Tag: news

WTF Chart Of The Day

WTF Chart Of The Day

Tyler Durden

Thu, 11/19/2020 – 10:40

A funny thing continues to happen in American stock markets. While business media channels fill their days with ‘breaking news’, market-moving headlines, and investor-challenging interviews (what did billionaire XXX do today?), it appears it’s all entirely useless when it comes to ‘real world’ investing.

The buy-at-the-open, sell-at-the-close strategy is unchanged since the start of May. The buy-at-the-close, sell-at-the-open strategy is up a stunning 660 points over the same period.

Most notably, the strategy is having seen yet another renaissance since the election (daytime -5pts, nighttime +133pts)…

Traditionally, “investors benefit from receiving as much information as possible, and there’s a lack of information outside of market hours,” Todd Rosenbluth, head of ETF and mutual fund research at CFRA told Bloomberg, but it’s been different this year.

In fact “for late-night traders, this yeas has been like no other,” Paul Hickey, co-founder of Bespoke Investment Group, told Bloomberg.

“Holding the market overnight this year was a very risky trade. A lot of the uncertainty is behind us. Investors willing to take the risk to hold the SPY for 17.5 hours are again being rewarded more.”

But, while this has been a very successful trade since May (even adjusted for risk), it is a time-tested strategy for dramatic outperformance.

If a trader bought the SPY ETF at the open and sold it at the close every day beginning in 1993, she’d be down 10% over the time span, data compiled by Bespoke Investment Group show. Buying it at the close and selling at the next open, and then repeating it the next day, would have brought over 800%, the data show.

As we previously reported, JPM’s Nikolaos Panigirtzoglou attempted to explain this massive divergence in performance between regular and extended trading hours, noting that “the arrival of important news after US hours and during European trading hours, including both US and non-US economic data as well as better virus-related news in Asia and Europe.”

Frankly, in a world in which even other JPM strategists admit that neither news nor data matters any more – and only central banks do – we find this explanation to be self-serving BS (after all, the last thing we want is for JPM to analyze the root causes of the massive intervention by the Fed which starting last September was to bail out none other than JPMorgan itself), but whatever is the true reason for the ongoing overnight surge in the Emini, whether it is “important news and better virus news” when US markets are closed as JPM claims, or simply because that’s when central banks are most active in propping up markets, it doesn’t matter: as long as the divergence persists, and allows those who have noticed the “worst kept secret in the market” to literally keep printing money by buying the US close and selling the open, everyone remains happy.


 

Trade accordingly, night owls!

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

Stocks Slide After NYC Mayor Says Indoor Dining Will Be Shut In “Next Week Or Two”

Stocks Slide After NYC Mayor Says Indoor Dining Will Be Shut In “Next Week Or Two”

Tyler Durden

Thu, 11/19/2020 – 10:30

Mirroring their response to initial reports about NYC’s latest round of school closures, stocks are sliding Thursday following comments from NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio that it’s “just a matter of time” before restaurants in the city are forced to close indoor dining once again. Except this time, they won’t be able to rely on outdoor seating to make up for some of the lost revenue. 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/35Mcdl3 Tyler Durden

Canada Inches Closer to Allowing More People To Be Paid for Plasma

obi-onyeador-PMnbMcJeftk-unsplash

The U.S., one of the few places where blood plasma donors are legally allowed to receive compensation, currently provides about 70 percent of the world’s supply. With the passage of new legislation, Alberta, a province in Canada—which has allowed private organizations to pay for plasma in select cities and provinces for years—is inching closer to solving its own plasma shortage problems.

Albertans will soon be able to receive payment for their blood and plasma donations. Bill 204, the Voluntary Blood Donations Repeal Act, was introduced by Tany Yao, a member of the legislative assembly for Alberta’s provincial government, and passed in the legislature this week. It must now get royal assent—a mere formality—for it to become law. The bill overturns a 2017 prohibition on paid plasma, and will allow private companies to pay plasma donors for their efforts. If they so choose, people will still be able to donate blood and plasma without receiving compensation via Canadian Blood Services.

