Month: September 2018

NORAD Confirms Another Dangerous US Intercept Of Russian Long-Range Bombers Near Alaska

Russia’s defense ministry has confirmed another US intercept of its aircraft as two of its long-range bombers flew in international airspace over the Arctic Ocean and near Alaska. 

Two American F-22 jets were reported as approaching and then shadowing a pair of Russian TU-95MS nuclear-capable bombers in an incident also confirmed by North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD). 

Prior file photo via CNN

A NORAD spokesman said the bombers were detected flying near the Aleutian Islands, describing to the Free Beacon on Friday that “Two Alaskan-based NORAD F-22 fighters intercepted and visually identified two Tu-95 ‘Bear’ long-range bomber aircraft flying in the Alaskan Air Defense Identification Zone, south of the Aleutian Islands.”

The NORAD spokesman would not disclose how far the Russian bombers were from the west coast of Alaska, citing security reasons, but confirmed the F-22’s shadowed the bombers until they left NORAD’s identification zone. “At no time did the Russian bombers enter Canadian or United States sovereign airspace,”  the official said. 

The Russian Defense Ministry put out its own statement on Friday, which reads: “The Russian Air Force’s Tu-95MS strategic bomber aircraft have carried out scheduled flights over neutral waters in Arctic Ocean as well as the Bering and Okhotsk Seas.” And indicates that “The aircraft were escorted by two US Air Force F-22 fighter jets on certain legs of their route”. 

Previously this year in May there was a similar incident where American fighter jets intercepted Russian TU-95’s off the Alaskan coast at somewhat close range, but it was reported at the time that the American jets didn’t come closer than 100 meters, and shadowed the bombers for up to 40 minutes. 

According to the Russian Defense Ministry its long-range bombers frequently carry out what it describes as “routine patrols” over the Arctic and the Atlantic, and the Pacific Ocean, but that the Russian bombers operate “in strict compliance with international regulations without violating foreign borders.”

But its possible this week’s incident wasn’t merely routine patrolling as the Free Beacon notes that it “coincided with large-scale military exercises now underway in the Russian Far East called Vostok-18 and were likely part of the exercises that have been underway since late August.”

As part of the exercises, on official speculated, the bombers could have been practicing cruise missile strikes on U.S. missile defenses in Alaska. They are capable of carrying nuclear warheads, specifically the nuclear-tipped KH-55 long-range cruise missile with a max range of up to 1,841 miles.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2QdVWvq Tyler Durden

Turkish Filmmaker Gets 6-Year Prison Sentence For Depicting Execution Of Erdogan

This about summarizes the true state of Turkish politics today: a Turkish filmmaker was given a lengthy prison sentence after being convicted Friday for producing a film that included a scene depicting President Tayyip Erdogan with a gun pointed at his head as his family lay dead all around him.

The filmmaker, Ali Avci, had been arrested last year immediately after the release a trailer for his new movie, called “Awakening”, based on the failed military putsch that captured world headlines in 2016, in which over 250 people were killed, and in which Erdogan was nearly overthrown. At the time Erdogan had to vacate his residence and office and Skype messages to his supporters while temporarily deep in hiding. 

“Erdogan execution scene” from the controversial movie, “Awakening”

Avci was given a stiff six year prison sentence for producing the scene, and further he was convicted on charges of membership in a terrorist group. Six years of hard time is a massive sentence in most any country for making a film, but this seems par for the course in Erdogan’s Turkey, who just consolidated his AKP party’s iron grip over the country’s main institutions during a June election. 

A new Reuters report describes the scene in question:

The trailer caused public uproar with sequences showing Erdogan’s family, including his son-in-law, Finance Minister Berat Albayrak, shot dead, and an army officer pointing a gun at the back of the president’s head as he prayed.

An Istanbul court sentenced Avci to 6 years and three months in jail for belonging to the network of U.S.-based Muslim cleric Fethullah Gulen, deemed a terrorist organization by Turkey. Gulen denies Turkey’s accusation that he masterminded the coup attempt.

