Expect the House Education Committee to Target Betsy DeVos and Title IX Reforms

DeVosWith control of only one chamber of Congress, the Democrats will have trouble passing any new education legislation. But they have gained the power to hold hearings, and a likely target will be Education Secretary Betsy DeVos.

DeVos featured prominently in Democratic attack ads during the campaign. Katie Porter, who came up just short in her attempt to unseat incumbent Republican Rep. Mimi Walters in a South California race, accused DeVos of repealing “protections that keep our sons and daughters safe on college campuses,” according to Politico. This was a reference to DeVos’s proposed reforms for Title IX, the federal sex equality statute that became an important component of campus sexual misconduct adjudication during the Obama years.

Under DeVos, the Education Department plans to release new guidance that guarantees due process rights to students accused of sexual misconduct. These changes are important because the previous guidelines encouraged university administrators to forbid cross-examination during hearings, and forced them to use the preponderance of evidence standard—meaning that the deck was effectively stacked against the accused.

The Democrats recapturing the House doesn’t put DeVos’s Title IX agenda in real danger, but Rep. Bobby Scott (D–VA.), incoming chairman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, could summon DeVos and her aides to testify in oversight hearings. According to Education Week:

Democrats on the Hill have indicated that they want a bunch of Trump administration education officials to testify about specific policy decisions in various areas. So you might see officials like Kenneth L. Marcus, the assistant secretary for civil rights, and Frank Brogan, the assistant secretary for elementary and secondary education, take their turns testifying as well.

Education Week also predicts that Scott will focus on higher education issues as a means of appealing to young voters in the run up to 2020.

Still, there was good news for proponents of Title IX reform last night: Sen. Claire McCaskill (D–MO.), one of the Senate’s most ardent defenders of unfair campus adjudication procedures, was defeated.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2qyiYS0
via IFTTT

Another Journalist Killed During Torture By Saudi Arabia

Via Middle East Monitor,

Saudi journalist and writer Turki Bin Abdul Aziz Al-Jasser (not a US-resident writing for The Washington Post) has died after being tortured while in detention, the New Khaleej reported yesterday.

Reporting human rights sources, the news site said that Al-Jasser was arrested and tortured to death after Saudi authorities claimed he administered the Twitter account Kashkool, which disclosed rights violations committed by the Saudi authorities and royal family.

The sources said that the authorities identified Al-Jasser as the admin using spies in Twitter’s regional office located in Dubai. He was arrested in March.

According to the sources, these spies are considered part of the Saudi Cyber Army which was established by Saud Al-Qahtani, the former aide of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman.

In a tweet, Al-Qahtani has said that the fake names on Twitter would not protect those behind the accounts from the Saudi authorities.

*  *  *

Where’s the international outrage? The condemnations?

via RSS https://ift.tt/2PghwT9 Tyler Durden

Three-Month Libor Hits New Decade High As Rate Hike Odds Increase

While one of the consensus expectations resulting from last night’s midterm election result is that any hopes for future fiscal stimulus have been put on hold indefinitely, thereby preventing any potential further overheating of the economy and obviating a need for further tightening by the Fed, this has yet to trickle down to the market, where this morning December rate hike odds rose notably, hitting 78% from just above 74% before the election.

And while 10Y yields have dropped from yesterday’s highs just shy of new 7 year highs, when the benchmark US Treasury hit 3.25%, dropping to 3.19% on Wednesday morning, the short end has been following rate hike intentions, with the 2Y higher modestly, rising to 2.932%, up 0.4bps. Also tracking the move higher in rate hike odds was USD three-month Libor, which was fixed higher by about 1bp on Wednesday to 2.6011%, the highest level since November 2008.

While Libor is being phased out, it remains a key benchmark for over $200 trillion in financial securities which reference the infamous rate. Furthermore, even assuming Libor is fully phased out on schedule, and replaced with the alternative SOFR rates some time in 2021, an estimated $36T notional of LIBOR-linked instruments will remain outstanding after that date.

In the meantime, many new trades continue to reference LIBOR and according to the TBAC, “the calculation does not consider replacement risk.”

More concerning is that as the Treasury noted in its latest refunding documents, LIBOR transition plans have not meaningfully altered issuance behavior as many deals continue to reference LIBOR.

