Megyn Kelly Flees Fox for NBC, GOP Drops Ethics Office Battle, Trump Children Descend on D.C.: P.M. Links

  • IvankaMegyn Kelly is leaving Fox News in order to join NBC, where she will host a daytime program and a Sunday evening news show.
  • House Republicans are no longer trying to destroy the Office of Congressional Ethics.
  • Rhode Island College required students to devote themselves to “the value of social and economic justice.”
  • But there’s not a free speech problem on college campuses, oh no, that’s crazy talk.
  • Rice University will make freshman take a five-week class on sex, relationships, and consent.
  • Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner are moving to D.C. Their new home is a three-minute walk from President Obama’s new home.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2j61NWl
via IFTTT

Just What the Country Needed: Yet Another Video of Smug Celebrities Whining About Trump

FieldsAs Anthony Fisher previously observed, “Liberal Celebrity Videos Failed to Stop Donald Trump, But Trump’s Victory Has Failed to Stop Liberal Celebrity Videos.” Today, we are confronted with yet more evidence of this, courtesy of Art Not War’s latest masterpiece, #StandUpForUs.

Sally Field, Steve Buscemi, Jeffrey Wright, Rosie Perez, and a bunch of mildly famous people you’ve never heard of, have a message for members of Congress. For emphasis, they say so several times. Stop me if you’ve heard this one before:

Dear members of Congress.

Dear members of Congress.

Dear members of Congress.

Dear. Members. Of. Congress.

Watch the full thing here.

“The important thing is that our moral, ethical, and intellectual betters have been given yet another opportunity to browbeat us,” writes The Daily Caller‘s Jim Treacher. “In their minds, they lost because they just didn’t sneer at us enough. After all, they’re on TV and we’re not.”

Speaking of sneering liberals:

Har har.

Too many people in the media and entertainment industries don’t seem to understand that folks hate being treated like morons. I’m not thrilled about America’s choice for president, but I wasn’t thrilled about the other choice, either. I’m supposed to be shamed for not wanting Hillary Clinton, a key supporter of the disasters in Iraq and Libya, to fly the plane?

Smug liberalism is a problem: unfortunately, smug liberals will be the last identity group to admit it. In the meantime, Trump will be happy to continue profiting from the resentment said smugness inspires.

#StandUpForUS from Art Not War on Vimeo.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2iFgoaK
via IFTTT

Dow 20k Disappoints For 14th Day As Crude Crumbles, Peso Pounded

Disappointment again…

 

Early exuberance in stocks – as overnight gains suggested panic buying at the US open, faded rapidly as financials and tech faded and crude plunged (despite better than expected data)… then after NYMEX closed VIX was smashed lower and stocks lifted…

 

S&P was best on the day, Trannies were red (thanks to Ford news impacting rails)… NOTE – stocks ripped at the open, then dumped into the European close, then went nowhere…

 

This is the 14th day of disappointments for Dow 20k fans…

 

Bets on Regional bank declines are soaring in the last few weeks… (Put/Call ratio is highest since Feb 2014)

 

Restaurant stocks tumbled for the 8th straight day, to the lowest since Nov 17th… (today was worst since Oct 25th and worst 2-day drop sine September 9th)

SunTrust Robinson analyst Jake Bartlett writes that there is some risk to industry stock prices given strong performance of restaurants since election, lack of any clear improvement of sales trends (casual dining comps. appear to have decelerated, QSR promotional activity remains high)

Bonds were mixed today with most of the curve higher in yield overnight then, bonds went bid as US equities opened andas the long-end outperformed – 30Y yields were down 9bps from overnight highs…

 

As the yield curve continues to flatten and bank stocks are starting to realize that…

 

Notably the recent shifts in US, Japanese real yield differentials suggests USD weakness from here…

 

The US Dollar Index surge after better than expected Manufacturing data to fresh 14-year highs (before fading back)…

 

Led by EUR weakness…

 

But the Mexican Peso was pounded after Ford news…breaking above 21/$ once again…to a new record low close

 

Bitcoin continued to rise – up 18 of the last 21 days – topping $1000…

 

Silver rallied notably today – mirroring the downward move in Crude…

 

Big plunge in Oil priced in silver…biggest drop since July…

 

While headlines focused on Crude's demise (after news that Iraqi Kurds are producing more than they are supposed to), it was NatGas that was monkey-hammered, dumping over 10% on the day (after warmer-than-expected January weather forecasts)

John Kilduff of Again Capital LLC says: "Too much faith has been put in OPEC and the other countries that have promised cuts. They have been increasing output the last few months, so the cuts will be like New Year’s crash diet, and we know how those end."