The bill was opposed by nurses unions, which claim patients who rely on plasma therapies will suffer from this. “While its supporters claim Bill 204 will address the sufficiency of the supply of plasma in Canada, it will in fact do the exact opposite,” said Linda Silas, president of the Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions, in a press release. “As our donors come to expect payment, our voluntary donor base for both blood and plasma will be jeopardized.”

United Nurses of Alberta’s president Heather Smith told Global News that “the government is putting its ideology and desire to support profiteers above what is actually safe for Albertans and Canadians.” Elsewhere she said that “donating blood should not be viewed as a business venture.”

But Smith is wrong to act as if these shadowy “profiteers” support harming patients, when in fact plasma sellers are the very people trying to help those in need (with, yes, some money thrown in for their time and discomfort). After all, paid plasma accounts for 89 percent of the world’s total supply, which constantly teeters on the brink of shortage. Many patients and organizations that advocate on their behalf have come out in favor of Bill 204. 

The Network of Rare Blood Disorder Organizations (NRBDO) issued a statement reminding that “with no evidence of safety risks, and no evidence of threats to the voluntary collection of blood, compensated collection of plasma can help with the global and Canadian plasma supply shortage, helping to ensure patients can access plasma-derived medicinal (PDMPs) products when they need them.” 

They’re right. Blood plasma therapy keeps many people with autoimmune and immunodeficiency disorders alive and well. And there is no good evidence to suggest that paid plasma is less safe than plasma given by uncompensated donors. In fact, the plasma donation process is much longer and more cumbersome than standard whole blood donation. As Peter Jaworski wrote in Reason, “Unlike blood, which takes approximately 30 minutes to donate and is possible to do once every 56 days, donating plasma takes about two hours, with 40 minutes of ‘needle-in’ time, and we need people to do it much more often—three times a month or more.”

Canadian Blood Services currently struggles to source all the necessary plasma to serve the country’s patients, with 83 percent of its supply imported from the United States. It’s a sad irony that while many Canadian provinces preclude their citizens from getting paid, the nation is reliant on plasma imports from donors elsewhere—donors who have, in fact, been paid.

Yao, the bill’s sponsor, tells Reason that he feels “buoyed by the fact” that countries “that do allow for compensated donations…have higher donation percentages than those currently here in Canada.” Yao also registered his disappointment that labor unions like the United Nurses of Alberta were so vocally opposed to his bill, since “professional health care workers should have the pragmatic understanding of the pharmaceutical industry.” 

With no reason to believe payment taints the safety of plasma donations, and so many countries struggling to produce enough domestic plasma to serve patients in need, Alberta’s repeal will help Canada better deliver lifesaving treatments to the many patients who depend on them.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/38TSYrL
via IFTTT

Even With A Vaccine, Strategists Aren’t Bullish On Europe

Even With A Vaccine, Strategists Aren’t Bullish On Europe

Tyler Durden

Thu, 11/19/2020 – 10:15

By Michael Msika, Bloomberg macro commentator

After this month’s vaccine-induced rally that caught most investors by surprise, strategists are turning to 2021 for further gains in European stock markets, given that benchmark indexes will most likely finish this year in the red. On average, they are far from bullish.

The Stoxx Europe 600 Index will rise to 399 points next year, implying just above 2% gain from Wednesday’s close, based on the average forecast from nine strategists polled by Bloomberg. They see a 2021 year-end level of 3,582 for the euro-area gauge Euro Stoxx 50, leaving less than 3% upside.

“We already saw some kind of a year-end rally since the end of October, mainly based on vaccine hopes,” said Unicredit SpA strategist Christian Stocker, who sees the Stoxx 600 making little headway for the rest of 2020. Next year, effective treatments for Covid-19 should improve market sentiment further, with cyclical stocks likely to be among the best performers, the strategist said.

European stocks benefited from a series of catalysts in November that propelled the Stoxx 600 to 390 points, a 14% surge. The outcome of the U.S. election was perceived as a positive event for Europe, with a Joe Biden presidency expected to ease international tensions, while successful clinical trials for two coronavirus vaccines brought forward the prospect of a return to normalcy. After the November rally, the Stoxx 600 is still down about 6% this year after a 40% surge from its March 18 low.