And the reason why rising Libor remains a major risk to financial conditions, is because as the table below shows, its footprint can be found everywhere, from OTC interest rate swaps, to leveraged loans – considered by many as the locus of the next credit crisis – to retail mortgages, to complex securitizations.

While so far Libor’s rise has not been cited as a key catalyst for tighter financial conditions, it is only a matter of time before the breaking point is hit, and the Fed is forced to end the tightening cycle, an event which will surely happen long before 2021 when Libor is no longer the dominant fixed income reference rate.

There is much more on the role of Libor, and its replacement SOFR, in the following TBAC document submitted as part of the latest refunding announcement.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2FaZq0e Tyler Durden

Watch Live: Trump To Discuss GOP’s “Tremendous Success” In Midterm Vote

Riding high after Tuesday night’s midterms – which saw his Republican party widen their lead in the Senate while averting a “blue wave” Democratic sweep of the House – President Trump has wasted no time spinning the results as an umitigated win for his “America First” agenda (even as more than two dozen Congressional races have yet to be called).

And as he braces for two years of struggling with Democrats in Congress, President Trump said early Wednesday that he will hold a White House press conference to discuss “our success in the midterms.”

Of course, now that the midterms have ushered in a new era of divided government in Washington, Trump knows he will need to find a way to work with the Democrats. And the Democrats also know that they will need to work with him “for the good of the country,” as his senior advisory Kellyanne Conway put it during comments to the press last night.

The conference comes after Trump threatened to fight back against any Democratic investigations in the House into his taxes or alleged Russia ties, declaring that “two can play that game.”

Republicans have, so far, lost 27 seats in the House. But compared with his immediate predecessors, Trump has good reason to tout that number as a success. Clinton’s Democrats lost 52 seats in his first midterm vote, while George W Bush lost 30 Republican seats and President Obama lost 63 Democratic seats in 2010 (before losing 13 more in the 2014 midterms).

Trump

While last night’s election will undoubtedly be the main focus, Trump could choose to pivot to any number of issues. Though he has said drug prices won’t be discussed, an expected reshuffling of his cabinet, his plans for infrastructure reform and demands for Democrats to authorize funding for his promised border wall could all be on the table. Goldman Sachs explored some of these issues in a guide to what gridlock means for our economy published on Wednesday.

The press conference is expected to begin at 11:30 am ET. Watch it live here:

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

A Surprisingly Normal Election

From Brett Kavanaugh to Stormy Daniels to the Mueller investigation to President Trump’s hyperactive Twitter feed, this year’s midterm campaigns often felt unusually fraught, less like another boring day watching C-SPAN and more like some sort of strange thriller, leaving our political class and its Too Online hangers-on feeling twitchy and nervous, as if anything could happen. Beto! Russia! Maybe even aliens.

Yet for all the panic, all went more or less as expected. If anything, coming in the wake of the colossal twist-ending of 2016 and all that has happened since, watching the election returns last night felt oddly normal.

Democrats took the House, while Republicans expanded their majority in the Senate, roughly as the pre-election polling predicted. The surprise was that nothing too strange happened.

Although Trump played a role, the election was largely fought over conventional kitchen table issues—education and the economy in Wisconsin, where GOP Gov. Scott Walker lost a close race; pre-existing conditions regulations in Arizona, where Republican candidate Martha McSally won; Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion in the Kansas governor’s race, where Republican Chris Kobach lost to Democrat Laura Kelly, who ran on expanding the program; as well as state ballot initiatives in Idaho, Nebraska, and Utah—all of which were approved.

Yes, the Democratic gains in the House were significant, a rebuke to Trump and a sign of the particular ways in which he is unpopular, notably amongst the sort of outer-ring suburban voters who have often gone for Republicans in the past. But even those gains were tempered somewhat by Republican pickups in the Senate and by Democratic losses in a few high profile contests, like the Texas Senate race, where Beto O’Rourke, despite raising $70 million, lost to incumbent Ted Cruz.

Immigration played a role, too, and the last-minute fearmongering by Trump and his supporters over the migrant caravan—which was nowhere near the U.S. border, and which was hardly the invading criminal army that Trump insinuated—was unusual in a way. But even there, you could find a whiff of normalcy; given the persistence of the immigration debate and its importance to both parties, you would have expected immigration to be at or near the center of any midterm election, regardless of who was in the White House. And even Trump’s rhetoric was normal for Trump, who has been running on fears of immigrant crime since the day he launched his presidential campaign.