Finally, gold is 2017's best performing asset-class…

via http://ift.tt/2iABIeK Tyler Durden

Centralized Control, Power, & Money Are The Problem, Not The Solution

Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

Solutions abound, but they look forward, not backward.

Many observers decry the loss of national coherence and purpose, and the increasing fragmentation of the populace into "tribes" with their own loyalties, value systems and priorities.

These observers look back on the national unity of World War II as the ideal social standard: everyone pitching in, with shared purpose and sacrifice. (Never mind the war killed tens of millions of people, including over 400,000 Americans.)

But few (if any) of these nostalgic observers note that history has no rewind button or reverse gear. It is impossible to recreate the national unity of World War II, as modern war is either specialized or nuclear. Neither enable mass mobilization.

Few observers note that World War II set the template for the next 60 years: the solution is always to further centralize power, control and money to serve the goals set by centralized authority.

The wartime economies of every combatant were optimized not just for production of war goods but for centralized command and control of that production.

We are now so habituated to centralized decision-making, control and power that we don't even question the notion that a wildly diverse nation of 320 million people can be well-served by a single healthcare system that requires thousands of pages of regulations to function in a centrally managed fashion.

It seems blindingly obvious to me that we need 10,000 different solutions to healthcare, not one insanely complex centralized system that is a global outlier in its cost and ineffectiveness (see chart below).

Those who are nostalgic for a centralized command and control economy and society are like those who decried the breakdown of "the one faith" Catholicism in the emergence of Protestant Christians.

The Protestant Reformation occurred because the centralized authority of Rome no longer worked for many of the faithful. The proliferation of Protestant churches was the solution.

Simply put, the 4th Industrial Revolution has de-optimized centralization. Centralized control, power and money are now the problem, not the solution.


Source: U.S. Healthcare Is A Global Outlier

This reality has pitted the changes in the economy and technology against the political command and control system that is virtually unchanged since 1945. New layers of bureaucracy are added, but none are ever dissolved.

Those decrying the loss of centralized control and narratives are in essence decrying solutions to the new problems we face. Just as the Catholic Church could not turn back the clock to 500 A.D., so the central states and banks cannot turn back the clock to 1945.

Solutions abound, but they look forward, not backward, and they embrace experimentation, innovation, decentralization, community and new models that obsolete de-optimized centralization. These solutions are what Of Two Minds is all about.

via http://ift.tt/2hPpvnN Tyler Durden

Donald Trump’s Cronyism and Authoritarianism on Full Display in Twitter Attack on GM

Donald Trump has not yet taken the oath of office, but he’s again overstepping the limits of presidential authority by bullying more American companies for shipping jobs to other counties.

As he did in December—claiming credit when Carrier, an Indiana-based air conditioning and heating manufacturer that had been a popular whipping boy during Trump’s presidential campaign, decided to cancel plans for moving jobs to a new facility in Mexico—Trump took to Twitter over the weekend to berate General Motors for selling Mexican-made cars in the United States.

The carmaker joins a growing list of American businesses being personally and publicly attacked by the president elect. It gives another chilling look at how the country’s 45th president views the relationship between government and business, and again shows Trump to be an economically illiterate bully.

“The president-elect’s tweet is disturbing on lots of different levels,” Daniel Griswold, a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center, said in a phone interview Tuesday.

For starters, Trump’s tweet about GM isn’t very factual. As the Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday, most of the Cruze hatchbacks made at Chevrolet’s Mexico facility are sold in foreign markets, not in the United States. Producing vehicles in foreign countries helps car manufacturers make more sales abroad and open greater market share. That’s why BMW operates a manufacturing plant in Spartanburg, South Carolina, and Nissan builds cars in Smyrna, Tennessee.