“In 2021, the market will focus on the path of the recovery and will more discriminate between sectors,” said Roland Kaloyan, Societe Generale SA’s head of European equity strategy. “With very accommodative fiscal and monetary policy and, hopefully, vaccines at work, European markets have still room to continue to recover next year.”

Investors’ buoyancy is still leaving some strategists skeptical about next year, represented by the wide range of forecasts in the survey, with TFS Derivatives Ltd predicting the Stoxx 600 will fall more than 7%, while Makor Capital Markets SA expects a 22% rise.

Overall, the global equity market is now close to “full bull,” Bank of America Corp. strategists said in reporting the results from their November fund manager survey. Investor optimism toward equities is the highest since January 2018, while cash allocations have dropped below pre-Covid level at 4.1% and are close to triggering a “sell signal” at 4%, they wrote. Over the past seven months, cash levels have fallen 1.8 percentage points, the fastest drop ever, according to BofA.

BofA strategists lowered their stance on European equities from positive to neutral last week, and cut their Stoxx 600 year-end target for 2020 by 8.8% from last month, the largest change in the Bloomberg survey. They remain overweight the cyclical laggards, such as value versus growth stocks, banks, insurance, energy and airlines, which have only recently started to price in a recovery, BofA strategist Milla Savova said.

“With the market already fairly advanced in pricing the macro recovery we expect over the coming months, our PMI assumptions imply over 10% near-term downside for the Stoxx 600, followed by less than 5% upside from current levels to 400 by April,” she said.

Overall, the positive vaccine newsflow didn’t trigger any immediate wave of optimism among strategists. They increased their 2020 year-end price target for the Stoxx Europe 600 by only 2.7% on average, to 380, this month compared with October.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/35L8vIh Tyler Durden

Canada Inches Closer to Allowing More People To Be Paid for Plasma

obi-onyeador-PMnbMcJeftk-unsplash

The U.S., one of the few places where blood plasma donors are legally allowed to receive compensation, currently provides about 70 percent of the world’s supply. With the passage of new legislation, Alberta, a province in Canada—which has allowed private organizations to pay for plasma in select cities and provinces for years—is inching closer to solving its own plasma shortage problems.

Albertans will soon be able to receive payment for their blood and plasma donations. Bill 204, the Voluntary Blood Donations Repeal Act, was introduced by Tany Yao, a member of the legislative assembly for Alberta’s provincial government, and passed in the legislature this week. It must now get royal assent—a mere formality—for it to become law. The bill overturns a 2017 prohibition on paid plasma, and will allow private companies to pay plasma donors for their efforts. If they so choose, people will still be able to donate blood and plasma without receiving compensation via Canadian Blood Services.

The bill was opposed by nurses unions, which claim patients who rely on plasma therapies will suffer from this. “While its supporters claim Bill 204 will address the sufficiency of the supply of plasma in Canada, it will in fact do the exact opposite,” said Linda Silas, president of the Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions, in a press release. “As our donors come to expect payment, our voluntary donor base for both blood and plasma will be jeopardized.”

United Nurses of Alberta’s president Heather Smith told Global News that “the government is putting its ideology and desire to support profiteers above what is actually safe for Albertans and Canadians.” Elsewhere she said that “donating blood should not be viewed as a business venture.”

But Smith is wrong to act as if these shadowy “profiteers” support harming patients, when in fact plasma sellers are the very people trying to help those in need (with, yes, some money thrown in for their time and discomfort). After all, paid plasma accounts for 89 percent of the world’s total supply, which constantly teeters on the brink of shortage. Many patients and organizations that advocate on their behalf have come out in favor of Bill 204. 

The Network of Rare Blood Disorder Organizations (NRBDO) issued a statement reminding that “with no evidence of safety risks, and no evidence of threats to the voluntary collection of blood, compensated collection of plasma can help with the global and Canadian plasma supply shortage, helping to ensure patients can access plasma-derived medicinal (PDMPs) products when they need them.” 