The powerful opposition figure Fethullah Gulen is still reportedly living in exile under US protection in Pennsylvania. Turkish intelligence has been notorious for attempting to nab some of his high profile followers in European countries of late. 

Meanwhile Pastor Andrew Brunson’s trial continues as the American citizen remains under house arrest while facing terrorism charges, which has sparked a now months-running bitter fued between NATO allies Washington and Ankara.

According to state media, the newly sentenced filmmaker who portrayed Erdogan’s execution was said by the court to have been engaged in “public perception management in line with the core goals of the terrorist organization” through his movie.

Avci denied the charges and pointed to the political nature of the film, echoing Erdogan’s own words that confirmed he was the ultimate target of the failed putsch, which also involved air strikes on the presidential palace in Ankara. Such a film’s popularity could prove deeply embarrassing for Erdogan, something the aggressive prosecution and film’s suppression is seeking to prevent. 

“If I was trying to make terrorist propaganda, I would have shown Erdogan making plans to flee, instead of the praying scene,” Avci told the court, which remained unmoved. 

Currently international monitoring groups have estimated that some 50,000 Turkish citizens remain locked up after mass “political arrests” and are still pending trial. After the 2016 coup attempt, about 150,000 state workers including teachers, judges and soldiers were suspended.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2NWnsMr Tyler Durden

Ignore the Anthem Outrage Mob, It’s Going To Be a Great Year for Football

Football fans rejoice: The NFL is finally back.

Well, it technically returned more than a month ago if you count the preseason. (You shouldn’t). And we did finally get a taste of the real action on Thursday night, when the Eagles defeated the Falcons 18–12.

But if you—like me—have been counting down the days since February 4, when Tom Brady’s last-second heave fell to the ground and the Eagles won their first Super Bowl championship, you’re probably excited for Sunday when the season gets underway in earnest.

Unfortunately, the return of football brings with it the return of the national anthem controversy, now entering its third season. It all started prior to a 2016 preseason game, when then-49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick knelt for the playing of The Star-Spangled Banner. Kaepernick, who was kneeling to protest police brutality against African Americans, kept at it throughout the regular season, and many players around the league joined him.

Many conservatives were, and still are, outraged. Kneeling during the anthem shows blatant disrespect for the American flag and military veterans, they say. Others think differently, and in some circles Kaepernick has been hailed as a hero. The fight has long since ceased to be about the legitimate debate over policing practices, however; it is now the province of partisans and culture warriors.

Still, the controversy likely would have died a lot sooner if not for President Donald Trump. At a rally one year ago for Alabama senatorial candidate Luther Strange, Trump denounced the players who kneel, suggesting they ought to be “fired.” Trump continued to insert himself into the debate over the next year, firing off periodic tweets on the issue to remind supporters of his great respect for the military.

Kaepernick, for his part, opted out of his contract with the 49ers (he didn’t really have a choice) and hasn’t played in the NFL since. He’s filed a collusion grievance against the NFL, claiming he’s being blackballed, though his detractors say he just isn’t good. (In reality, it’s probably a little bit of both.)

The NFL, meanwhile, has consistently shown it has no idea how to deal with being at the center of a high-volume, low-content political death match. The league approved then later suspended a policy requiring all players on the field to stand during anthem. This week, the league said in a statement that the “social justice issues” raised by Kaepernick and other kneelers “deserve our attention and action.”

That latest statement was prompted by a new Nike ad campaign headlined by Kaepernick. The campaign’s motto? “Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything.”

As one might expect, Trump has been all over Nike for effectively endorsing Kaepernick. “I don’t like what Nike did. I don’t think it’s appropriate,” he told Fox & Friends at a rally Thursday night in Montana. “I honor the flag. I honor our national anthem,” he added. Early Friday morning, Trump reiterated those sentiments, tweeting, “What was Nike thinking?”

And Trump’s response to the Nike ad campaign was far from the most extreme. Across the country, people decided the best way to stick it to the multibillion-dollar apparel company was to burn their Nike gear—nevermind that Nike already had their money.