Trump’s economic nationalism will make it harder for American brands like GM and Ford to compete in growing foreign markets like Latin America and might counter-productively hurt those companies if they lose market share to foreign rivals, Griswold predicted.

“With the president-elect intimidating companies into withdrawing from foreign markets, we stand to lose influence and market share in those economies,” Griswold told Reason.

Targeting the automobile industry just doesn’t make much sense. Sure, unemployed auto workers in the Rust Belt might have helped Trump win the White House, but the industry as a whole is flourishing in the United States. Motor vehicle exports from the United States reached a record 2.6 million in 2015. In 2016, more than 12 million cars and light trucks were assembled in the United States, notes Griswold, and output has more than doubled since 1994, when one of Trump’s favorite boogeymen, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), was signed.

On Tuesday, Trump was at it again, taking credit for Ford’s decision to scrap plans for a $1.4 billion Mexican manufacturing facility and to invest $700 million in a Michigan plant instead. Ford, like Carrier, had been a popular target for Trump’s vitriol during the campaign.

“It used to be cars were made in Flint and you couldn’t drink the water in Mexico,” Trump told a crowd during a September speech, conflating two issues that didn’t have much in common beyond happening in the same physical location. “Now the cars are made in Mexico, and you can’t drink the water in Flint. That’s not good.”

Less than two weeks after winning the election, Trump took credit for Ford’s decision to keep a plant in Kentucky open instead of moving it to Mexico:

It’s dangerous for a president to meddle in the economy on such a personal level, but it’s arguably more dangerous for him to believe that he’s doing so effectively. Consider what Trump said in December about Carrier’s decision to keep their plant in Indiana open. On stage, he told a story about meeting a Carrier worker on the campaign trail who expressed the utmost confidence that Trump would keep the company in place, even though the decision to move had already been made.

“I never thought I made that promise,” Trump said. “Not with Carrier. I made it for everybody else. I didn’t make it really for Carrier.”

“That was a euphemism,” Trump continued. “I was talking about Carrier like all other companies from here on in, because they had made the decision a year and a half ago.”

That’s ego masquerading as humility. Of course Trump believed he had the power to bully Carrier into staying in Indiana—or at least that he would have the power to bully “all other companies from here on in” to make similar decisions—and to reward the faith that so many had placed in him. That the company did so in such short order after his victory at the polls only reinforced the strongman message. Trump was practically glowing (moreso than usual) on the stage that day in Indiana, giddy over the opportunity to demonstrate that all America really needed was a chief executive determined to prevent jobs from spilling over the border.

Trump was not shy about foreshadowing. “Companies are not going to leave the United States anymore without consequences,” Trump promised to raucous applause. “Not going to happen. It’s not going to happen, I’ll tell you right now.”

There will likely be more cheering about Trump’s bullying of Ford and General Motors. “Trump is already delivering the jobs he promised America,” trumpeted the New York Post on New Year’s Day (the headline got a retweet from the president-elect, of course), but that might only encourage the new president to continue down a dangerous path of mixing politics with businesses in an unprecedented way. Libertarians and fiscal conservatives for decades have talked about corporate welfare schemes as examples of “government picking winners and losers,” but Trump is threatening to take the idea to its most extreme conclusion—one where it’s not clear who exactly the winners are.

“This is the rule of one man,” said Griswold. “Not the rule of law.”

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2j1BT1X
via IFTTT

McDowell Is the Poorest, Sickest, Most Hopeless County in America. Why Doesn’t Everyone Just Leave? (Reason Podcast)

The short answer: Most did leave. In the last half-century, about 80 percent of the population of McDowell County, West Virginia, departed as jobs disappeared and civic life frayed, writes Reason’s Ron Bailey in “Stuck,” a story in our January 2017 issue. So why does the other 20 percent stay put?

Bailey’s grandparents left McDowell County around 1950, at a time when the town of Welch was known to locals as “Little New York.” When Bailey visited recently, he found only empty streets with the exception of a lone pickup truck.

