How Snowfall Presents Crack’ s History is Wack: New at Reason

'Snowfall'John Singleton was once the buzz king of Hollywood. At 24, he was the youngest nominee ever for a best directing Oscar for Boyz n the Hood, which he wrote while a film student at the University of Southern California. His film launched a whole generation of stars. (Cuba Gooding, Ice Cube, Morris Chestnut, Laurence Fishburne, Nia Long, Regina King, and Angela Bassett all got their first major exposure in Boyz.)

These days, however, the biggest buzz around Singleton is about films from which he’s been bounced. He mostly works on remakes and sequels with lots of flying lead and crashing cars; he hasn’t written or directed a movie or, apparently, had a thought of any importance this century.

Nothing in the hackneyed and ahistorical Snowfall is likely to change that. Billing itself as the story of “how crack began,” Snowfall is really just a collection of cliches and set pieces you’ve already seen in other, much better narcodramas. Television critic Glenn Garvin explains further.

View this article.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2tt33aC
via IFTTT

“Honey, I Shrunk The VIX”

There’s been a growing chorus lately suggesting that perhaps the record low VIX readings aren’t due to record low feelings about volatility, but instead due to the dramatic increase in VIX products and assets betting on decreases in volatility.

As RCM Alternatives notes, it sure feels like that is the case, with every move higher in the VIX seemingly smacked down earlier, and with more force, than the one before it.

We’ve covered it herehere, and here, but who wants to read when you can see it in pictures… infographic style:

Source: http://ift.tt/2lQRoiF

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

GOP Pushes Bad, Punitive Anti-Federalist Immigration Bills Through the House

immigration bannerHouse Republicans overwhelmingly voted in favor of two bad immigration-focused bills yesterday that potentially punish those in the United States illegally with new harsh prison sentences and attempts to push cities into helping federal authorities deport people.

The first bill, popularly known as “Kate’s Law,” adds new criminal penalties and federal prison sentences to any immigrant who returns to the United States after being deported for criminal behavior. But it also threatens up to 10 years in federal prison for illegal immigrants who repeatedly return to the United States after being deported, even if they’ve committed no other crimes. It also forbids the immigrant from challenging the legitimacy of any prior removal orders.

The second bill, the “No Sanctuary for Criminals Act,” attempts to push cities, particularly so-called “sanctuary cities,” into cooperating with federal immigration officials to detain and eject those in the country illegally.

President Donald Trump (and many, many other Republicans) made a big deal about fighting sanctuary cities—which generally don’t ask residents or people who interact with government officials about their citizenship status—on the campaign trail.

But after Trump took office, his Department of Justice was faced with an awkward truth: Most sanctuary cities are not defying federal laws at all, and there’s not much the government can currently do about them. Federal laws do not require that cities and local law enforcement assist immigration officials by detaining people the feds want to deport. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) can ask cities to hold illegal immigrants for in “detainer orders.” But they’re requests. Cities have their own rules about when they’ll comply with such orders (often requiring court orders or a warrant for cooperation).

Ultimately after the Department of Justice started threatening federal grant money to sanctuary cities, they ended up discovering that really only a handful of governments (eight cities and one county) are behaving in a way that was even remotely in defiance of federal authority.

What the “No Sanctuary for Criminals Act” does is forbid municipalities from stopping local law enforcement officials from helping federal immigration officials by complying with detainer orders. In areas of immigration enforcement, it overrules the ability of cities to control the behavior of their own law enforcement officers.

The act also classifies specifically which grants the federal government would withhold from sanctuary cities that defy them. Previously the administration through executive order threaten to withhold all sorts of federal grants, but the courts have previously ruled such behavior unconstitutional. The grants have to be connected to enforcing the laws themselves. This act specifically defines which grants could be denied sanctuary cities.

