to control the situation. 

Protesters flooded various Mass Transit Railway (MTR) stations on Sunday, some of whom were met with tear gas. 

Meanwhile, activist Ventus Lau Wing-hong, who organized two anti-government rallies last month, had his home vandalized and received what he says was a death threat. 

Three days of demonstrations at the Hong Kong International Airport are winding down, as protesters gathered in the halls on Friday to try and explain what’s going on to foreigners – passing out handmade postcards and stickers. 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Z1VNOF Tyler Durden

Risk Happens Fast. Is The Selling Over?

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

Risk Happens Fast

Over the last few weeks, we’ve been discussing the potential for a correction due to the extreme extension of the market above the 200-dma. To wit:

In the very short-term, the market is grossly extended and in need of some correction action to return the market to a more normal state. As shown below, while the market is on a near-term ‘buy signal’ (lower panel) the overbought condition, and near 9% extension above the 200-dma, suggests a pullback is in order.”

Chart Updated Through Friday

The correction was inevitable; it just needed a catalyst, like President Trump ramping up trade wars, to trip up traders. However, the rebound in the markets through the end of the week was also expected. As we told our RIAPRO subscribers on Monday (30-Day Free Trial).

After 5-days of selling, look for a short-term bounce next week, but we suspect the correction is not complete yet.

We followed that analysis on Tuesday morning before the market opened in “Look for a ‘Sellable Bounce:”

“On a very short-term basis, the market has reversed the previously overbought condition to oversold. This could very well provide a short-term ‘sellable bounce’ in the market back to the 50-dma. As shown in the chart below, any rally should be used to reduce portfolio risk in the short-term as the test of the 200-dma is highly probable.

(We are not ruling out the possibility the market could decline directly to the 200-dma. However, the spike in volatility and surge in negative sentiment suggests a bounce is likely first.)

By the end of the week, the market did indeed retrace back to the 50-dma, but failed to climb above it. With the market only halfway back to “overbought,” there is some “fuel” still available for a further rally next week. 

However, even if the market does rally a bit more next week, it is STILL a “sellable rally.”

Therefore, let me restate what actions should be taken in the short-term:

1) Trim Winning Positions back to their original portfolio weightings. (ie. Take profits)

2) Sell Those Positions That Aren’t Working. If they don’t rally with the market during a bounce, they are going to decline more when the market sells off again.

3) Move Trailing Stop Losses Up to new levels.

4) Review Your Portfolio Allocation Relative To Your Risk Tolerance. If you are aggressively weighted in equities at this point of the market cycle, you may want to try and recall how you felt during 2008. Raise cash levels and increase fixed income accordingly to reduce relative market exposure.

This is just the “risk management” process. 

Last week, I quoted my friend Victor Adair at Polar Futures Group:

“Risk happens fast.” 

In the past, I have spilled much digital ink discussing risk and reward, and possibilities versus probabilities. 

Investing is simply about the understanding of risk. However, when risk is compounded by high-speed, automated trading, the effect of “risk” is compressed into a concise time frame. As such, reversions are becoming faster, deeper, and more concentrated than we have seen in the past. 

Take a look at the chart below, which shows the daily trading range of the S&P 500.

That’s what is known as “volatility.” 

However, volatility has not been just this past week, but for the past four months. While investors may not realize it, the markets are currently no higher than they were at the beginning of May.

This kind of volatility makes it incredibly tough for investors to sit on their hands and do nothing. But, sometimes, the best course of action is simply “doing nothing.”

However, that depends on what you think will happen next.

Is The Selling Over?

The market, now driven primarily by “headline watching” algorithms, ran up and down this past week on the back of a “tweet.”

Stocks plunged on a tweet that more tariffs would hit China. Then surged on a tweet of a September “trade deal,.” The market then plunged again on a tweet that restrictions would return on Huawei, just to surge again on news the ban would only apply to Federal agencies.

I’m exhausted just typing that.

As I said above, it is difficult to trade kind of volatility.

The good news is the market did rally this past week, as hopes the Fed will continue to cut rates to support asset prices. (I am writing an article for next week on the “Pavlovian effect.”) 

The bad news, is the current set up, technically speaking, is much like we saw last September/October as markets. The chart below is the S&P 500 as compared to the “Volatility” index which is inverted for clarity.

As we saw last year, the market plunged from very overbought conditions, rallied sharply back, and failed again before crashing to lows. The strong contra-rallies pulled investors into the markets before crushing them into the end of the year. 

Currently, while it may not be the Fed causing problems for the market, it is the White House that is raising red flags. If the White House follows through on its threats to increase tariffs on China, and assuming that China doesn’t retaliate in return, there is not an inconsequential risk to asset prices as markets begin to reprice earnings. (More on this in a moment)

Importantly, the market has triggered a “sell signal” much like was seen in both May of this year, and in February and October of 2018.