Today, “nearly 47 percent of all personal income in the county is from Social Security, disability insurance, food stamps…and other federal programs,” Bailey writes. Twenty-five percent of residents under 65 are considered disabled, and only 32 percent of those over 16 are part of the workforce.

In our latest podcast, Bailey talks with Nick Gillespie about those who stayed behind and what it says about American poverty. Part of the problem is that “at this point, the government is paying poor people to stay there and remain poor,” Bailey argues.

The interview touches on the role of welfare, the federal disability program, and how Bailey’s research relates to Charles Murray’s Losing Ground: American Social Policy, 1950-1980, and Hillbilly Elegy, J.D. Vance’s blockbuster 2016 memoir of growing up in rural Ohio (which Bailey reviewed for Reason).

Click below to listen to that conversation—or subscribe to our podcast at iTunes.

Don’t miss a single Reason podcast or video! Subscribe, rate, and review!

Subscribe at iTunes.

Follow us at Soundcloud.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel.

Like us on Facebook.

Follow us on Twitter.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2iAG4mi
via IFTTT

Treat Porn ‘Epidemic’ Like We Did Tobacco, Utah Republican Proposes

Last April, Utah passed a resolution declaring pornography a “public health hazard.” The bizarre antic offered no remedy for this imagined scourge, nor any binding legislative action, but simply an assertion that porn leads “to a broad spectrum of individual and public health impacts and societal harms.”

Now the proverbial other shoe has dropped. Sen. Todd Weiler (R-Woods Cross), who sponsored last year’s porn resolution, said he will soon introduce new legislation that would allow Utah residents who imagine themselves addicted to porn to sue the websites where they watch it.

“I’m trying to kind of track the same path that was taken against tobacco 70 years ago,” Weiler told Utah’s KSL.com. “I’m looking at where we can push the envelope as a state of Utah. To pretend that this is not having any impact on our youth, on children’s’ minds as they’re developing, as their attitudes towards sex and the opposite sex are being formed, I think is foolish.”

Weiler fancies his solution a libertarian one.

“It’s not government coming in and saying what you can and can’t watch,” he said. “It’s just basically a message to the pornography industry that if someone in Utah can prove damages from the product, that they may be held liable financially.”

It’s easy to laugh at melodramatic musings like Weiler’s and at such tone-deaf dealings as the Utah porn resolution. But this silly “porn as public health crisis” meme seems to now be spreading to other states, egged on by folks at the group formerly known as Morality in Media.

Last week, Virginia State Delegate Bob Marshall (R-Prince William) proposed legislation declaring porn a “public health crisis” that has reached “epidemic” proportions, the evidence of which can be seen by the fact that teenagers are—gasp—texting each other sexy pictures. (Because everyone knows that before ubiquitous internet porn, puberty-racked adolescents walked uphill both ways to and from school and never saw themselves as sexual beings…)

Despite the feverish paranoia of conservative lawmakers like Weiler and Marshall, many in the Republican rank-and-file think their party’s obsession with issues like pornography is out of touch and misguided. Check out what delegates at the 2016 Republican National Convention had to say about porn’s alleged public-health-hazard status in the video below.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2hPAKwr
via IFTTT

“The World Has Materially Changed”: Why Morgan Stanley Began To Fade The Trump Rally

Morgan Stanley’s Adam Parker has undergone an epistemological catharsis of sorts in the past year: having called 2013-2015 largely accurately, 2016 threw him for a loop, when he entered the year bullish, only to turn bearish, and then to flip again (along with most other sellsiders) shortly after the Trump victory. Then, going into year end, Parker remained steadfastly optimistic, however much of that appears to have now changed, because, as he admits in his latest research outlook issued early this morning, he has turned decidedly more sour on the market (although he still expects the S&P to close the year at 2,300, same as Goldman), as his “view of the world has materially changed in the last couple of months” following the furious market rally, which has little optimistic upside left.

To wit: “What increasingly optimistic news are we going to start embedding in our earnings outlooks post-inauguration that hasn’t already been contemplated? A number of stocks are up a lot for which we don’t expect much incrementally positive news for at least the next couple of earnings seasons. So to us, it is WHEN, not IF we should fade this recent reflation trade.