They’re right. Blood plasma therapy keeps many people with autoimmune and immunodeficiency disorders alive and well. And there is no good evidence to suggest that paid plasma is less safe than plasma given by uncompensated donors. In fact, the plasma donation process is much longer and more cumbersome than standard whole blood donation. As Peter Jaworski wrote in Reason, “Unlike blood, which takes approximately 30 minutes to donate and is possible to do once every 56 days, donating plasma takes about two hours, with 40 minutes of ‘needle-in’ time, and we need people to do it much more often—three times a month or more.”

Canadian Blood Services currently struggles to source all the necessary plasma to serve the country’s patients, with 83 percent of its supply imported from the United States. It’s a sad irony that while many Canadian provinces preclude their citizens from getting paid, the nation is reliant on plasma imports from donors elsewhere—donors who have, in fact, been paid.

Yao, the bill’s sponsor, tells Reason that he feels “buoyed by the fact” that countries “that do allow for compensated donations…have higher donation percentages than those currently here in Canada.” Yao also registered his disappointment that labor unions like the United Nurses of Alberta were so vocally opposed to his bill, since “professional health care workers should have the pragmatic understanding of the pharmaceutical industry.” 

With no reason to believe payment taints the safety of plasma donations, and so many countries struggling to produce enough domestic plasma to serve patients in need, Alberta’s repeal will help Canada better deliver lifesaving treatments to the many patients who depend on them.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/38TSYrL
via IFTTT

Existing Home Sales Soar To Highest In 15 Years

Existing Home Sales Soar To Highest In 15 Years

Tyler Durden

Thu, 11/19/2020 – 10:07

Existing home sales bucked the trend in September (rising to highest since May 2006 as new- and pending-home sales slipped) and analysts expect it too catch down a little in October, but yet again, it surprised to the upside, surging 4.3% MoM (vs a 1.1% MoM expected drop), and September’s jump was revised higher to a 9.9% spike…

This surprise rise has pushed the YoY jump in sales to 26.6% – the biggest spike since Nov 2009

 

Source: Bloomberg

This is the highest existing home sales print since November 2005…

Source: Bloomberg

Christophe Barraud explains why the number was so ‘surprisingly’ good:

  • Buyers continued to benefit from favorable market conditions in October with mortgage rates still close to the lowest level on record

  • Local/state reports confirm that sales kept rising by more than 20% YoY (non-seasonally adjusted: NSA) in October, which should translate into a bounce on a MoM basis (seasonally adjusted: SA)

  • Recent announcements from corporates suggest that home-improvement activity (correlated to existing home sales) is still booming

Median home price rose 15.5% from last year to $313,000, an all-time high, according to NAR.

“It’s quite amazing, and certainly surprising me,” Lawrence Yun, NAR’s chief economist, said on a call with reporters.

“It’s quite remarkable given that we’re still in the midst of the pandemic and the high unemployment rate.”

Finally, we note that while homebuilder sentiment is at record highs (but building permits stumbled?), homebuyer sentiment remains low and has rolled over…

Source: Bloomberg

And don’t expect The Fed to come to the rescue with ‘rate-cuts’ anytime soon.

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

Coronavirus Curfews Are Trending Again, Despite Total Lack of Evidence They Help

iosphotos226376

Coronaviruses don’t get more deadly or dangerous after dark. Yet across the country, leaders are imposing new curfews on their residents and businesses in the name of stopping COVID-19.

Those advocating for curfews argue that when it comes to places serving alcohol, earlier closures will mean fewer drunk patrons, better decisions, and better hygiene. (“Shenanigans happen at night,” said one public health professor.) Others suggest that limiting the hours people can shop or leave their houses recreationally will decrease opportunities for the virus to spread overall. And some leaders have suggested they’re doing it to send the right message about the pandemic.

But…there’s no evidence that this is indeed the case. And it’s just as likely that limited hours mean more people cramming their shopping, socializing, and errands into the same hours, making establishments more crowded and ensuring longer waits in transmission-friendly lines. Besides, not everyone has a job or home and family responsibilities that make state-approved socializing hours possible. Making residents stay in their homes after a certain hour eliminates people’s ability to meet non-household members in safer ways—like taking walks together, meeting in yards or on porches, or patronizing places where the weather or heat lamps still permit—and it also invites selective and discriminatory enforcement.