None of which is to say that American politics is simply business as usual right now, or that we have somehow settled into a stable and unremarkable equilibrium.Trump really is an unusual and alarming president, and, with the loss of Republicans who don’t match his style, the Republican party is likely to grow Trumpier, at least in style and emphasis (the party would need an actual agenda in order to grow more Trumpy on policy). Increasing geographic polarization, meanwhile, in which Democrats consolidate support amongst high-density urban areas while Republicans make gains in rural communities, is likely to lead to even more intense partisan warfare, and could result in a Democratic party that effectively ignores voters outside of major metro enclaves. The new Democratic House majority is nearly certain to focus on oversight intended to check Trump. The Russia probe looms. I suppose we could still meet some aliens.

Yet last night’s election is nonetheless a reminder that politics is often chaotic, that it can be hard to judge how unusual a moment really is when it is happening, that what feels, on the surface, like a time of pandemonium might actually turn out to be point at which normalcy, against the odds, asserts itself, resulting in a return to the divided government, with clearer checks between branches that Americans often seem to prefer. As Josh Kraushaar writes, Americans voted for a balanced government rather than a full-on resistance.

It is also a reminder that the laws of political gravity still apply, and that voters still care about ordinary policy issues like education, jobs, and, especially, health care, which 40 percent of voters rated as their top problem facing the country, according to early exit poll data from CNN.

It’s a sign, in other words, that even in our Trump-obsessed era, which often plays out like a deranged reality show, focused entirely on culture war stunts and clashes of personality, retail politics is still about more than liking or disliking the president. Trump matters, but our political contests still revolve around essential policy and governing decisions that matter to the people casting their votes. It’s a notion that really shouldn’t be a shock, but in 2018 may be the biggest surprise of all.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2Dry5Fn
via IFTTT

Pundits Gripe Over Meaningless Senate ‘Popular Vote’

I’ve been seeing this argument a lot last night and this morning:

The biggest problem with this sort of analysis is that the Democrats…won most of yesterday’s Senate races. No, seriously: If the Senate consisted solely of the states that elected senators yesterday, the Democrats would have a majority of legislators to match their majority of votes. The reason the Republicans wound up gaining seats is because most of those Democratic victories came in states they already held. If you really want to compare the total number of senators each party has to the number of votes those senators received, you’d need to bring in a bunch of ballots cast in 2014 and 2016 too.

But that would be a pointless exercise, because the Senate (and the House) are not elected by a single national “popular vote.” Legislative elections are not presidential elections. The U.S. does not hold one big race between a generic Democrat and a generic Republican to determine which party should control each chamber. It holds individual races between individual candidates, each with his or her own strengths and weaknesses. Each race also has its own dynamics—for example, how close it is likely to be—that can increase or decrease turnout for reasons largely unrelated to national patterns. (The Senate figures are further distorted by the fact that in California, both candidates on the ballot this year were Democrats. So even if you voted against the incumbent there, you go into that “votes for Democrats” pile.)

It would be one thing if this were just a silly bit of post-election spin, but it speaks to a deeper rot in the way many people look at our politics. For all the partisan sorting we’ve seen over the past few decades, there still is a fair amount of regional variation in the parties. One way those centrist northeastern Republican governors win is by distancing themselves from the national GOP. You see something similar among red-state Dems like West Virginia’s Sen. Joe Manchin. (West Virginia voters in general sometimes feel like they’re trying to will into existence a populist party that isn’t beholden to either of the big national organizations.) Those relatively independent-minded politicians are joined by an growing number of registered independents in the electorate—and no, those voters aren’t just a bunch of “closet partisans.” To pretend that we were simply watching two national races last night is to erase an immense amount of American variety. In the process, you just feed the false idea that only two political options are possible.

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

SWIFT Caves To US Pressure, Defies EU By Cutting Off Iranian Banks

Shortly after Trump reimposed nuclear sanctions on Tehran on November 5, the international financial messaging system SWIFT announced the suspension of several Iranian banks from its service. “In keeping with our mission of supporting the resilience and integrity of the global financial system as a global and neutral service provider, SWIFT is suspending certain Iranian banks’ access to the messaging system,” SWIFT said.

The Belgium-based financial messaging service added:

“This step, while regrettable, has been taken in the interest of the stability and integrity of the wider global financial system.”