And speaking of the WHEN to fade the reflation trade, Parker provides a tenative answer: “Part of us thinks we should just sell the inauguration. After all, what incrementally positive and exciting outcomes could be produced in the first few weeks after that? We are worried that there is an arrogance  in telling people that they should be worried, but to stay bullish for now. We are getting more cautious and are trying to be prudent as the market has materially appreciated.”

Finally, for those worried that the selling may begin sooner (or later), the note concludes by laying out the list of red flags the Morgan Stanley strategist is monitoring for an indication that the “optimistic” upside case is about to be undone.

Below are selected excerpts from Parker’s full note: “Buy the Election and Sell the Inauguration? The 2017 US Equity Portfolio Playbook

Our view of the world has materially changed in the last couple of months. For the previous several years we had retained an optimistic view of US equities, fueled by a view that there would be low earnings growth and some multiple expansion. Conversely, we now are forecasting material earnings growth, projecting EPS to be 18% higher in 2018 than in 2016.

 

 

 

However, we are assuming modest multiple contraction going forward, and we think a key investment controversy for 2017 will be at what point does the multiple contraction begin to offset the dreams and reality of higher earnings growth.

 


 

 

Why multiple contraction? We have shown with data and, dare we say, demonstrated in practice over the past few years that forecasting the price-to-earnings ratio is challenging. Over the very long term, we know that changes to the perception about growth and rates matter most for investing. But visibility is also important. We can’t help but think that the Republican sweep has created a more uncertain and volatile outlook for the economy and corporate earnings growth. Moreover, it seems likely that the distribution of outcomes from the Fed over the next two years is skewed toward more hawkishness than had been the case only a few short months ago. With more uncertainty and more tightening, we are no longer comfortable forecasting multiple expansion.

 

There are many other potential risks, including a slowdown in economic growth in China, elections and uncertainty in Europe, a materially stronger dollar, and a big change to the slope and level of US interest rates (i.e., no “rate Goldilocks”). Our base case price target for year-end 2017 is 2300 on the S&P 500, just a couple percent above today’s level, plus the 2% dividend. This doesn’t leave us outright bearish on US equities, as we were, for instance, in 2011, but it does mean that we will continue to try to analyze sentiment and evaluate signposts to call when to fade the reflation rally. With our base case of 2300 equal to 16.2x 2018e S&P 500 EPS of $141.50, we feel a lot of optimism is already baked into our outlook and current market prices.

 

Sentiment – Is there anyone left to dream bigger? There are so many ways to gauge sentiment, including meeting with investors, surveying and polling them, analyzing hedge fund exposure, ETF flows, futures positioning, assessing recent derivative trades, research click data, among many other sources. In aggregate, our judgment is that the confluence of these metrics is pretty mixed today, and certainly sentiment is no longer negative enough to make a contrarian call, as it was in early February 2016 for example. In the end, one way to view stock investing is the process of buying a little dream today in the hope of selling it to a sucker with a bigger dream later. By our getting less optimistic, all we are really saying is that today’s dreams are no longer that little. Investors are including materially lower tax rates in the base cases of their earnings outlooks.

 

Economists are projecting higher growth and rates. The President-elect is tweeting victory laps about the market appreciation. Yet, we struggle to see how corporate earnings and the management teams we are assessing could be as proactively enthused. How should CFOs think about what will happen to interest expense deductions? Will there be accelerated depreciation, or R&D credits? How should they think about capital use? What increasingly optimistic news are we going to start embedding in our earnings outlooks post-inauguration that hasn’t already been contemplated? A number of stocks are up a lot for which we don’t expect much incrementally positive news for at least the next couple of earnings seasons. So to us, it is WHEN, not IF we should fade this recent reflation trade.

Fully aware that in a market that makes idiots out of even the smartest people, Parker then hedges by saying that while the market can keep rising well beyond its “sell by” date, he believes that the selling catalyst may be a very prominent one: the Trump inauguration:

Fade gauge“: It is easy for someone to say that they are increasingly worried about the bigger picture but think things could remain okay for a while. Part of us thinks we should just sell the inauguration. After all, what incrementally positive and exciting outcomes could be produced in the first few weeks after that? We are worried that there is an arrogance in telling people that they should be worried, but to stay bullish for now. We are getting more cautious and are trying to be prudent as the market has materially appreciated.

