Crude Unable To Bounce Despite Biggest Rig Count Decline In 6 Weeks

After its earlier pump and rapid dump, WTI crude is unable to bounce for now despite the biggest rig count decline in 6 weeks. The oil rig count declined by 11 to 332 – the lowest since October 2009 – tracking lagged crude prices. If the co-dependence continues we would expect to see rig counts begin to rise (or stop declining) very soon. Total US rig count dropped to 420 – a new all-time record low.

  • *U.S. TOTAL RIG COUNT DOWN 11 TO 420 , BAKER HUGHES SAYS

 

  • *U.S. OIL RIG COUNT DOWN 11 TO 332, BAKER HUGHES SAYS

 

Will we see rig counts stabilize here – tracking the legged price of crude?

via http://ift.tt/1SPkypT Tyler Durden

In Latest US-China Escalation, Beijing Denies US Aircraft Carrier Access To Hong Kong Port

What until now was mostly effete jawboning over US complaints surrounding China’s territorial expansion ambitions in the South China Sea, including the occasional sailing of a US ship deep inside the disputed territorial waters (with zero impact especially now that China may soon start building maritime nuclear power plants in the area), changed dramatically earlier today when China officially denied a U.S. carrier strike group’s request for a port visit to Hong Kong next week.

The Stennis strike group

As Stripes writes, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs notified the United States Thursday of its decision to deny the USS John C. Stennis and its escort ships access to the former British colony, Darragh Paradiso, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Consulate General in Hong Kong, said by phone. The ministry provided no explanation for the move.

While U.S. warships frequently visit Hong Kong, port calls have been canceled at times of diplomatic strain between the two Asia-Pacific powers. In 2007, China denied access to the city’s port by the aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk.

The decision follows weeks of increasing diplomatic sparring between China and the U.S. over Beijing’s claims to more than 80 percent of the South China Sea. The nuclear-powered Stennis has played a central role in U.S. efforts to demonstrate its continued security presence in the disputed waters, with Defense Secretary Ashton Carter visiting the warship on patrol there in April.

A plane carrying U.S. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter lands on the deck of the USS
John C. Stennis on April 15, 2016, as the ship sailed through the South China Sea.

According to Shi Yinhong, director of the Center on American Studies at Renmin University in Beijing, and a foreign policy adviser to the State Council, the Stennis has become a “symbol of efforts to spark strategic tensions between China and the United States. The cancellation is a snapshot of the current intensity in China-U.S. security relations. Without significant security need, routine port calls would not have been canceled.

While the US has been complaining about China’s territorial expansions over the past year, culminating with the current recent incident, China’s claims to the South China Sea have resulted in numerous other disputes with other neighboring Southeast Asian nations that assert rights to the area, including Vietnam and the Philippines. Tensions are running high as the region braces for a ruling by an international arbitration panel on a Philippine challenge to China’s claims.

“We have a long track record of successful port visits to Hong Kong, including with the current visit of the USS Blue Ridge, and we expect that will continue,” Paradiso said, referencing the U.S. Navy command ship already moored in the city.

Finally, earlier today the US State Department confirmed that indeed China has refused to allow Stennis to dock in Hong Kong.

via http://ift.tt/26BpCFz Tyler Durden

Why Canada’s Oil Industry May Never Be The Same

Submitted by David Yager via OilPrice.com,

Never is a long time. The dictionary definition is, “at no time in the past or future; on no occasion; not ever.” In the volatile oil and gas industry, those who try to look that far into the future and predict anything with certainty are invariably wrong. Here’s hoping.

But it’s not all bad, oil prices are gradually rising because of market physics and investor sentiment. Federal and provincial politicians are softening their opposition to, and have even publicly declared support for, pipelines to tidewater. The worst is over.

However, it is increasingly certain that the future will not be like the past. Previous downturns have been equally devastating but the primary causes eventually reversed themselves; low commodity prices recovered and damaging government policies were rescinded.

This recovery will be different for a variety of reasons which will combine to cap growth, opportunity and profits, even if oil and gas prices spike. The following major changes appear permanent.

Oil Is Destroying the World

“New research shows that the fossil-fuel era could be over in as little as 10 years, if governments commit to the right policy measures… If you think workers are suffering in Alberta now, wait until you see what Canada’s economy looks like if we miss the huge opportunities for jobs and prosperity offered in renewable energy and a truly climate-friendly economy.”

Written by a climate and energy campaigner for the Sierra Club, this appeared on top of page 13 in the April 23 edition of Victoria’s Times Columnist, under the headline, “Pipelines not the pathway to Paris solutions.” B.C.’s views on pipelines are well known.