Public health experts have criticized curfews, although some have done so on the grounds that they don’t go far enough. The consensus seems to be that there’s just little logic in them.

George Mason Univesity epidemiologist Saskia Popescu told Cleveland.com that the challenge with imposing curfews is that “it not only is likely to condense patrons into a smaller window of time, but for things like an outdoor restaurant or even gym, that might be a time with slower business and fewer people, which would make it safer. A better course of action is to focus on those high-risk activities and either temporarily halt them or find ways to make them safer.”

“It seems like it’s spreading all over, but I’ve seen no evidence it helps anything,” Kent State University public health professor Tara C. Smith told Vox‘s Dylan Scott. “I’ve not seen a single public health person recommend this as an intervention. I’m mystified at their popularity.”

Despite the lack of evidence for their efficacy, New York, Ohio, and Oklahoma are among the states to bring curfews back. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo last week announced a curfew for alcohol-serving establishments. Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt gave a new order on Monday that institutes an 11 p.m. curfew for bars and restaurants.

California is reportedly considering a statewide curfew, too, as counties like Los Angeles go ahead with them. On Friday, nonessential retail businesses in Los Angeles will have to start closing at 10 p.m.

Ohio’s 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. curfew—announced by Gov. Mike DeWine on Tuesday—starts tonight and lasts for three weeks. Restaurants are allowed to stay open for takeout and delivery but must close for on-premises dining during those hours. All retail businesses must also close. Curfew violators could be charged with a second-degree misdemeanor, which could come with up to 90 days in jail or a $750 fine.

“The governor did not say how the curfew will be enforced,” notes Cincinnati’s WLTW5. “He said cars on the roads will not be pulled over, but individuals seen congregating after curfew hours may be approached by law enforcement officers.”

Media outlets across the state have reported on the havoc the curfew is expected to wreak on business owners, musicians, and others affected. Some business owners expressed relief at not being shut down entirely again, but others said that’s no consolation. “Our business is a 10 p.m. to 2 a.m. business. To say what [DeWine’s] doing is crushing us, is an understatement,” Tom Zellner, co-owner of The Warehouse Tavern, told the Mansfield News Journal. Nick Tanchevski, owner of Uncle John’s Place, told the paper: “No, I feel absolutely no relief. In fact, I feel more anxious.”

It’s not all the fault of government orders.

“Everybody is terrified so nobody is coming out anyway,” said Tanchevski. “This is the worst week I’ve had since COVID started in March.”

But the curfews are making a bad situation even worse, without any evidence that they’ll reduce transmission of COVID-19.

“For weeks, Gov. Mike DeWine has told story after sad story of the coronavirus spreading because Ohioans let their guard down among family and friends at informal gatherings, weddings and funerals,” writes Cleveland.com columnist Laura Hancock.”So it raised a big question when the governor, amid an alarming increase in virus cases and hospitalizations, announced […] Ohioans would be under a curfew from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. — not the time of day when those types of gatherings commonly take place.”

“This curfew is going to do nothing, absolutely nothing,” said Sheriff Richard K. Jones of Butler County, Ohio. He told a local Fox affiliate that he’s not the “mask police” or the “curfew police” and won’t enforce the curfew.

I’m not going to have my employees go out and make arrests, or stop people. People are angry, and I don’t care what the governor says, somebody will disobey or run. Bad things will happen from this curfew.

In New York, the editors of the Queens Gazette call for focusing on irresponsible venues rather than punishing all businesses:

We were told some restaurants turn into dance clubs after 10 pm, and if that is the problem, why not ban that? But legitimate restaurants serving food and wine, such as our wonderful Queens restaurants that are struggling to survive, don’t deserve to be penalized. We understand the severity of coronavirus and efforts to stop the spread, but we cannot let our local businesses be assaulted by a misguided policy.

[…] Also included in this new policy are gyms. How busy are gyms after 10 pm? Don’t most people go earlier? We believe it makes more sense to extend hours, much in the same way we have extended areas of restaurants by expanding into outdoor seating. If less people can go later, won’t they be going earlier and limiting free space even more?

We understand the purpose and the necessity of limiting exposure, but this latest policy will cause unnecessary hardship.