The votes fell mostly across party lines—Republicans in favor of the two bills and Democrats against them. More Democrats were willing to cross the aisle to vote in favor of harsher criminal sentences for illegal immigrants than to cut federal grants from sanctuary cities, so make of that what you will.

Only one Republican voted against both bills, libertarian Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan. Amash tweeted his reasons why. He found both bills to significantly violate the Constitution and the concept of federalism:

A spokesperson for Amash’s office told Reason, “Rep. Amash supports securing our borders and has voted to defund sanctuary cities, but these bills go far beyond that and are unconstitutional.”

Though the legislation passed the House, it has a challenge getting through a Senate where Republicans hold just a slim majority. As it stands, Republican Senators have their own ideas on what this legislation should look like, and they’re combining Kate’s Law with other punitive immigration policies in one massive bill designed to find more ways to throw people into federal prison.

These bills represent attacks on immigrants that aren’t backed up by data. There is little evidence that illegal immigrants are a source of crime that justifies new, harsher federal criminal penalties and the data suggests otherwise. Furthermore, it’s utterly inappropriate for the federal government to try to overrule a state or city’s control over its own law enforcement officers.

Below, ReasonTV explains what Republicans don’t understand about sanctuary cities:

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2tt7SAL
via IFTTT

The GOP Health-Care Reform Plans Are Worse Than Useless: Nick Gillespie on Kennedy

I was on Fox Business’ Kennedy to talk about the Senate Republicans’ now-on-hold plans to reform Obamacare. The eponymous host started out by talking about an excellent letter from Sen. Rand Paul outlining the Kentucky Republican’s opposition to his own colleagues’ plan. Among other things, Paul objected to the plan’s refundable tax credits, which he convincingly argues create a new entitlement. What is wrong with politicians that they will do anything but talk seriously about bring market forces and price signals into health care?

Watch above for our discussion. And click below to learn why the reforms being pushed by House and Senate Republicans represent not just a failure of nerve but a failure of vision about how best to actually “repeal and replace” Obamacare. The GOP currently runs the House, the Senate, and the White House. If they’re not up to the task of creating a system that increases the quantity and quality of health care now, they never will be.

Read Reason’s coverage of health-care reform here.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2s9NHEo
via IFTTT

Police Chief (And Most Of His Department) Quit In Protest Of City Corruption

Authored by Carey Wedler via TheAntiMedia.org,

The majority of the small police department in Slaughter, Louisiana – including the police chief – resigned this week after accusing the mayor of the city of attempting to impose ticket quotas on citizens to increase revenue and turn a profit.

The officers’ resignations followed accusations their assistant chief made against Mayor Robert Jackson in April after residents began complaining of the high volume of tickets they were receiving — tickets that would have increased in number had the police adhered to Jackson’s quotas.

At the time, local outlet WBRZ 2 reported, Assistant Police Chief Bobby Hopson recorded a conversation with Jackson in which the mayor appeared to admit he would pay officers to execute 40 “warrants” each per month.

You told me 40 tickets a month would be perfect for each officer because it would keep the budget going good,” Hopson said on the recording with Mayor Robert Jackson, WBRZ reported.

 

I agree with that. I agree with that,” Jackson responded. “We sat down and looked at the numbers with the Chief, and that’s what we come [sic] up with and thought it would be a workable number.

Police Chief Walter Smith denied agreeing to a quota, and Hopson stood behind him. Rather, Smith says he informed the mayor that imposing quotas is illegal.

You can’t set a quota, [officers] have the right to do their job,” Chief Smith said. “We’ve told him before that it’s illegal to give ticket quotas,” Hopson added.

Pursuant to RS: 40:2401.1, “municipalities and their police departments are prohibited from establishing or maintaining on a formal or informal basis policies which require or suggest predetermined or specified number of any type or combination of arrests or traffic citations.

When WBRZ confronted Jackson with Hopson’s recording, he admitted it was his voice on the tape but denied giving the police a quota, claiming he suggested “40 interactions” rather than “40 tickets.”