Whether you or the tens of thousands of laid-off oil workers believe the first paragraph or not, on April 22 at the United Nations in New York, 171 countries signed the Paris climate change agreement negotiated last year. At the event, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said: "Paris will shape the lives of all future generations in a profound way – it is their future that is at stake.” He said the planet was experiencing record temperatures: "We are in a race against time. I urge all countries to join the agreement at the national level. Today we are signing a new covenant for the future."

Showing support, in the Globe and Mail April 26, the Minister of Foreign Affairs for the island country of Maldives wrote, “Our ratification (of the Paris agreement) is based on the clear and present danger of losing our country completely to rising tides. How critical this has become can be seen in a report released only this month that questioned the stability of our polar ice sheets. We now know March, 2016 was the hottest month in recorded history.”

This is all caused by burning carbon fuel. True or not, this debate will not die anytime soon.

The anti-carbon movement is already affecting the oil industry in ways nobody would have imagined two years ago. Alberta’s comprehensive carbon tax regime will become law January 1, 2017 apparently to prove that the province deserves a social license to stay in the oil business from carbon fuel opponents. The recent Canada / U.S. commitment to reduce methane emissions will come at an enormous cost to the oilpatch if implementation is not preceded by a significant study and comprehensive cost / benefit analysis.

These are just part of a growing trend to dismiss and / or deny the essential role hydrocarbon fuel plays in powering the world’s economy. Oil doesn’t matter any longer. University endowment funds have been pressured for years to divest shares in oil and gas companies. The Royal Bank of Scotland now refuses to provide funding for oilsands development. Historically, people sought jobs in the oilpatch and were proud of their work. This is changing fast.

Canada is one of the few major oil and gas-producing jurisdictions determined to push rapidly forward with major and expensive anti-carbon policy changes despite being only a nominal contributor to global emissions. We won’t be followed anytime soon by Russia, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Kazakhstan, Iran, Iraq, Mexico, Venezuela, Nigeria and so on. They will be happy to supply Canada with oil, whether Canadian supplies continue or not.

“Quantitative Easing” No Longer Stimulating Economy

Following the 2008 / 2009 recession the world’s central bankers embarked on a program of near-zero interest rates that would be expanded into something called “quantitative easing.” Investopedia’s definition is, Quantitative easing is an unconventional monetary policy in which a central bank purchases government securities or other securities from the market in order to lower interest rates and increase the money supply.” This has now been expanded in some countries to include experimental negative interest rates where banks and, ultimately, savers are penalized for holding cash and not spending their money.

The purpose has been to juice spending to keep the western economic miracle alive while government debt balloons and the economy stagnates. If interest rates ever approached the double-digit levels of 30 years ago, the economic devastation would be staggering. Prime lending and mortgage rates peaked at 22.5 percent in the early 1980s, long before it was believed (then accepted) governments could print money without collapsing the economy or creating runaway inflation.

But it isn’t working anymore. Past recessions were caused by high oil prices and cured when they fell. Not this time. An article at Oilprice.com on April 19 by Gail Tverberg read, “…consumers are the foundation of the economy. If their wages are not rising rapidly, and their buying power (considering both debt and wages) is not rising very much, they are not going to be buying many new houses and cars – the big products that require oil consumption. In fact, in order to bring oil demand back up to a level that commands a price over $100 per barrel, we need consumers who can afford to buy a growing quantity of goods made with oil products.”

Oops. This time oil prices collapsed and so did demand. The International Energy Agency is forecasting, despite low prices, demand growth of only 1.2 million barrels (b/d) per day this year compared to 1.6 million b/d or higher in 2015 and prior years. Middle class incomes, the main driver of growing oil consumption in the past, are no longer rising in the western world. Quantitative easing has run its course. What growth in oil demand may occur will be in Asia and other foreign markets. Should governments reverse policies on near-zero or sub-zero interest rates or people lose confidence in the long-term stability of central banks printing money as required, oil consumption and prices are doomed.

The U.S. Shale Boom Was Financed By Low Interest Rates

The hunt for yield in the era of lower to zero interest rates leads to peculiar investment decisions. In 2008 the collapse of the housing bubble – driven by an endless investor appetite for high-yield mortgage bonds of questionable quality – was said to cause the global recession. This precipitated the collapse of major financial institutions like Lehman Brothers and the bailout of many more. Regulators frowned and tried to bring in policies to ensure it would not happen again.