The coronavirus curfews are basically hygiene theater, designed to give the appearance of strong action around the virus, even if they fail to actually cut COVID-19 spread and simply cause some categories of people more hardship instead.

ELECTION 2020

See also: Trump’s Attempts to Undo the Election Won’t Work

QUICK HITS

  • New York City schools are shutting down in-person learning again.
  • Law professors Lawrence Lessig and Richard Epstein debate abolishing the electoral college.
  • What does the fabric calico have in common with cocaine? Prohibition, and people finding ways around it, explains Virginia Postrel.
  • “Few prominent political arguments have been so nakedly self-refuting as the conservative case for antitrust action against big tech,” writes Reason‘s Peter Suderman.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2ILF2Fb
via IFTTT

Chinese 10Y Yield Premium Over US Treasurys Hits Record High

Chinese 10Y Yield Premium Over US Treasurys Hits Record High

Tyler Durden

Thu, 11/19/2020 – 09:50

With US Treasury yields capped around 0.90% amid concerns that in the absence of fiscal stimulus the Fed will need to step in with more easing (either in the form of extending QE maturities, or an outright expansion in QE), China is facing a different set of challenges and following the recent rout in the bond market following several unprecedented SOE defaults, overnight the Chinese 10Y yield rose another 2bps to 3.36%, and almost 90bps from the all time low of 2.48% hit in April.

As a result, the premium for China’s 10-year government bonds over U.S. Treasuries of same duration has climbed to 250 basis points, the highest on record.

A big part for the continued push higher in Chinese yields is the PBoC’s “limited approach” to dealing with recent SoE defaults, which we profiled on Monday in “China’s Bond Market Turmoil Worsens As More State-Owned Companies Default.”

Still, as Caixin reported overnight, the series of bond defaults by Chinese state-owned enterprises is now on the radar screen of the country’s top economic planner. At a routine press conference Tuesday, National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) spokesperson Meng Wei called for local governments to step up supervision through project screening to prevent default risk for enterprise bonds.

Risk prevention for enterprise bonds has been relatively good with no defaults this year despite SOE defaults in the corporate bond category, NDRC says

Overall, risk prevention for enterprise bonds has been relatively good and there has been no default this year, Meng said. The cumulative default rate of enterprise bonds is at the lowest level among corporate debts, she said.

As discussed previously, the number of defaults by China’s SOEs is expected to rise marginally next year as the central bank shifts toward a more neutral policy stance amid an economic recovery, according to a Fitch report released Monday. Also on Monday, China’s central bank pumped 800 billion yuan of liquidity into the money market Monday through its medium-term lending facility helping to relieve some of the anxiety that’s gripped institutions and investors after the recent bond defaults, although judging by the continued drift higher in yields, tensions remain.

Investor appetite for debt from weaker SOEs is likely to ebb as market liquidity tightens, a trend that Yongcheng’s surprise default may accelerate, Fitch said. Before the Yongcheng default, five SOEs failed to repay debt from January through October, close to levels seen in the previous two years, according to Fitch.

Amid the investor strike following the SOE defaults, at least 20 Chinese companies have suspended planned bond sales worth 15.5Bn yuan ($2.4bn) over the past week, as the high-profile defaults of three state-owned enterprises and questions about the solvency of a fourth unnerved investors in the world’s second-largest bond market, the FT reported.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3lNFjG7 Tyler Durden

Iran Just Activated Formerly Banned High-Tech Uranium Centrifuges At The Same Site Trump Considered Attacking

Iran Just Activated Formerly Banned High-Tech Uranium Centrifuges At The Same Site Trump Considered Attacking

Tyler Durden

Thu, 11/19/2020 – 09:35

While the left was busy panicking about the headline that President Trump was considering his options for attacking a Iranian nuclear facility before leaving office – ostensibly worried that Trump would “flip his table before storming out of the restaurant” – the same Iranian facility he was keeping an eye on has just started “pumping fuel into banned centrifuges”, according to the Daily Mail. 

Trump had asked previously for options on bombarding Iran’s most prominent nuclear facility, called Natanz:

Natanz, also known as the Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant, is one of Iran’s central nuclear enrichment facilities, located around 200 miles south of the capital in Tehran.