I told Bobby, and Bobby and I, but you ended it before I said 40 interactions,” Jackson told the outlet. “Let it keep going.”

WBRZ reported:

So we continued playing the recording. Never did Jackson say he told the Police Chief, Assistant chief or other Officers in the Department about interacting 40 times with the public. The Chief and Assistant Chief are also not mincing their words. They said the Mayor’s orders were clear. He wanted 40 tickets per month.

A week after the initial April report, WBRZ reported again on the interactions between Hopson and Jackson.

Everyone makes $25 bucks a piece…each warrant. I thought it would be a good thing for officers to make extra money,” Jackson reportedly said.

 

The law precludes him from doing that,” Chief Smith said more recently. “But, he was not up enough on that law to know that.”

When WBRZ contacted Jackson again the following week in April, they reported that he hung up on them after saying “I have no interest in speaking with you.”

Smith says he decided to resign after nearly everyone in the department quit over the alleged quota system. “Everyone I had working here when you talked to me last (two months ago) no longer is,” he said. They refused to enforce the quotas.

As police around the country continue to face scrutiny for illegal and immoral behavior, it is refreshing to see the majority of a police force stand up against injustice and an apparently corrupt official to side with the public.

As Hopson said back in April, As a law enforcement officer, anytime someone is breaking the law, it’s my job to expose it. That’s what I took an oath to do as a law enforcement officer.”

An interim chief will be appointed until the town can elect a new one, and the local sheriff’s department will likely provide back up until new officers are hired.

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

Eric Holder Sends Ominous Late Night Tweet To “Career DOJ/FBI” Employees

Eric Holder, Obama’s former Attorney General and a man who recently hinted at an interest in pursuing a 2020 bid for the White House, issued a rather ominous warning to the “career men & women” of the DOJ/FBI last night saying that their “actions and integrity will be unfairly questioned” before calling upon them to “be prepared, be strong.”

“To the career men & women at DOJ/FBI: your actions and integrity will be unfairly questioned. Be prepared, be strong. Duty. Honor. Country.”

 

Of course, with the many scandals that plagued Obama’s Justice Department, it’s impossible to know exactly which one sparked Holder’s warning. 

Could it be the outrageous unmasking of Trump officials in the waning days of Obama’s administration, an obvious attempt to exploit the collection of foreign intelligence and use it as a political weapon of mass destruction, and subsequent illegal leaking of that information to the media?  Certainly, this would seem to be a concern for Susan Rice who has been asked to testify before the House Intelligence Committee.

Or, is it a simple message directed at FBI Director McCabe who we recently pointed out is coming under increasing scrutiny for not recusing himself from the investigation of Michael Flynn, a man against whom he very clearly harbored a personal vendetta.

Or, perhaps its that whole James Comey revelation that Eric Holder’s replacement, Loretta Lynch, colluded with the Hillary Clinton campaign and the FBI to quash the investigation of Hillary’s email scandal.

Or, perhaps it’s just a general warning after the FISA court recently revealed the the Obama administration conducted illegal queries targeting American citizens “with much greater frequency than had previously been disclosed to the Court”…an issue which it described as a “very serious Fourth Amendment issue.”

“Since 2011, NSA’s minimization procedures have prohibited use of U.S.-person identifiers to query the results of upstream Internet collection under Section 702.  The October 26, 2016 Notice informed the Court that NSA analysts had been conducting such queries in violation of that prohibition, with much greater frequency than had previously been disclosed to the Court.”

 

“At the October 26, 2016 hearing, the Court ascribed the government’s failure to disclose those IG and OCO reviews at the October 4, 2016 hearing to an institutional ‘lack of candor’ on NSA’s part and emphasized that ‘this is a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.'”