SWIFT’s decision has further undermined EU efforts to maintain trade with Iran and save an international deal with Tehran to curtail its nuclear program, after President Donald Trump pulled the US out in May. Being cut off from SWIFT makes it difficult for Iran to get paid for exports and to pay for imports, mostly of oil.

As a further note, the EU was one of the few entities not to receive a sanctions waiver from the US earlier this week.

The European Commission was understandably displeased, and on Wednesday said it found the SWIFT decision “regrettable”

“We find this decision rather … regrettable,” Commission foreign affairs spokeswoman Maja Kocijancic told a briefing.

As we reported over the weekend, last Friday Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin warned SWIFT it could be penalized if it doesn’t cut off financial services to entities and individuals doing business with Iran. However, by complying with Washington, SWIFT now faces the threat of punitive action from Brussels.

Washington has been pressuring SWIFT to cut off Iran from the financial system as it did in 2012 before the nuclear deal. Six years, ago the EU imposed sanctions on Iranian banks, forcing SWIFT, which is subject to EU laws, to cut financial transactions with at least 30 of Iran’s financial institutions, including the central bank.

Iranian banks were reconnected to the network in 2016 after the Iran nuclear deal came into force, allowing much needed foreign cash to flow into Tehran’s coffers.

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

“Blind Faith” Isn’t A Strategy For “Late-Cycle” Markets

Authored by Michael Lebowitz via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

 The journey of a thousand miles begins with one step.”  – Lao Tzu

In a tiny first step on December 16, 2015, the Federal Reserve (Fed) did something they had not done in over nine years. From the unprecedented starting point of zero, they raised the Fed Funds rate. Since, they have begun to allow their swollen balance sheet to contract in what can only be characterized as another unprecedented event. Although monetary policy remains extreme and real rates only recently have turned positive, these measures mark the end of an era of maintaining extreme financial crisis monetary policy in the United States.

Reversing these experimental policies initiates a new set of dynamics which will gradually reduce excessive liquidity from the financial system. Just as quantitative easing (QE) and zero interest rates were a grand experiment, the removal of these policy measures is equally experimental. Now, over 325 million domestic lab rats and the rest of the world wait to see how it plays out.  Importantly, if the Fed continues down this path, investors should carefully consider potential risks and the appropriate market exposure in this brave new world.

Despite the multitude of unanswerable questions about the implications of these events, what we know is that the economy is in the late stages of an economic expansion. Just as low tides follow high tides, we can use prior cycles as a guide to consider prudent, late-stage portfolio positioning.

Market Expectations

As discussed in, Everyone Hears the Fed but Few Listen, the difference between Fed officials’ expected path of Fed rate hikes and market expectations for the Fed Funds rate is important. The implications for the market and investors are especially compelling when considering asset allocation weightings. For example, if the Fed continues on their path of more rate hikes and surpasses market expectations, stocks are likely to struggle as much needed liquidity evaporates. The bond market, on the other hand, will probably continue to do what it has been doing, but to a greater extent. A flatter and possibly an inverted yield curve would be in order unless inflation rises by more than is currently expected. Conversely, if the Fed backs away from their current commitment, it will likely be bullish for risk assets and the yield curve would probably steepen, led by a decline in 2-year Treasury yields.

Context

Through September this year, the U.S. economy has posted an average growth rate of 3.3% (average quarterly annualized) and S&P 500 earnings have grown over 20% so far this year. The news from consumer and business surveys is favorable, and the country is essentially at full employment. That all sounds good, but is it sustainable?

The table below, courtesy of the Committee for a Responsible Fiscal Budget (CRFB), shows that recent tax and budget legislation along with soybean purchases in anticipation of trade tariffs drove recent economic growth at the margin.

While the stimulative impact of fiscal policy remains favorable, it will steadily decline toward neutral for the rest of this year and throughout 2019. Policies regarding tariffs and trade are likely to weigh on economic growth throughout this year and next year. Most importantly, the Fed is clear that their plans are to continuing raising rates and reducing the holdings on their balance sheet that resulted from QE.

Late-Cycle Adjustments

Since the end of the recession in June 2009, the economy has clearly moved from recovery to expansion. That means the U.S. economy is nearing the “slowdown” phase of the cycle and heading toward the contraction (recession) phase. The evidence of the U.S. now being in a late-cycle environment is compelling and strongly suggests that investors modify their asset allocation weightings to protect against losses as the cycle progresses.