The great light tight oil (LTO) or shale boom in the U.S. since 2010 has all the hallmarks of a similar asset bubble. Exploration and production (E&P) companies were able to finance significant drilling through the sale of subordinated bonds with an attractive yield of 6 percent or more. They were for the most part interest-only and due in several years. The problem with drilling high decline LTO wells with high-yield debt is by the time the bonds mature, the production from the wells the debt paid for has declined to the point the assets are only worth a fraction of the leverage outstanding. Many companies in the U.S. are already broke and more will follow. Much analysis has been done to show some of the top LTO drillers in the U.S. spent $2 on drilling for every $1 of cash flow prior investments had generated. The difference was made up by seemingly limitless capital inflows.

This has created two problems for Canada’s oil future.

The first is even if commodity prices rise and transportation issues are solved, the ability of companies to raise cheap debt will be impaired for some time, perhaps forever, depending on what happens to interest rates. Historical E&P spending has almost always exceeded cash flow providing investment, jobs and opportunity that would not exist otherwise. External capital inflows are essential to feed the machine.

 

The other is the impact debt-financing has had on oilfield services (OFS) sector balance sheets. As has been written on these pages before, in 2014 and 2015 alone 21 diversified Canadian OFS operators invested $37 billion adding new rigs, frack spreads, camps, processing plants, midstream facilities and pipelines for a growing North American oilpatch. Three large Canadian pressure pumpers alone carried a combined $2.6 billion in debt and one has gone broke. A lot of E&P demand was financed by debt, which is no longer available. Now OFS is overbuilt and many operators over-levered. It will take some recovery to clean this up.

Middle East Production About Volume, Not Price

Why Middle East producers do what they do remains a mystery. But whatever the plan or strategy, the cash cost of finding and producing the next barrel in this region remains the lowest in the world. In the past it seemed Middle East oil strategy was about price with oil sales assured. Now it looks like volume and market share.

The Middle East may soon be the world’s most active market for drilling rigs. According to the Baker Hughes worldwide rig count, the only area of the world (Latin America, Europe, Africa, Middle East, Asia Pacific, U.S., Canada) still operating about the same number of rigs in 2016 as it was in 2014 is the Middle East. The only region that has increased its active rig count from 2013 and 2012 and its share of the global active drilling rigs is the Middle East.

(Click to enlarge)

Source: Baker Hughes Worldwide Rig Count April 22, 2016, average rigs operating for the period

Why? Because they can, and to sustain output, they must. Whatever the financial situation may be for the governments in charge, there is clearly sufficient cash flow from existing production to fund more drilling. With the Baker Hughes U.S. total active rig count for April 22 down to 471, the average 403 rigs drilling in the Middle East in the first three months of 2016 make it the second-busiest region in the world. Unless prices recover soon, it could become number one.

This is not a price war Canada can win. One of the attractions of Canada in recent years is foreign capital was welcome to develop massive, if expensive, oil reserves. Now Iran is said to be open for business. As is Mexico. Saudi Arabia wants to diversify its economy away from oil and sell its refining operations to global investors. The Saudis are talking bravely about an economy no longer dependent upon oil profits as soon as 2030.

Western Canada is not the only oil-producing jurisdiction wondering about its future. It is, however, the highest cost oil-producing jurisdiction wondering about its future.

Canada Down But Not Out

Canada produces 7 million barrels of oil equivalent per day of bitumen, crude oil, natural gas liquids and natural gas, making it the fifth largest hydrocarbon-producing jurisdiction in the world. The country won’t be going off the oil and gas business anytime soon, so keeping it going will remain good business and the largest resource industry in Canada.

But the current mantra of “lower for longer” is wrong. This is only the price of oil. In terms of the Canadian oil and gas industry there are multiple reasons it could be “lower for a long time, possibly forever.” As a country that performs all elements of producing still-essential hydrocarbons as well or better than anyone else in the world – everything from broad economic participation to worker safety to environmental protection – that is a tragedy.

via http://ift.tt/1UlVFVl Tyler Durden

How to find companies selling for less than cash

[Editor’s note: This letter was penned by Tim Staermose, Sovereign Man’s Chief Investment Strategist and editor of the 4th Pillar Investment Alert.]

If you know me personally, you know I have a lot of hair.

So when I go get a haircut, I always feel bad that the price is the same for me as for people who are almost bald… so I tip accordingly.

Recently when I went for a long-overdue haircut in Bali, I paid about US$1.50, plus a generous 50% tip of roughly 75 cents.