FISA

 

Or, perhaps its something else entirely.  Just imagine the possibilities…

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

Trump-Media Wars, Nancy MacLean’s Smear, and the People vs. John McEnroe: New Fifth Column

Would the world be better served without having televised White House press briefings? Former press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Mike McCurry seem to think so, and so did Michael Moynihan and Kmele Foster…until I got all shouty about it near the end of the latest episode of The Fifth Column podcast. The three of us also dissect the Jake Tapper approach to factfulness in the Trump era, the president’s war on Morning Joe, the dishonesty-riddled Nancy MacLean book Democracy in Chains, the effects of whiskey on Kmele’s eye color, and John McEnroe’s #problematic decision to answer a question about Serena Williams honestly. It’s a fine episode, and you can listen to it right here:

Reminder: Over the weekend you can listen to an hour-long version of The Fifth Column on Sirius XM POTUS (channel 124) Saturdays at 11 a.m. ET then Sundays at 1 a.m. and 3 p.m. And you can always find more Fifth Column at iTunes, Stitcher, Google Play, wethefifth.com, @wethefifth, and Facebook.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2u7t6BT
via IFTTT

Regime Change in Iran Is Neither Necessary Nor Prudent: New at Reason

Despite threat inflation by Iran hawks, the country has limited capabilities and U.S.-driven regime change is a bad idea.

Bonnie Kristian writes:

There’s mischief afoot in the White House, and it’s the familiar mischief of regime change. Some in President Trump’s advisory circle are reportedly pushing for an official embrace of regime change as the United States’ policy toward Iran.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) is at the forefront of this ill-advised endeavor. “I don’t see how anyone can say America can be safe,” he told Politico, “as long as you have in power a theocratic despotism” in Iran.

Well, senator, let me explain.

First, let’s agree the government of Iran is an unsavory regime. Tehran has a well-documented record of human rights abuses, so Cotton’s “theocratic despotism” label is not unfair. Iran also has a reputation for sponsoring terrorism and backing Syria’s genocidal government.

To be sure, the recent re-election of President Hassan Rouhani, who campaigned on a message of moderation and liberalization, is a step in the right direction. Rouhani’s hardline opponent was considered the favorite of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and his voters hailed the win as a victory for peace and positive international diplomacy. More importantly, younger Iranians are increasingly secular and pro-Western. They are challenging their government’s strict social controls and have a positive view of America. As these generations mature and Khamenei’s cohort dies off, political evolution (if not revolution) is likely.

View this article.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2tsYA86
via IFTTT

Minneapolis City Council Ignores Damning Seattle Study, Passes Its Own $15 Minimum Wage

Protesting union activistsA week after the release of a study revealing the high cost of Seattle’s minimum wage, the Minneapolis City Council rammed through a $15 minimum wage over the strenuous objections of workers and businesses.

The council voted 13-1 in favor of a tiered minimum wage roll-out schedule for large and small businesses modeled closely on Seattle’s. The first of the wage increases will kick in in January 2018.

“The majority of the city council has given us two middle fingers,” said Sarah Webster Norton, of Service Industry Staff for Change, which has been fighting the minimum wage ordinance.

Much of the opposition in Minneapolis has centered on the council’s refusal to allow restaurants and bars to credit tips to the base hourly wage of their workers.

The tip credit puts more cash in the pockets of workers and gives businesses more flexibility in adjusting to wage hikes. Webster Norton, a server with 24 years of experience, says she expects businesses and customers will scale back or eliminate tipping, cutting her take-home pay by half.

“We’ve tried to show them the numbers and show them the math, they absolutely, staunchly refuse to listen,” she said.

A survey of more than 100 Minneapolis restaurants by Pathway to 15—a pro-minimum wage, pro-tip credit organization—found that 81 percent of businesses would reduce hours, and another 55 percent would eliminate current positions without a tip credit.

Roughly 63 percent of business owners surveyed said they would implement a service charge or change their tipping model if a tip credit wasn’t included in the Minneapolis minimum wage ordinance.