The Path Forward

The past does not provide investors with perfect information about how we should invest, but it does offer excellent clues. It may be helpful to look at the major asset classes and consider portfolio adjustments for late-cycle positioning.

U.S. Stocks: To evaluate late-cycle performance, we looked at equity performance by sector in the 12-months leading up to each of the prior three recessions (1990, 2001, and 2007).

Data Courtesy Bloomberg

Every environment is different, and what outperformed in the past may not on this occasion as the cycle unfolds. Prior to the last three recessions, investors preferred defensive sectors, such as staples, healthcare, utilities, energy and industrials during late-cycle periods.

U.S. Bonds: Using the same framework, we looked at various bond categories in the period leading up to the three prior recessions (due to limited data, some categories do not have return information for the 1990 period).

Data Courtesy Bloomberg

The important takeaway is that investors prefer lower risk bonds leading into a recession. This is also evident across the rating categories of the high yield bond market.  Note how much better BB-rated bonds perform relative to lower-rated B and CCC bonds.

The quality of the securities within both the investment grade and high yield market is so poor in this cycle (highly levered, high percentage of covenant-lite structures, high percentage of BBB-rated securities in the IG sector) that we urge a very conservative position in both cases. Indeed, the “up-in-quality” theme holds for any credit instrument in the late stages of the cycle.

Commodities: Despite the rise in oil and gas prices in 2018, commodities remain the most undervalued of all major asset classes. Some soft and hard commodities have been hurt by the tariffs initiated by the Trump administration, but there is a reason they are characterized as “commodities.” We need them, and they are staples to our standard of living. Supply fluctuations will occur between nations as trade negotiations evolve, but the demand will remain intact.

Additionally, global central bank interventionism remains alive and well as demonstrated by recent actions of the Peoples Bank of China (PBOC). To the extent that central bankers continue to take the easy route of solving problems by printing money to calm markets when disruptions occur, natural resources and agricultural products will likely do well as a store of value – much like gold. They all reside in the same zip code as a means of protecting wealth.

Cash is King: In addition to the ideas illustrated above, it is always a good late-cycle idea to raise cash. As American financier and statesman, Bernard Baruch said,I made my money selling too soon. Although the low return on cash is a disincentive, the discipline affords opportunity and peace of mind. Having cash on hand is also a reflection of the discipline of selling into high prices, a skill at which most investors fail. Cash is an undervalued asset class heading into a recession because most investors panic as markets correct. Those with “dry powder” are better able to rationally assess market changes and more clearly see opportunities as certain assets fall out of favor and are cheap to acquire.

Investment Tourist

Many investors elect to leave the “serious” decision-making to their investment advisors on the assumption that the advisor will make the right decision “on my behalf.” They delegate with full autonomy the task of adjusting risk posture, when the advisor ultimately bears far less risk in the equation. Being inquisitive, asking good questions and challenging the “hired help” is a proper prerogative.  One should always operate and engage with humility but never on blind faith.

Given the complexities and the risks of the current environment, investors should not be silent passengers on the journey. One who has wealth and takes that responsibility seriously should have valid questions that are both difficult to answer and enlightening to debate. Iron sharpens iron as the proverb says.

Summary

The Fed has now taken eight steps in their path to normalizing interest rates and trying to set the economy on a sustainable growth path. Although he probably did not consider its application in the realm of monetary policy, Sir Isaac Newton’s law of inertia states that a body in motion will remain in motion unless acted upon by an outside force. Rate hikes are in motion and likely to remain so for the foreseeable future unless and until some outside force comes in to play (crisis).

Given the extreme nature of past policy actions and the likely impact of their reversal, forecasting future events and market behavior promises to be more difficult than usual. Reliable guideposts of prior periods may or may not hold the same predictive power. Although unlikely to afford investors with prescriptive solutions this time around, there is value to doing that analytical homework and gaining awareness of those patterns. Finally, as the cycle unfolds, successfully navigating what is to come and preserving wealth will also require investors to apply sound decision-making using clear guidance and input from those who dare to be contrary.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2FlyM55 Tyler Durden

WTI Slumps To $61 Handle After Surprise Crude, Gasoline Builds

Despite sliding after last night’s API-reported big Crude and Cushing build, WTI has rebounded overnight amid a post-midterms tumbling dollar, but a larger crude build than expected from DOE, combined with a smaller gasoline draw, could lead to WTI “set to test $60 easily,” Tariq Zahir, a commodity fund manager at Tyche Capital Advisors, says

Additionally, Oil rose on the back of headlines that OPEC and its allies were said to plan talks on fresh production cuts next year, responding to recent increases in crude inventories amid surging U.S. supply.