Given that we took profits in May and July from portfolios, raised cash, and are carrying hedges, we will “sit on our hands” for the moment and wait for the market to “tell us” what it wants to do next. 

However, our signals suggest the risk, at the moment, is to the downside.

Risk Happens Slowly Too

While “risk happens fast” in the financial markets, it builds up slowly as well. As Doug Kass noted this past week:

“The odds of a U.S. recession according to JP Morgan is 40% – a cycle high. The rate of growth is slowing measurably. The manufacturing recession is now seeping into the consumer sector.”

“Like in 2007, (though the circumstances are far different) many investors, and even Administration officials, are ignoring the tea leaves of substantially slowing global economic growth.

With the world more interconnected at any time in history, non-domestic economic activity is importantly influencing the S&P Index’s constituent companies’ top- and bottom- lines.”

He is absolutely correct. 

Most importantly, while investors are betting on more Fed rate cuts, they are missing what is happening with earnings which continue to erode. The first chart is our earnings estimates (which we projected in June, 2018, unrevised for accountability) versus S&P’s estimates (which are constantly revised.) Note that estimates not only caught up with our original projections (wiping out the entire benefit of tax cuts) but has now exceed those levels. 

Despite the collapse in earnings, stocks are currently trading higher than they were in then. Valuations have expanded by 3x, while earnings have deteriorated. More importantly, and even less optimistic for the bulls, is the continued deterioration of 2020 estimates.  (The orange dashed line is our estimate for earnings based on assumptions of trade war impacts.) 

This is not a problem the Fed cutting rates, or doing QE, will fix. 

The other problem for the bullish view is the global glut. 

Following the financial crisis, it was China’s consumption binge which bailed out the majority of the world. While many believe it was Central Banks that rescued the globe, it really wasn’t. 

However, now, China is at its limits, and the global glut and output gap has now come home to roost.

Doug drives this point home:

“An output gap is the difference between actual global GDP and the level that would be consistent with operating at full capacity. The difference today is a consequential 0.5% – an unusually large figure considering the late stage cycle of economic growth.

In other words, a subpar economic recovery since The Great Recession has yielded excess global supply. This idle capacity has been accompanied with a continuous deflationary influence that has contributed to generational lows in worldwide interest rates and a central bank community that is quickly out of monetary bullets.

This means that since 2007, the $128 trillion of new global debt has been supported by only $27 trillion of new income. (Debt has grown by a factor of 5x against the amount of money that can support it!)

World debt is now about 295% of world GDP – a new record.

To understand the severity of this problem we should look back into the 2001-07 cycle. During that period global debt rose by only $30 trillion (from $86 trillion to $116 trillion). In the interim interval, global GDP rose by $25 trillion to $58 trillion. So, in the bubble cycle of 2001-07, debt growth (+$30 trillion) outstripped economic growth (+$25 trillion) by only 20% compared to the 2007-19 time frame in which debt growth (+$128 trillion) outstripped economic growth (+$37 trillion) by nearly 400%!!!

Ignore the massive buildup of global debt (against the backdrop of slow global nominal GDP) at your own risk.”

While investors are hoping that Fed rate cuts and QE will extend the current cycle, I can’t stress enough that when the recession hits, and it will, it will be a far more destructive process than the current consensus believes. 

It will be the “Perfect Storm” when debt, demographics, and unfunded pension obligations collide. There is simply not enough money to bail it all out at once.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Z1DFIO Tyler Durden

Watch: Tesla On Autopilot In Moscow Slams Into Tow Truck, Explodes Into Flames

Just days after we reported that Tesla could be on the verge of a formal investigation by the NHTSA, a father and his two kids in Moscow both suffered serious injuries after their Tesla Model S on Autopilot slammed into a tow truck before bursting into flames, according to RT

Shocking video footage from a vehicle passing the accident in the opposing lane captures the moment that the Tesla explodes, going up in flames and “shocking oncoming drivers”. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A post shared by Gago (@gagorun) on

This video, around the 2 minute mark, shows a driver passing what can only be described as the smoldering wreckage of the Tesla after the finally was finally under control. 

The accident took place on Moscow’s Ring Road on Saturday evening and initial reports are blaming the car’s Autopilot system for failing to recognize a stopped tow truck that was attending to a vehicle on the road. 

Both the driver and his children were rushed to the hospital before the Tesla caught fire. The driver suffered a concussion and a leg fracture and the children suffered cervical spine and chest injuries. 

Video of the initial incident shows the Tesla, in the left hand lane, failing to move over for a stopped tow truck and driving directly into the stopped vehicle. 

With more Teslas on the road now than ever, it feels as though the “watershed” moment that’ll prompt the NHTSA to take serious and swift action against the company, in order to protect drivers, might not be that far away.  

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2H28rY5 Tyler Durden