Minneapolis Mayor Betsy Hodges, a minimum wage proponent, however, described tipping in an essay as a legacy of slavery and demeaning to women. Webster Norton said Hodges and the council have abused identity politics to quiet opposition.

“It’s insulting to those of us who have tried to hone our craft, who have worked our asses off to become knowledgeable about food and beverage and alcohol and wine,” Webster Norton said. “All the things that make a good tipped employee. It basically just implies that we have to use our feminine wiles to get tips.”

Steve Minn, a former council member himself and owner of affordable housing developments in the city, told Reason the rush to a minimum wage increase was political pandering by Hodges and councilman Jacob Frey, who are vying for the nomination for mayor at the Democrat-Farm Labor Party convention July 8.

Minn wrote a lengthy op-ed in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune detailing his concerns.

“If this was about good policy, they would have waited and done their study, and paused when the most recent data on Seattle came back,” Minn said. “The rush to deal with it this month has everything to do with the mayoral convention that happens in two weeks.”

The new ordinance leaves Minn in a tough spot, prohibiting him from raising rents of his affordable housing, thanks to a contract with the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Minn says his alternative will probably be to trim services to his tenants.

“Instead of having three cleaning crews a week,” he said, “maybe I’ll have two.”

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2s9S8ix
via IFTTT

Stockman: Debt Is the Third Benjamin Franklin ‘Certainty’

Authored by David Stockman via The Daily Reckoning,

Benjamin Franklin supposedly said, “In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.”

If old Ben were still around he would surely add “debt” to his famous saying. Indeed, a recent Experian study of its 220 million consumer files actually proves the case.

It turns out that 73% of consumers who died last year had debts which averaged nearly $62,000. In addition to the kind of debt that apparently always stays with you — credit cards and car loans — it also happened that 37% of the newly deceased had unpaid mortgages and 6% still had student loans with an average unpaid balance of $25,391!

Once upon a time people used to have mortgage burning ceremonies when later in their working years the balance on the one-time loan they took out in their 30s to buy their castle was finally reduced to zero.

And there was no such thing as student loans, and not only because students are inherently not credit worthy. College was paid for with family savings, summer jobs, work study and an austere life of four to a dorm room.

No more. The essence of debt in the present era is that it is perpetually increased and rolled-over. It’s never reduced and paid-off.

To be sure, much of mainstream opinion considers that reality unremarkable — even evidence of economic progress and enlightenment. Keynesians, Washington politicians and Wall Street gamblers would have it no other way because their entire modus operandi is based not just on ever more debt, but more importantly, on ever higher leverage.

The chart below not only proves the latter point, but documents that over the last four decades rising leverage has been insinuated into every nook and cranny of the U.S. economy.

Nominal GDP (dark blue) grew by 6X from $3 trillion to $18 trillion, whereas total credit outstanding (light blue) soared by 13X from $5 trillion to $64 trillion.

Consequently, the national leverage ratio rose from 1.5X in 1980 to 3.5X today.

My point today is not to moralize, but to discuss the practical implications of the nation’s debt-topia for Ben Franklin’s other two certainties — death and (especially) taxes.

There’s no doubt that the modus operandi of the American economy has been transformed by the trends displayed in the below chart.

It so happened that the 1.5X ratio of total debt-to-income (GDP) at the beginning of the chart was not an aberration. It had actually been a constant for 100 years — except for a couple of unusual years during the Great Depression.

It was also linked with the greatest period of capitalist prosperity, economic growth and rising living standards in recorded history.

By contrast, today’s 3.5X debt-to-income ratio has two clear implications.

  • First, the nation effectively performed a leveraged buyout (LBO) on itself during the last forty years. And that did temporarily add to the appearance of prosperity.
  • But it also means that the U.S. economy is now lugging two turns of extra debt compared to the historic norm. Mainstream opinion, of course, says “so what?”

The U.S. economy is lugging $35 trillion of extra debt, that’s what.