And so the controversy rages on. Though it’s worth noting that on Thursday night, anthem protests were a non-issue. Two Eagles players, defensive end Michael Bennett and running back Jay Ajayi, sat down right before the song ended, but there was no kneeling.

Though it’s not terribly surprising that the outrage continues; fomenting outrage is good politics. Maybe that’s why Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) has taken to tweeting what Reason‘s Peter Suderman correctly referred to as “inane pablum” about the kneeling players. Walker is facing a tough re-election battle against Democrat Tony Evers, so what better way to rile up the base than by scoring easy political points with some showy rhetoric about being “honorable” and showing “respect?”

Police brutality is a very real problem and football players are right to use their platforms to call attention to it. It’s also possible to make a good-faith argument in favor of a league policy that requires players to stand for the anthem. But this entire controversy has come to be defined by unresolvable partisan bickering.

It’s a shame really, because there are so many reasons we should be excited for the NFL’s return.

All around the league, there are great storylines. Will Andrew Luck return to form after missing all of last season with a devastating shoulder injury? Are the new-look Browns going to build off a disastrous 0–16 season? Can Kirk Cousins turn the Vikings from a playoff contender to the team to beat in the NFC? Will Sam Darnold turn out to be the quarterback the Jets have been searching for since Joe Namath?

Storylines aren’t the only thing to get hyped about. There’s fantasy football, and gambling too. Plus, thanks to a May Supreme Court ruling, some of those bets might even be legal (though only in certain parts of the country).

While all of those things are great, for many fans, it’s simple: After a very long offseason, there’s finally something good to watch on Sunday afternoons. And Sunday nights. And Monday nights. And Thursday nights. Baseball is great, but there’s only so many times a man can watch the Mets embarrass themselves.

When the NFL games kick off on Sunday afternoon, why not skip the politics and focus on football?

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2O1ZrUo
via IFTTT

College Removes All Uniforms With Nike Logo To Protest Kaeppernick Ad

Following Nike’s controversial endorsement deal with former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick, a private Missouri college is removing all uniforms bought from Nike that contain the brand’s logo, reports the Associated Press. 

“If Nike is ashamed of America, we are ashamed of them” said College of the Ozarks President Jerry C. Davis, adding “We also believe that those who know what sacrifice is all about are more likely to be wearing a military uniform than an athletic uniform.“

Kaepernick, who began kneeling during the National Anthem in 2016, has become a divisive figure; representing a resistance icon to some, and an unpatriotic anti-American to others.

“I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color,” said the former QB – whose kneeling movement which began under the Obama administration has become a thorn in President Trump’s side. 

In May, Trump told Fox & Friends “You have to stand proudly for the national anthem or you shouldn’t be playing, you shouldn’t be there. Maybe you shouldn’t be in the country” 

And in a Wednesday tweet in response to the Nike deal, Trump wrote: “Nike is getting absolutely killed with anger and boycotts,” adding “I wonder if they had any idea that it would be this way? As far as the NFL is concerned, I just find it hard to watch, and always will, until they stand for the FLAG!”

Nike’s ad featuring Kaepernick sparked outrage from the right, with several social media users posting videos of burning shoes and other Nike apparel. 

And on Wednesday we reported that legendary Green Beret sniper and ex-UFC star Tim Kennedy says he’s boycotting Nike following their decision to spotlight former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick – as many in law enforcement and the military have taken offense to the ad’s tag-line of “Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything.” 

Kennedy – who is currently participating in a military school course at Fort Bragg in North Carolina, told TMZ that Nike’s ad is disrespectful to the US flag as well as to the men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces.

“When I walked into the team room this morning, there were some people who were fuming,” Kennedy tells TMZ Sports … “I’m not gonna speak for them, but there was no one happy about it.” –TMZ

Kennedy says that every member of the special forces in his team room had lost at least 10 friends who had “sacrificed everything.” 