Ahead of me in line was an older European gentleman. He went for the works. Haircut, shave, and scalp massage. His total cost: about US$3.80.

It got me thinking about trading, investing and the relative value of things.

The same service at the barber in Europe, Australia, or North America would undoubtedly have cost 10 to 20 times as much.

So, this was clearly fantastic value – right?

Well, I would argue that it actually depends on your yardstick.

Here in Indonesia an average wage can be as little as $150 to $300 a month. So a $1.50 haircut represents about 0.5% to 1% of the average monthly wage.

In the US, the average monthly wage is about $3,900 according to the Department of Labor. 0.5% to 1% is $19.50 to $39.

That’s more or less what a haircut will cost you in the US, depending on where you live.

So as it turns out, in both the US and Indonesia, a haircut runs 0.5% to 1% of average monthly income.

So, while I’d argue that my haircut in Bali was very good value in ABSOLUTE terms, in RELATIVE terms it wasn’t a screaming bargain after all.

Fortunately (or deliberately arranged that way, actually), my income is earned entirely overseas, at “rich economy” rates.

So for me personally, the cost of living in Indonesia – including haircuts – is an absolute bargain.

That brings me back to investing: professional money managers often seek investments that offer good relative value.

A stock might be cheap relative to its competitors. Or it might be cheap relative to its historical trading range.

Or, it could be cheap relative to alternative investments like government bonds.

But who cares if a stock is ‘relatively’ cheap if everything you compare it to is expensive?

It’s not particularly good value to buy a stock that’s slightly less overpriced than its competitors.

That’s the problem with most mainstream investments nowadays; they’re only being viewed in relative terms.

In absolute terms, stocks in most major markets are incredibly overpriced.

Thankfully, as small individual investors, we can think for ourselves. In seeking independent forms of income, we can look across the world for the best bargains to find absolute value.

In particular, we want to buy shares in companies that are screaming bargains.

One of the most lucrative corner of the market for me has always been companies that are selling for less than their ‘net cash’ in the bank.

(Net cash refers to the company’s bank balance minus any debt.)

I have always found that if you can buy such a company and have a modest degree of patience, almost invariably you can make a very nice profit.

Sometimes this happens quickly.

This was the case with a company called Queste Communications (QUE on the Australian Securities Exchange) that I made a small fortune with back in 2003.

It was just after I’d bought my first house. So I only had about A$14,000 of savings left to my name. I put ALL of it into Queste.

It was a small technology company whose shares had crashed in the dot-com bust.

The crash was so deep that the company’s stock price was about 4 cents; yet the amount of cash it had per share amounted to 14 cents.

So by buying the shares, I was spending 4 cents to purchase 14 cents in cash.

Needless to say I bought as many as I could afford. Within a few months the stock price had more than tripled (and even then was selling below its cash backing).

In all, I got back A$51,723.21 on a A$14,000 investment. Not bad for a small-time investor, as I was back then.

These sorts of deals have been my focus for years and comprise the majority of our recommendations in the 4th Pillar Investment Alert.

Right now I’m finding the Australian market to be fertile hunting grounds.

My methodology is slow and deliberate; my research team and I pour over hundreds of companies’ quarterly reports; you can find these yourself on the ASX website.

It takes a lot of time, but after going through those reports, we uncover all the gems… well-managed companies that are selling for less than their bank balances.

There’s a LOT more analysis that goes in to the decision to find our top recommendations…

… but, broadly, this should give you a basic understanding of our approach and how you might be able to apply it to your own investments to find incredibly lucrative ABSOLUTE value.

PS-

This 4th Pillar investment strategy is a no-brainer, and the track record is fantastic. We’re having a special sale– take over 40% off the regular price.

This promotion ends tomorrow. Try out the 4th Pillar Risk Free.

from Sovereign Man http://ift.tt/1O0xx3S
via IFTTT

Former McDonalds CEO Warns Minimum Wage “Will Wipe Out 1000s Of Jobs”

While this should be no surprise to any rational non-establishment-teet-suckling economist, former McDonalds' CEO Ed Rensi exclaims, in a recent Forbes Op-Ed, that "a $15 minimum wage won’t spell the end of [fast-food brands]. However it will mean wiping out thousands of entry-level opportunities for people without many other options." The $15 minimum wage demand, which translates to $30,000 a year for a full-time employee, is built upon a fundamental misunderstanding of a restaurant business (and we add simple supply and demand fundamentals) – just "do the math" Rensi rants…

“They’re making millions while millions can’t pay their bills,” argue the union groups, suggesting there’s plenty of profit left over in corporate coffers to fund a massive pay increase at the bottom.