That’s right. In the absence of the 40-year leverage aberration since the late 1970s, the chart below would show about $29 trillion of credit market debt (public and private) outstanding, not $64 trillion.

Make no mistake, $35 trillion of extra debt make a very practical and very large difference.

The soaring leverage ratio of recent years came at a heavy price — and one which Keynesians and their camp followers simply refuse to acknowledge:

America’s 40-year LBO didn’t create permanent incremental growth. It just stole it from the future.

Today’s added leverage and the incremental spending it currently finances eventually become tomorrow’s higher debt service cost and reduced spending. In fact, the latter is already occurring. And that’s the reason I call the chart below “The Great Inverse.”

The trend level of real GDP growth captured by the gray bars has been heading south since the early 1970s. And during the last 10 years it’s averaged only 1.2% annually, or just one-third of the 3.8% average recorded during the American heyday (1953-1971).

This stunning deterioration occurred precisely as the national LBO hit full stride (red line), rising from the historic 1.5X to the current 3.5X.

Ultimately, all this debt and financial suppression is the enemy of investment and productivity.

It encourages massive financial engineering in the form of stock buybacks and merger and acquisition (M&A) deals. This diverts economic resources from productive investment on main street to leveraged speculation in existing financial assets on Wall Street.

The retail sector, for example, was the site of massive borrowings to fund share buybacks and LBOs — until Amazon knocked over the house of cards, causing what I call Retail Armageddon. The retail sector will see upwards of 30,000 store closures over 2016-2018 alone.

We’ve also seen massive debt envelop the auto sector, which is nearly $3 trillion. This is a sector that bears very close watching, as I believe it’s ready to implode any day now.

In short, the sum of business sector debt stood at $8.7 trillion on the eve of the great financial crisis. It now stands at $13.2 trillion. And that $4.5 trillion gain was not pumped into productive investments on main street.

The Fed’s reckless money printing is grinding down the U.S. economy’s growth with rising debt and higher leverage ratios — exactly the kind of causation that lies behind the Great Inverse chart.

And that gets us to death and taxes…

A surprisingly high share of today’s soaring medical costs are designed to ward off the former. But the overwhelming share of households have no savings or remaining debt capacity.

So they demand government help with their medical bills and sooner or latter we end up with Medicare, Medicaid,  tax subsidized employer plans ($200 billion per year) and Obamacare.

During the next decade, for example, upwards of $25 trillion or nearly 63% of personal health care costs will be financed by the programs listed above (including the state share of Medicaid).

Needless to say, that’s why government funded health care has become the true third rail of American politics.

The entire population has been driven into government financed or subsidized health insurance. And as these policies became increasingly socialist (i.e. based on community ratings and homogenized rather than risk-differentiated premiums), the whole system becomes more inefficient and costly.

But capitalism doesn’t work if you have no economic prices and no real consumers. What you get instead is price-insensitive patients and organized provider cartels, which attempt to maximize their incomes by lobbying public and private insurance payors.

The solution of government insurance then becomes the driving force of endlessly escalating government budgets.

There is not a snowballs chance in the hot place the system will be reformed any time soon because the baby boom gave itself an LBO. That is, 73% of the population going into its “final expenses” with $62,000 of debt.

In short, the national LBO of 1980-2017 has saddled the nation with a giant Welfare State (health care and retirement pensions) because the bottom 90% of the population has no material savings.

And financing that mushrooming Welfare State will mean, in turn, higher taxes and more public debt as far as the eye can see.

When you look at the Great Inverse chart above it becomes fairly obvious that even more debt and taxes will result in even lower economic growth. That will only necessitate even higher taxes and debt to pay for the Welfare State.

Benjamin Franklin also famously said at the end of the Constitutional Convention, “gentleman you have a Republic, if you can keep it.”

If he had known about today’s trifecta of death, taxes and debt, he might not have pronounced so boldly.

via http://ift.tt/2spv5V5 Tyler Durden