“You can’t go around that room [in Fort Bragg] and not ask a guy if he could list on his two hands friends that have died from Special Forces,” said Kennedy, adding “I’m talking about REAL heroes and I’m surrounded by a bunch of them right now.”

Meanwhile, the National Fraternal Order of Police issued a press release in response to Nike, which reads in part: 

“Since 2016, 381 cops have been killed in the line of duty. They believed in something and sacrificed everything as did the families they left behind. All of the men and women in law enforcement believe in something and are prepared to sacrifice everything.” 

via RSS https://ift.tt/2MT8NoN Tyler Durden

Obama Endorses Medicare-for-All

While president, Barack Obama was a resolute critic of the idea that America was ready for single-payer healthcare. Free from the confines of his office, he’s warmed to the idea.

In a well-publicized speech this afternoon, the former Commander in Chief praised the bright ideas of his party’s progressive wing. “Democrats aren’t just running on good old ideas like a higher minimum wage, they’re running on good new ideas like Medicare-for-all,” Obama said in his remarks, while also endorsing proposals like giving workers seats on corporate boards and reversing tax cuts.

Whatever one thinks of Medicare-for-all—also known as “single-payer”—it can hardly be called a “new” idea. If it were, Obama would not have had to spend so much time in office and on the campaign trail dismissing it as unworkable.

Here’s then-Sen. Obama at a campaign event in Albuquerque, New Mexico, in 2008:

“If I were setting up a system from scratch, then I’d probably set up a single-payer system. The problem is we’re not starting from scratch,” said Obama. “We have a system that most people have become accustom to getting their health insurance from their employer…Making that transition in a rapid way would be very difficult.”

Then there’s the President Obama addressing the American Medical Association in 2009, while the legislation that would eventually become Obamacare was still working its way through Congress:

“I’ll be honest. There are countries where a single-payer system may be working. But I believe—and I’ve even taken some flak from members of my own party for this belief—that it is important for us to build on our traditions here in the United States. So, when you hear the naysayers claim that I’m trying to bring about government-run health care, know this—they are not telling the truth.”

There was also that time in August 2009, when Obama was asked at a town hall event in New Hampshire whether he supported single-payer healthcare:

“A single-payer plan would be a plan like Medicare for all, or the kind of plan that they have in Canada, where basically government is the only person—is the only entity that pays for all health care,” said Obama, before stating bluntly. “I have not said that I was a single-payer supporter because, frankly, we historically have had a employer-based system in this country with private insurers, and for us to transition to a system like that I believe would be too disruptive.”

This change in Obama’s attitude shows a couple things that are relevant for our current debate about Medicare-for-all.

The first is that this is not a bright new idea suddenly gaining traction, but rather an age-old Democratic priority that has never come to fruition because actually doing it would be incredibly difficult and potentially disastrous. This is probably why Obama’s enthusiasm for it has waxed and waned depending on his proximity to the White House. One can find examples of Obama throwing his support behind single-payer while still just a state senator from Illinois in 2003, before souring on it during a run for U.S. Senate a year later.

The feasibility—or lack thereof—can also be seen at the state level. In Vermont, a Democratic governor walked away from a single-payer plan after it became clear that paying for it would require the state to massively increase its income and business taxes.

The second point is that expansion of the government’s role in health care will not satiate the demand for more government interventions later on. If anything, it just ratchets up the level of government intervention progressives will deem necessary, and that conservatives will eventually concede to be acceptable.

Obviously, Obamacare saw both the expansion of an old entitlement program (Medicaid) and the creation of new ones in the form of new health insurance subsidies. Now, the president who gave that legislation its name is arguing—less than two years after leaving office!—that we need to do much more. Conservatives, meanwhile, have made their peace with Obamacare, declining to repeal it when they had a chance, opting instead to preserve some of its key features.