Finally, with that honest assessment out of the day, this is what the key warning signs watched by Parker:

What are we monitoring? This is by no means an exhaustive list, but our signposts include:  any signs of gridlock in Washington on taxes or regulatory reform, changes to the slope and level of the curve, the UST vs. Bund and JGB gaps, tighter financial conditions globally and in the US, material  changes to the commodity complex and that component of the reflation thesis, and news about wage inflation during corporate earnings, among other items.

it was not immediately clear what one should do when any/all of these red flags are hit, and the market – which long ago stopped responding to fundamental or even tehnical signals – keeps rising higher.

via http://ift.tt/2iMpDDd Tyler Durden

Mexico Responds To Ford’s Decision To Scrap Its New Plant

Mexico “regrets” Ford’s decision to scrap the plan to build a plant in the central Mexican state of San Luis Potosi, the Economy Ministry said on Tuesday, adding that it has made sure Ford will reimburse any costs and expenses from the state government to facilitate the now defunct investment.

In a surprising statement on Tuesday at 11am ET, in an act of goodwill toward the president-elect, the second largest U.S. automaker said it will scrap the $1.6 billion factory in Mexico and will invest $700 million at a Michigan factory, after President-elect Donald Trump had harshly criticized the Mexico investment plan.

The Mexican ministry said that jobs created in Mexico have contributed to maintaining other manufacturing jobs in the U.S. that would have disappeared to Asian competition.

Meanwhile, Mexico vowed to maintain its commitment to making Mexico a competitive nation to attract investment, and reiterated its commitment to modernizing NAFTA in a way that strengthens competitive capacity of North America.

It may find roadblocks in that regard if Trump follows through with his threat to build a “great, big wall” between the two nations.

via http://ift.tt/2iwCpI3 Tyler Durden

How Crony Capitalism Works

MoneyChangingHandsSvetlanaLarinaDreamstimeHigher campaign contrbutions by companies helps them to secure more federal government contracts at better terms that yield higher profits, says a new working paper from researchers associated with the Networks Financial Institute at Indiana State University. In “It’s a Sweetheart of a Deal: Political Connections and Federal Contracting,” economists Stephen Ferris and Reza Houston confirm earlier econometric findings that firms that make more contributions to politicians do better than companies that supply lower or no contributions. They measured political connections of firms by taking into account the size of political contributions made by each company’s political action committee (PAC) to directly to Congressional candidates and political parties and to their associated PACs.

Looking at all of the firms listed on the S&P 1500 Composite Index, they find that companies that make above median political contributions received 6.1 to 8.6 times more federal contracts than those making below median contributions. In addition, larger contributors receive larger contracts that are together nearly 17-fold more valuable than the aggregate of those contracts made with companies whose contributions fell below the median.

Additionally, Ferris and Houston wanted to find out whether larger contributors got better contractual terms, that is, sweetheart deals. To probe this, they constructed a four-point Sweetheart Index based on contractual terms that are clearly advantageous to the contractor but not necessarily so for the government. Specifically, they scanned government contracts for no-bid, cost-plus, multi-year, and exemption from cost and pricing data provisions. Obviously, all four provisions enhance the profitability of the contracts. So what did Ferris and Houston find?

We observe that contract terms are consistently more favorable for firms with stronger political connections The overall sweetheart index across all measures of political connectivity is 1.12 for firms making below median political contributions. The corresponding value for those firms making above median contributions is 1.41. The difference in these index values is statistically significant.

So politically connected companies, that is, those make larger contributions to politicians and parties, are not only more likely to be awarded government contracts, they are also more likely to get sweetheart deals. President-elect Donald Trump says that he is going to “drain the swamp” that is Washington, D.C. His own career as crony capitalist and his Carrier intervention do not provide much hope that he will do more than change the denizens who inhabit that particular swamp.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2j5JuR8
via IFTTT