 

In truth, nearly 90% of McDonald’s locations are independently-owned by franchisees who aren’t making “millions” in profit. Rather, they keep roughly six cents of each sales dollar after paying for food, staff costs, rent and other expenses.

 

Let’s do the math: A typical franchisee sells about $2.6 million worth of burgers, fries, shakes and Happy Meals each year, leaving them with $156,000 in profit. If that franchisee has 15 part-time employees on staff earning minimum wage, a $15 hourly pay requirement eats up three-quarters of their profitability. (In reality, the costs will be much higher, as the company will have to fund raises further up the pay scale.) For some locations, a $15 minimum wage wipes out their entire profit.

 

Recouping those costs isn’t as simple as raising prices. If it were easy to add big price increases to a meal, it would have already been done without a wage hike to trigger it. In the real world, our industry customers are notoriously sensitive to price increases. (If you’re a McDonald’s regular, there’s a reason you gravitate towards an extra-value meal or the dollar menu.)  

 

Instead, franchisees can absorb the cost with a change that customers don’t mind: The substitution of a self-service computer kiosk for a a full-service employee.

Rensi concludes rather ominously…

I suspect that the labor organizers behind this campaign for a $15 minimum wage are less interested in helping employees, and more interested in helping themselves to dues money from their paycheck.

 

They’re unlikely to succeed in their goal of organizing the employees of McDonald’s franchisees, but they may well succeed in passing $15 into law in other sympathetic locales.

You’ll see their legacy every time you visit the Golden Arches, where “would you like fries with that” is a button on a computer screen rather than a phrase spoken by an employee in their first job.

via http://ift.tt/1TjAaPW Tyler Durden

Libertarians and the Zika Virus

AedesAegyptiZika virus is coming to the mainland U.S. this summer. It is spread by the Aedes aegypti mosquito and is now known to target developing brain cells and thus substantially raise the microencephaly rate among children whose mothers had been infected during their pregnancies. In addition, Zika infections also increase the risk of the Gullain-Barre paralyzing syndrome. The Zika virus has spread throughout Latin America and the Caribbean; the outbreak in Puerto Rico is growing fast. So far no local mosquito-borne Zika virus disease cases have been reported in the mainland U.S., but there have been 388 travel-associated cases.

Pharmaceutical companies are working on a vaccine, but until one becomes available mosquito control is the only real way to limit the outbreak. In addition, modern biotechnology could be used to create mosquitoes genetically engineered to resist the virus or even kill off the mosquitoes that spread it.

Libertarians are justifiably skeptical when federal health bureaucrats seek to expand their powers by claiming that obesity and gun violence are public health emergencies. However, infectious diseases occur in the medical open access commons where individuals (especially in the absence of a vaccine or suitable anti-viral medications) have a hard time taking effective measures to protect themselves against infection. In this case, the medical commons that we all share is threatened by a disease that can be best limited by implementing widespread measures to kill the mosquitoes that spread it. There are three ways to address problems in a commons: regulate them, privatize them, or ignore them. In the case of Zika privatizing won’t work, although I suppose we could all drape mosquito netting or soak ourselves in DEET before going outside this summer.

ZikaMapThe Obama administration has asked Congress to appropriate $1.9 billion to fight the spread of the disease. Congress is balking at appropriating the requested funds on the grounds it will increase the federal deficit. Congress wants the Obama Administration to shift some funds previously appropriated for Ebola control to the fight against Zika. This fight needs to be resolved before summer when Zika is likely to begin its spread in the U.S.

For more background on how to handle the medical commons, see Reason’s forum, What is the Libertarian Response to Ebola?

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/249L31X
via IFTTT

Germany Moves To Ban Refugees From Welfare; Politician Calls For “Islam Law” To Limit Influence

The initial refugee welcome in Germany is rapidly turning to rejection as the nation plan to ban EU migrants from most unemployment benefits for five years after arrival as a senior German politician has called for an "Islam law" that would limit the influence of foreign imams and prohibit the foreign financing of mosques in Germany.

As The FT reports, Germany is planning to ban EU migrants from most unemployment benefits for five years after their arrival in dramatic response to rightwing populist assaults on chancellor Angela Merkel’s liberal immigration policies.

The proposals, which are far tougher than had been expected even a few months ago, highlight the government’s concern over growing public anxiety about immigration and the related advance of the Alternative for Germany party, the most popular rightwing grouping since the second world war.