Government’s slow and seemingly inevitable creep into the health-care market doesn’t eliminate the practical problems Democrats will face in attempting to implement Medicare-for-all. But if past is prologue, they will eventually have the political capital necessary to give it a go anyway.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2NUVRva
via IFTTT

Papadopoulos Sentenced To 14 Days In Prison For Lying To FBI In Mueller Probe

Trump’s former campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos was sentenced to 14 days in jail, the first campaign official to be sentenced as part of Robert Mueller’s probe into Russian election interference. Papadopoulos was sentenced to one year of supervised release, 200 hours of community service and a $9,500 fine.

Papadopoulos pleaded guilty in October 2017 to making false statements to the FBI about his contacts with Russia nationals and efforts to arrange a meeting with the Trump campaign and the Russian government.

During the sentencing, Papadopoulos’ lawyer told the judge that he was motivated to lie in part by Trump characterizing investigation as “Fake news.”

Prosecutors had asked that Papadopoulos be jailed for up to six months and face a $9,500 fine for his crime. They argued in a recent court filing that his false statements “caused damage to the government’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.” Papadopoulos’s defense attorneys, meanwhile, pushed for one year of probation, arguing that their client did not do deliberate harm to the investigation.

The former campaign aide attracted widespread attention last year after becoming the first Trump associate to plead guilty and cooperate with prosecutors in Mueller’s probe.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2MWdJZT Tyler Durden

Japanese Government Admits First Fukushima Radiation Death

Over seven years after the devastating earthquake and tsunami that crippled Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power plant, the Japanese government has admitted that a former plant worker has died as a result of radiation exposure.

While the 2011 earthquake and tsunami killed approximately 19,000 people, as NPR’s Elise Hu reported, and “most drowned within minutes,” this is the first radiation-exposure-based death since the incident (the radiation plumes caused by Fukushima’s meltdowns spread up to 25 miles away)

A radiation monitoring post next to one of the temporary homes. It indicates 0.276 micro sv/h, which is three to four times higher than the normal level.

NPR reports that the country’s health and labor ministry has said the man’s family should be paid compensation, according to state broadcaster NHK.

It’s not clear precisely when the man died. He was in his 50s, NHK said, and his duties included “measuring radiation levels at the plant immediately after the severe nuclear accident.”

He left his job there in 2015, and was diagnosed with lung cancer before his death.

The ministry said that he “developed cancer due to total radiation exposure of around 195 millisieverts,” NHK reported. 

According to Reuters, exposure to 100 millisieverts of radiation in a year “is the lowest level at which any increase in cancer risk is clearly evident.”

While this is the first fatality that was attributed to radiation, NHK says four workers who have cancer have been deemed eligible for compensation (while at least five applications for compensation have been denied).

One of them, who is suffering from leukemia, was awarded compensation last December, according to The Asahi Shimbun.

He “was engaged in emergency operations to send water to cool the reactor containment vessels and assess the extent of damage,” the newspaper said, and did so for months after the disaster started.

We suspect there will be considerably more to come as NPR notes that Nature reported in 2012, two assessments by the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation and the World Health Organization, showed that “167 workers at the plant received radiation doses that slightly raise their risk of developing cancer.”

via RSS https://ift.tt/2Nnf23L Tyler Durden

The Pension Crisis Is Bigger Than The World’s 20 Largest Economies

Submitted by Simon Black of Sovereign Man

If your retirement plans consist entirely of that pension you’ve been promised, it’s time to start looking elsewhere.

As you probably know, pensions are giant pools of capital responsible for paying out retirement benefits to workers.

And right now many pension funds around the world simply don’t have enough assets to cover the retirement obligations they owe to millions of workers.

In the US alone, federal, state, and local governments, pensions are about $7 TRILLION short of the funding they need to pay out all the benefits they’ve promised.

(** And that doesn’t include another $49 trillion in unfunded Social Security obligations…)

America’s private pensions are in bad shape too — a total of around 1400 corporate pensions are a combined $553 billion in the hole. Plus, 25% of those funds are expected to go broke in the next decade. But the pension problem is much bigger than just what’s happening (though the US problems are SEVERE).