It became subject to monitoring by the UN watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency after Iran inked a nuclear accord with US, Germany, France, Britain, China and Russia in 2015. 

Last week the IAEA released a report which found that Iran’s uranium stockpile at Natanz is now 12 times larger than the limit set under the nuclear accord. 

The location is also now pumping fuel into “high-tech IR-2m machines” after the country had previously agreed to only use IR-1 machines. Last week, an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report had shown the country had moved a cluster of those centrifuges underground.

Source: Daily Mail

A report on Tuesday revealed that uranium hexafluoride (UF6) gas, which is used to fuel the machines, is now being pumped into them. Trump, meanwhile, was talked out of attacking the site by advisers including “vice president Mike Pence, secretary of state Mike Pompeo, acting defense secretary Christopher C. Miller and joint chiefs chairman Mark Milley”.

“On 14 November 2020, the Agency verified that Iran began feeding UF6 into the recently installed cascade of 174 IR-2m centrifuges at the Fuel Enrichment Plant (FEP) in Natanz,” the report says. The move is a bold breach of the country’s previous deal with the United States.

Ali Rabiei, an Iranian government spokesman, also responded to the headline that Trump was considering attacking the site, stating: “Any action against the Iranian nation would certainly face a crushing response.”

Iran has also said it would abide by the terms of the previous deal if President-elect Biden were to re-implement it during his turn. It was just days ago we noted that Iran was already reaching out to President-elect Joe Biden in hopes of re-establishing the nuclear deal it put into place while Barack Obama was President. 

The country’s foreign minister has proposed “a return to full compliance” of the Iran nuclear deal if Biden lifts sanctions that have been ordered onto the country by President Trump. He has commented that Biden’s administration can use executive orders to lift the sanctions.

Zarif told a state owned newspaper this week: “The fact that Mr. Biden wants to return to the nuclear deal is great. We’re ready to hold talks over how the U.S. can re-enter the nuclear deal.”

Eager to make Biden his lapdog, he continued: “I expect the situation to significantly improve in the next few months. When Mr. Biden decides to fulfill U.S. obligations, we will be ready to quickly return to our commitments. This process is not time-consuming at all.”

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2IOM4cr Tyler Durden

Coronavirus Curfews Are Trending Again, Despite Total Lack of Evidence They Help

iosphotos226376

Coronaviruses don’t get more deadly or dangerous after dark. Yet across the country, leaders are imposing new curfews on their residents and businesses in the name of stopping COVID-19.

Those advocating for curfews argue that when it comes to places serving alcohol, earlier closures will mean fewer drunk patrons, better decisions, and better hygiene. (“Shenanigans happen at night,” said one public health professor.) Others suggest that limiting the hours people can shop or leave their houses recreationally will decrease opportunities for the virus to spread overall. And some leaders have suggested they’re doing it to send the right message about the pandemic.

But…there’s no evidence that this is indeed the case. And it’s just as likely that limited hours mean more people cramming their shopping, socializing, and errands into the same hours, making establishments more crowded and ensuring longer waits in transmission-friendly lines. Besides, not everyone has a job or home and family responsibilities that make state-approved socializing hours possible. Making residents stay in their homes after a certain hour eliminates people’s ability to meet non-household members in safer ways—like taking walks together, meeting in yards or on porches, or patronizing places where the weather or heat lamps still permit—and it also invites selective and discriminatory enforcement.

Public health experts have criticized curfews, although some have done so on the grounds that they don’t go far enough. The consensus seems to be that there’s just little logic in them.

George Mason Univesity epidemiologist Saskia Popescu told Cleveland.com that the challenge with imposing curfews is that “it not only is likely to condense patrons into a smaller window of time, but for things like an outdoor restaurant or even gym, that might be a time with slower business and fewer people, which would make it safer. A better course of action is to focus on those high-risk activities and either temporarily halt them or find ways to make them safer.”

“It seems like it’s spreading all over, but I’ve seen no evidence it helps anything,” Kent State University public health professor Tara C. Smith told Vox‘s Dylan Scott. “I’ve not seen a single public health person recommend this as an intervention. I’m mystified at their popularity.”