 

“I full and clearly support freedom of movement [of workers in the EU],” said labour minister Andrea Nahles, detailing the plans. “But freedom of access to social welfare is something else.”

 

It is a sign of how much the AfD is shaking German politics that the proposals come from Ms Nahles, a leftwing social democrat. The SPD is suffering even more than Ms Merkel’s CDU/CSU bloc in the face of the AfD’s advance. Opinion polls show it around 20 per cent, an all-time low.

 

The German debate on curbing EU migrants’ benefits echoes the intense arguments in the UK, as it prepares for its EU membership vote in June. Ms Merkel has previously promised to work with prime minister David Cameron in cutting welfare abuse.

And as if that was not 'welcoming' and 'integrative' enought, The Gatestone Institute's Soeren Kern reports a senior German politician has called for an "Islam law" that would limit the influence of foreign imams and prohibit the foreign financing of mosques in Germany.

  • "All imams need to be trained in Germany and share our core values. … It cannot be that we are importing different, partly extreme values ??from other countries. German must be the language of the mosques. Enlightened Europe must cultivate its own Islam." – Andreas Scheuer, the General Secretary of the Christian Social Union party (CSU).

  • The Turkish government has sent 970 clerics — most of whom do not speak German — to lead 900 mosques in Germany that are controlled by a branch of the Turkish government's Directorate for Religious Affairs. Turkish clerics in Germany are effectively Turkish civil servants who do the bidding of the Turkish government.

  • Erdogan has repeatedly warned Turkish immigrants not to assimilate into German society. During a trip to Berlin in November 2011, Erdogan declared: "Assimilation is a violation of human rights."

The proposal — modelled on the Islam Law promulgated in Austria in February 2015 — is aimed at staving off extremism and promoting Muslim integration by developing a moderate "European Islam."

The move comes amid revelations that the Turkish government is paying the salaries of nearly 1,000 conservative imams in Germany who are leading mosques across the country. In addition, Saudi Arabia recently pledged to finance the construction of 200 mosques in Germany to serve migrants there.

In an interview with the newspaper Die Welt, Andreas Scheuer, the General Secretary of the Christian Social Union (CSU), the Bavarian sister party to German Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats (CDU), said that Berlin should restrict Turkish financing of mosques in Germany and begin training and certifying its own imams. Otherwise, he argued, Muslim integration will be difficult or impossible to achieve. He said:

"We need to become more critical in our dealings with political Islam, because it hinders Muslim integration in our country. We need an Islam Law. The financing of mosques or Islamic kindergartens from abroad, e.g. from Turkey or Saudi Arabia, should be banned. All imams need to be trained in Germany and share our core values.

 

"It cannot be that we are importing different, partly extreme values ??from other countries. German must be the language of the mosques. Enlightened Europe must cultivate its own Islam.

"We are still at the beginning of our efforts. We must start now. We cannot on the one hand enact an Integration Law and on the other side close our eyes to what is being preached in mosques and by whom."

Scheuer's comments come amid reports that the Turkish government has sent 970 clerics — most of whom do not speak German — to lead 900 mosques in Germany that are controlled by the Turkish-Islamic Union for Religious Affairs (DITIB), a branch of the Turkish government's Directorate for Religious Affairs, known in Turkish as Diyanet.

Successive German governments are responsible for this state of affairs. An essay in Der Tagesspiegel states: "Over past decades, the federal government has welcomed the fact that the Turkish religious authority exercises a great influence on German mosques. Turkey was considered a secular state, and their influence was viewed as a shield against religious extremism."

This was before Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan embarked on a mission to turn the formerly secular nation an Islamic country.

According to Die Welt, Erdogan has increased the size, scope and power of the Diyanet, which now has a budget of 6.4 Turkish lira ($2.3 billion; €1.8 billion), which is more than the budgets of 12 Turkish government ministries, including the interior ministry and the foreign ministry. The Diyanet now has 120,000 employees, up from 72,000 in 2004.

The Turkish clerics in Germany are effectively Turkish civil servants who do the bidding of the Turkish government. Critics accuse Erdogan of using DITIB mosques to prevent Turkish migrants from integrating into German society.

German politician Cem Özdemir, co-chairman of the Green Party, said that DITIB is "nothing more than an extended arm of the Turkish state." He added: "Rather than being a legitimate religious organization, the Turkish government has turned DITIB into a political front organization of Erdogan's AKP party. Turkey must let go of the Muslims in Germany."

Erdogan has repeatedly warned Turkish immigrants not to assimilate into German society.