In 2015, the total worldwide gap in pension funding was $70 TRILLION according to the World Economic Forum. That is larger than the twenty largest economies in the world combined.

And it’s only gotten worse since then…

The WEC said that the worldwide pension shortfall is on track to reach $400 trillion by 2050.

And what solutions did they suggest?

“Provide a ‘safety net’ pension for all.” You know, sort of like Social Security… which as we mentioned is $49 trillion in the hole. Not exactly a sound solution.

Another solution the WEC offered was to increase contribution rates– in other words, forcing current workers pay more to support retired workers.

Only one problem with that… global demographics are awful. There just aren’t enough young people being born to pay out benefits for retirees.

And that problem is coming to a head in South Korea, where about 13% of the population is currently of retirement age: 65 or older.

By 2060, 40% of the population will be over 65.

And, you guessed it, there aren’t close to enough people being born to burden that load.

This is a nightmare scenario for pensions (in addition to fact that low interest rates have made the returns pensions need to break even basically unachievable).

But worry not, South Korea has an answer for the problem…

The government spent $113 billion over the past 12 years trying to get people to have more kids (I’m curious what this money was spent on… removing condom dispensers from bathrooms?).

But more importantly, this should give you a hint of how the government views you… Much like a dairy cow. Not enough milk? Breed more cows!

But for all the money and effort, South Koreans are actually having FEWER babies– a decline of 1.12 babies per woman in 2006, to just 0.96 this year.

So when you look a few decades out, South Korea clearly isn’t going to have enough workers paying into the pension system to support all the retired beneficiaries.

Even the government acknowledges this. And they’ve already started managing expectations…

One of the government’s proposals is to slash retirement payments by 10%.

At the same time, the government wants to increase current contributions (i.e. payroll TAX) by almost 50%.

These people have been planning their futures based on promises the government has been making for decades. Unfortunately, those promises have no basis in reality.

And if you think higher pension contributions and lower payouts are contained to South Korea, you’re nuts.

Earlier this year, the US Office of Personnel Management proposed $143.5 billion worth of pension cuts for current AND already retired federal workers.

But that’s a band-aid on a bullet wound… It won’t actually come even close to solving the problem. You know more cuts will come.

Remember, US government pensions are $7 TRILLION in the hole. And the demographics are just as bad (the US currently has the lowest fertility rate on record).

Look, I’m not trying to be alarmist. These are just the cold hard facts that everyone needs to understand.

We’re talking about long-term challenges to retirement. But it’s retirement… ergo we’re SUPPOSED to think long-term about retirement: years, decades out. Retirement requires having a plan.

Or, in this case, a Plan B… as anyone depending on a pension or social security for retirement is out of luck.

Governments have lulled hundred of millions of people into a false sense of security based on financial promises they are not going to be able to keep.

It’s not a political problem. It’s an arithmetic problem. And one they’re unable to solve.

But you can.

While you might not be able to fix the pension gap in your home country, you can definitely secure your own retirement.

There’s no need to rely on empty promises and broken pension funds. With some basic planning, education, and a bit of early action, you can safely sidestep the consequences of this looming financial crisis that is larger than the world’s 20 largest economies combined.

 

via RSS https://ift.tt/2M94wbB Tyler Durden

Apple Drops To Session Lows After Admitting Its Products Would Be Hit By Tariffs

Apple stock slumped near the close of trading, dragging down the Nasdaq and killing any hopes for a green close, after the company told the US government in a letter that the proposed tariff list covers a wide range of Apple products and the products used in the company’s U.S. operations.

The list includes Apple digital health and wireless connectivity products, including Apple Watch, Apple Pencil and Air Pods; Apple computing tools such as MacMini; Apple adapters, cables and chargers engineered for efficiency and safety; Apple- designed components and made-to-specification tooling for Apple’s U.S. manufacturing and product repair facilities; specialty testing equipment for Apple’s U.S. product development labs; and servers, hard drives and cables for Apple’s U.S. data centers that support our global services such as the App Store, it said.