“The Saudis want to stop the price decay,” said Giovanni Staunovo, an analyst at UBS Group AG in Zurich.

“There are many moving variables until the OPEC meeting in December, like Iran and U.S. production growth. But as the Saudis say they aim for market stability, if the data suggests an oversupplied market next year the probability of a cut is high.”

However, as Bloomberg notes, if OPEC, led by Saudi Arabia, does ultimately decide fresh cutbacks are necessary, it will confront a number of challenges. It will need to once again secure the support of rival-turned-partner Russia, which has less need for high oil prices. There’s also the risk of antagonizing the kingdom’s key geopolitical ally, President Trump.

API

  • Crude +7.831mm (+2mm exp)

  • Cushing +3.073mm (+2.1mm exp)

  • Gasoline -1.195mm

  • Distillates -3.638mm

DOE

  • Crude +5.78mm (+2mm exp)

  • Cushing +2.419mm (+2.1mm exp)

  • Gasoline +1.85mm (-1.7mm exp)

  • Distillates -3.465mm

Crude and Cushing inventories rose for the seventh straight week (considerably more than expected) and a surprise gasoline build, sent WTI prices back below pre-API levels from last night and back to a $61 handle…

 

And as inventories rose, production surged a huge 400k b/d to a new record high…

WTI’s overnight gains sagged back to pre-API levels ahead of the DOE print and dropped below it as the data confirmed the builds…

And finally, Bloomberg’s Javier Blas highlights perfectly why oil prices are sliding…

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

Election Entropy Sparks Bearish Dollar Narrative

Despite the results of the US Midterm elections coming in mostly as expected (Dem House, Rep Senate), the most notable post-vote impact on global capital markets is dollar weakness

It was quite a roller-coaster overnight as results tilted toward Reps and then Dems…

 

However, as Bloomberg macro strategist Mark Cudmore notes, there will be sufficient ripple effects to build a narrative that traders can allocate risk to, that’s not good for the greenback, especially if that tallies with a fundamental argument that was already gaining traction.

The Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index topped out Oct. 31 before falling sharply Nov. 1. It’s almost 2% below that peak but it already looks likely that high may not be tested again this year.

The data over those two days presented a clear picture of declining economic confidence. Whether it was the Chicago or Markit PMIs or the ISM indicator, all three dropped more than forecast.

The subsequent wages data helped U.S. yields rise but that’s no longer supportive for the dollar when it’s perceived to be occurring amid a deteriorating growth outlook.

Wage inflation squeezing corporate margins just as borrowing costs climb is a classic late-cycle dynamic that warrants elevated volatility for equities even if the bull market isn’t over yet.

Combined with concerns about the U.S. twin deficits — annualized debt costs surged again in October — higher U.S. yields have the potential to soon be seen as an outright negative for the dollar.

The pillars for U.S. equity and dollar outperformance are being eroded rapidly and the midterm results feed that narrative. Suddenly, the looming threat of a government shutdown in early December looks both more real and more negative with the Democrats winning control of the House.

The slim chances of further fiscal stimulus to boost U.S. assets and potential dollar repatriation have vanished entirely, while some commentators fear greater volatility from acrimonious Trump tweets triggered by a divided Congress.

The greenback is overvalued relative to the currencies of all 10 of its largest trading partners, according to IMF purchasing-power-parity metrics. That might soon become relevant given Trump’s isolationist approach on the world stage will now see him more isolated in domestic politics.

The tail risk of fresh impetus for U.S. assets is behind us. The tail risk of a very risk-averse outcome has also been averted. The middle ground of results coming exactly as anticipated supports investor releveraging — but that could translate into selling the dollar to buy global assets over U.S. equities.

And finally, as a reminder, President Trump is not Larry Kudlow – a weaker dollar is just what he has been hoping for, so don’t expect any Washington jawboning if this trend lower in the greenback accelerates.

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