The Cologne Central Mosque, run by DITIB, is used as a key base in Germany for Turkey's intelligence agency, where they run a local "thug squad" to mete out "tough punishments" to Turkish dissidents in Germany. (Image source: © Raimond Spekking/CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons)

During a trip to Berlin in November 2011, Erdogan declared: "Assimilation is a violation of human rights." In February 2011, Erdogan told a crowd of more than 10,000 Turkish immigrants in Düsseldorf: "We are against assimilation. No one should be able to rip us away from our culture and civilization." In February 2008, Erdogan told 16,000 Turkish immigrants in Cologne that "assimilation is a crime against humanity."

For his part, Saudi Arabia's King Salman recently announced a plan to finance the construction of 200 mosques in Germany to provide for the spiritual needs migrants and refugees who arrived there in 2015. The mosques would, presumably, adhere to Wahhabism, the official and dominant form of Sunni Islam in Saudi Arabia. Wahhabism is an austere form of Islam that insists on a literal interpretation of the Koran.

On April 11, Hans-Georg Maassen, the head of Germany's domestic intelligence agency (BfV), expressed alarm at the growing number of radical Arab-language mosques in Germany. "Many mosques are dominated by fundamentalists and are being monitored because of their Salafist orientation," Maassen said in an interview with Welt am Sonntag. He added that many of the mosques were being financed by donors in Saudi Arabia.

It remains uncertain, however, whether Merkel will back the "Islam Law," which is certain to antagonize Erdogan, who effectively controls the floodgates of Muslim mass migration to Europe. If Merkel were openly to support a ban on foreign financing of mosques in Germany, Erdogan likely would threaten to pull out of the EU-Turkey deal on migrants, a deal Merkel desperately needs to stanch the flow of mass migration to Germany. It is yet another indication of the tremendous leverage Erdogan has gained over Merkel and German policymaking.

Germany's coalition government has, however, reached a compromise deal on a new "Integration Law."

On April 14, Merkel announced the broad outlines of the law, which will spell out the rights and responsibilities of migrants in Germany. Under the law, the text of which will be finalized by May 24, asylum seekers must attend German language classes and integration training or have their benefits cut.

The government pledged to make it easier for asylum seekers to gain access to the German labor market by promising to create 100,000 new "working opportunities." The government will also suspend a law requiring employers to give preference to German or EU job applicants over asylum seekers.

In an effort to prevent the spread of migrant ghettoes in Germany, the new law, which is expected to enter into force this summer, will prohibit refugees from choosing where they live until they have secured asylum. Migrants who abandon state-assigned housing would face unspecified sanctions.

The new law also includes a counter-terrorism provision, which would allow German intelligence agencies to work more closely with their European, NATO and Israeli counterparts.

"We will have a German law on integration," Merkel said. "This is the first time in post-war Germany that this has happened. It is an important, qualitative step."

But critics say the proposed law does not go far enough because it does not threaten with deportation those migrants who refuse to integrate. In his interview with Die Welt, Scheuer insisted that Muslim immigrants must integrate or be deported:

"Anyone who fails to attend integration and language courses attests that they are not prepared to integrate and accept our values. Moreover, it is important that people who want to stay in Germany register with the Federal Employment Agency [Bundesagentur für Arbeit] and provide for their own livelihood. The message is clear: Those who are not integrated cannot stay here. We need to cease having romantic views of integration. Multiculturalism has failed. Those who are not integrated must count on deportation."

via http://ift.tt/1NG8Vmh Tyler Durden

Obama Administration Doesn’t Want Us to Hold Its Overzealous Prosecutions Against Its Targets

CellThe same government that threw the book at a man and tossed him in federal prison for facilitating a comical alteration of a headline at a news site wants to tell us all how to treat him when he finally gets back out.

The Department of Justice (with the support and backing of the Obama administration) has been holding something called National Reentry Week this week. They’ve sponsored tons of resource fairs and events and presentations all designed to facilitate the return of the people the government has locked away (some for good reason; far too many for bad reasons) to the outside world.

On this last day of the reentry blitz the administration announced it wants to “Ban the Box” for many people seeking jobs with the federal government. The “Ban the Box” movement is a push to eliminate the checkbox in job applications that ask people if they’ve ever been convicted of a crime. The idea is not to eliminate the consideration of criminal background entirely in the employment process. Instead the goal is to push it to later in the process so that applicants aren’t immediately screened out on the basis of a criminal background that never gets evaluated to determine whether it’s relevant to the job duties.