While hardly material for AAPL’s $1 trillion + market cap, the sharp drop in AAPL stock which wiped out over $10 billion in market cap, shows that should Trump continue to push China and more companies are caught in the net, not even the untouchable tech sector would be spared, a scary preposition for the S&P500, in which over half the gains have come from just six tech stocks, with AAPL among them.

 

via RSS https://ift.tt/2wQLjG8 Tyler Durden

Trump Tariff Threat Trounces Tech Turnaround, Tesla Tattered

It was supposed to be a blockbuster day for stocks, if not so much for bonds, and it started off well.

One hour after the BLS reported the strongest growth in average hourly earnings in 9 years…

… stocks started off strong, even if the performance through mid-day left something to be desired.

The early rebound was driven by tech stocks, with a rebound in the battered semis and chip sector…

…helping FANGs reverse two days of sharp declines, at least in early trading.

Treasury yields showed more enthusiasm, with a sharp bond selloff after the bell sending 10Y yield to 2.95%, after opening at 2.88%. The move was matched across the curve, even if yield curve remained perfectly flat intraday and was last seen fractionally lower.

However the pleasant mood in the market was promptly spoiled just around noon, when Bloomberg carried over comments from Trump aboard Air Force 1, in which the president threatened to impose an additional $267BN in tariffs on China imports, in addition to the $200BN already contemplated, capturing virtually all Chinese exports. The latest salvo from Trump in the trade war rattled U.S. stocks a day after top American executives made a last-minute push to convince the president to not impose fresh tariffs. The result in the Dow Jones was instant, sending the multi-national heavy index tumbling by 100 points. At its low point, the Dow was down nearly 180 points… 

… although as the day progressed, and as traders realized that the big “risk-off” event of the day, Trump’s announcement of $200BN in new Chinese tariffs, would be delayed, stocks recouped much of their losses, and the Nasdaq was virtually unchanged after peeking into the green on a few occasions.

The dour mood returned shortly after 3:30pm however, when Apple announced that it would likely be hit by the Chinese sanctions:

  • APPLE: PROPOSED TARRIFS AFFECTS WATCH, AIRPODS, APPLE PENCIL
  • APPLE SAYS PROPOSED TARRIFS ALSO AFFECT MAC MINI, SOME CABLES

Although even fears that Apple margins would be impacted failed to put too much pressure on stocks, and the S&P never really moved too far below the unchanged line.

Earlier in the session, dollar weakness helped emerging-market stocks snap seven days of declines while a gauge of currencies also rose.

The rebound, however, will be brief as today’s surge in the dollar which guarantees at least two more rate hikes this years, and potentially more in 2018, means that the pain for EMs will return as soon as Monday.

In summary, another day of whiplashes, in which Trump proved that with one phrase he can crush sentiment on a moment’s notice.

Meanwhile, as LPL Financial ‘s Ryan Detrick tweeted this morning, it’s been a tough start to the month of September for the S&P 500, which has fallen for the fourth day in a row. This is notable, because as he notes, “going back to the Great Depression, only two times did it start down the first four days. 1987 and 2001.“

And, as Bloomberg shows, a 20-year seasonality chart bears that out, with “2018 a far cry from recent history.”

Which is troubling for hedge funds, because as Nomura showed earlier in the week, September has traditionally been a month of two-halved: a strong first half, and then a slide in the second.

It may be the case that have decided to skip the first half and go straight to the selloff.

Finally, it’s worth noting that just hours after Elon Musk gave a controversial interview in which he showed off his flamethrower and smoked pot, first Tesla’s Chief accounting officer quit after just one month on the job, followed immediately by an announcement that Tesla’s head of HR would not be returning to the company. The news sent TSLA stock plunging as much as 10%, its biggest one day drop in 2 years…

… While Tesla bonds plunged to the lowest on record.

Is the long-overdue bursting of the Tesla bubble emblematic of the sentiment shift in the market in general? Tune in next week and find out.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2M8ZID5 Tyler Durden