Despite the lack of evidence for their efficacy, New York, Ohio, and Oklahoma are among the states to bring curfews back. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo last week announced a curfew for alcohol-serving establishments. Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt gave a new order on Monday that institutes an 11 p.m. curfew for bars and restaurants.

California is reportedly considering a statewide curfew, too, as counties like Los Angeles go ahead with them. On Friday, nonessential retail businesses in Los Angeles will have to start closing at 10 p.m.

Ohio’s 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. curfew—announced by Gov. Mike DeWine on Tuesday—starts tonight and lasts for three weeks. Restaurants are allowed to stay open for takeout and delivery but must close for on-premises dining during those hours. All retail businesses must also close. Curfew violators could be charged with a second-degree misdemeanor, which could come with up to 90 days in jail or a $750 fine.

“The governor did not say how the curfew will be enforced,” notes Cincinnati’s WLTW5. “He said cars on the roads will not be pulled over, but individuals seen congregating after curfew hours may be approached by law enforcement officers.”

Media outlets across the state have reported on the havoc the curfew is expected to wreak on business owners, musicians, and others affected. Some business owners expressed relief at not being shut down entirely again, but others said that’s no consolation. “Our business is a 10 p.m. to 2 a.m. business. To say what [DeWine’s] doing is crushing us, is an understatement,” Tom Zellner, co-owner of The Warehouse Tavern, told the Mansfield News Journal. Nick Tanchevski, owner of Uncle John’s Place, told the paper: “No, I feel absolutely no relief. In fact, I feel more anxious.”

It’s not all the fault of government orders.

“Everybody is terrified so nobody is coming out anyway,” said Tanchevski. “This is the worst week I’ve had since COVID started in March.”

But the curfews are making a bad situation even worse, without any evidence that they’ll reduce transmission of COVID-19.

“For weeks, Gov. Mike DeWine has told story after sad story of the coronavirus spreading because Ohioans let their guard down among family and friends at informal gatherings, weddings and funerals,” writes Cleveland.com columnist Laura Hancock.”So it raised a big question when the governor, amid an alarming increase in virus cases and hospitalizations, announced […] Ohioans would be under a curfew from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. — not the time of day when those types of gatherings commonly take place.”

“This curfew is going to do nothing, absolutely nothing,” said Sheriff Richard K. Jones of Butler County, Ohio. He told a local Fox affiliate that he’s not the “mask police” or the “curfew police” and won’t enforce the curfew.

I’m not going to have my employees go out and make arrests, or stop people. People are angry, and I don’t care what the governor says, somebody will disobey or run. Bad things will happen from this curfew.

In New York, the editors of the Queens Gazette call for focusing on irresponsible venues rather than punishing all businesses:

We were told some restaurants turn into dance clubs after 10 pm, and if that is the problem, why not ban that? But legitimate restaurants serving food and wine, such as our wonderful Queens restaurants that are struggling to survive, don’t deserve to be penalized. We understand the severity of coronavirus and efforts to stop the spread, but we cannot let our local businesses be assaulted by a misguided policy.

[…] Also included in this new policy are gyms. How busy are gyms after 10 pm? Don’t most people go earlier? We believe it makes more sense to extend hours, much in the same way we have extended areas of restaurants by expanding into outdoor seating. If less people can go later, won’t they be going earlier and limiting free space even more?

We understand the purpose and the necessity of limiting exposure, but this latest policy will cause unnecessary hardship.

The coronavirus curfews are basically hygiene theater, designed to give the appearance of strong action around the virus, even if they fail to actually cut COVID-19 spread and simply cause some categories of people more hardship instead.

ELECTION 2020

See also: Trump’s Attempts to Undo the Election Won’t Work

QUICK HITS

  • New York City schools are shutting down in-person learning again.
  • Law professors Lawrence Lessig and Richard Epstein debate abolishing the electoral college.
  • What does the fabric calico have in common with cocaine? Prohibition, and people finding ways around it, explains Virginia Postrel.
  • “Few prominent political arguments have been so nakedly self-refuting as the conservative case for antitrust action against big tech,” writes Reason‘s Peter Suderman.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2ILF2Fb
via IFTTT