According to BuzzFeed, if the federal government had the rule in the place, it would have affected about half of the federal government’s 200,000 hires in 2015. The rule would not apply to jobs in intelligence, national security, and law enforcement, and additional exceptions could be requested.

Dozens of major corporations are also signing on to voluntarily shift the way they consider job applicants in a “Fair Chance Business Pledge,” and good for them, as long as these are voluntary shifts and not government mandates. Businesses are best equipped to decide for themselves the circumstances by which they’ll consider the risks involved in hiring ex-cons, not the government.

Unfortunately—and sadly typically—if the government  thinks something’s a good idea there are going to be people who believe it should be mandated by laws or regulations. Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett even took note of this slightly ominous threat from the Labor Department when talking to reporters (via BuzzFeed):

Asked whether there was consideration of whether to take action to require federal contractors to “ban the box,” Jarrett said, “The president has supported federal legislation that would ban the box for federal contractors. He thinks that’s the best approach.”

Jarrett also noted, however, that the Department of Labor in 2013 adopted earlier guidance from Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to, in her words, “recommend that contractors refrain from inquiring about convictions on job applications.” That Labor Department directive, she added, also warned there are scenarios in which criminal records-based exclusions could violate civil rights protections.

How could it be a civil rights violation to exclude ex-convicts? The EEOC points to the “disparate impact” on racial minorities scenario, which turns this all a little strange. The EEOC points out in its guidance that African Americans and Latinos are arrested in numbers disproportionate to their percent of the population. It even notes that Latinos face federal drug charges at a rate three times higher than the rest of the population.

But this is all happening because of the behavior of the federal government itself, not the private job sector. It is not McDonald’s or Target or Microsoft that is putting these people in jail. This disparate impact is a direct result of the behavior of the government, including the very Department of Justice that is now taking a week away from abusing conspiracy laws in order to throw people in prison to beg us to help those same folks back into society.

So what we have here is one federal agency threatening to punish private employers for the civil rights violations that are actually caused by another federal agency.

Here’s a better idea: If the federal government wants employers to give less consideration to applicants’ criminal records, stop finding so many awful reasons to try to throw people in federal prison in the first place. Then maybe they can go around lecturing private businesses about “disparate impacts.”

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/1O0qTL6
via IFTTT

Dow Dumps 400 Points From BoJ Shock As Gold Nears $1300

Gold first closed above $1300 on September 29th 2010, 67 months ago; and as investors’ faith in Central Banks falters – with The Dow down over 400 points (and Nikkei 225 down 1700 points!) from the scene of Kuroda’s Kamikaze decision, gold has soared up above $1299…

NKY and JPY are bearing the brunt for now… (the former under 16,000 and the latter with a 106 handle)

 

Gold is soaring…

 

And Stocks are plunging…

 

As it appears Oil algos ran out of shorts to squeeze…

via http://ift.tt/1N73flj Tyler Durden

According To The NY Fed, US Has To Grow At 3.8% In Second Half To Hit The Fed’s GDP Forecast

Earlier today we reported that in its inaugural Q2 GDP nowcast, the Atlanta Fed expects 1.8% for Q2 GDP, a substantial rebound from the first official Q1 GDP print of only Q1. We also said that we expect this number (which is already 0.5% below the consensus estimate) will drop substantially in the coming weeks. Well, moment ago the New York Fed, which apparently has picked up the baton of the “most bearish regional Fed” released its own first Nowcast for Q2, in which it sees Q2 GDP growth of only 0.8%, or 1% below that of its fellow Fed.

This is why:

  • This week’s advance GDP release was 0.5% (0.54% when taken to two digits) which is close to the latest nowcast of 0.7% (0.72% to two digits) and consistent with the weakness predicted by the model since we started tracking the ýrst-quarter GDP growth in November 2015.
  • GDP growth prospects remain moderate for 2016:Q2, standing at 0.8%.
  • News from the past two weeks’ data releases, since the April 15 nowcast was released, had an overall negative effect on the nowcast for the second quarter.
  • Housing and manufacturing news had the largest negative impact on the nowcasts, while manufacturers’ inventories of durable goods provided a small but positive surprise.

Visually:

 

If the NY Fed is right, what does this mean in practical terms? Simple: assuming no revisions to Q1 GDP, and assuming Q2 GDP of 0.8%, then the US would have to grow at 3.8% to hit the Fed’s central tendency forecast of 2.2% GDP growth as per its latest forecast.

Good luck.

via http://ift.tt/1Wvkv56 Tyler Durden