Month: June 2021

In an Unprecedented Heat Wave, Portland’s Lingering COVID Restrictions Hurt Bars and Restaurants Again


ddpphotos345150

Staying cool in Portland, Oregon, for the past few days would have been challenging even in normal circumstances. Gloriously temperate summers are supposed to be the payoff here for slogging through the rainy gray winters, but on Monday, a record-shattering heatwave culminated with temperatures rising all the way up to 116 degrees Fahrenheit.

That’s hotter than has ever been recorded in Atlanta or Houston, cities where buildings are designed for that kind of heat. The handful of Portland bars and restaurants with air conditioning up to the task would have been rewarded with booming business on these days if not for one thing: the state’s COVID restrictions, due to expire today, were still limiting their indoor spaces to half capacity. Few industries have been as hard hit by rigid and often-nonsensical pandemic policies over the last year as the service sector. This week’s failure to adjust at a time when it might have helped both businesses and patrons is just one more blow to the state’s struggling bar and restaurant scene.

The heat drove many hospitality businesses, particularly food carts, to shut down preemptively. Others made a go of it but threw in the towel when refrigerators failed, doughs over-proofed, or kitchens got too damn hot. “Eighty percent of places we’re associated with had to close either because it was so hot that it was unsafe to have people inside or because the equipment got so overwhelmed that we couldn’t keep food at temperature,” says Kurt Huffman, owner of ChefStable, a group that partners on operations with some of the city’s most well-known restaurants.

Businesses in newer buildings with efficient air conditioners, such as ChefStable’s beer bar Loyal Legion, were able to stay open. “We had employees that were asking us to stay open during the heatwave because it was so much cooler than their homes,” Huffman says. Loyal Legion could have provided a beery oasis for more than 200 Portlanders, but state restrictions cut its capacity in half. (Exceptions are available for restaurants that screen guests by vaccination status, a step many have been reluctant to take.)

The intense heat reversed pandemic business trends, rendering outdoor dining setups worthless and putting cool indoor spaces at a premium. “This weekend was bonkers,” says Israel Morales of Russian restaurant Kachka, a success he credits to having really good air conditioning and a slushie machine. “We were at max capacity from open to close.” The catch? Maximum capacity was just 30 people. With half of his dining area in a suddenly intolerably hot outdoor space, he lost half his potential business. He could have welcomed those guests inside if not for Oregon’s lingering COVID rules.

Oregon is one of the last four states in the country to fully re-open. Governor Kate Brown announced on Friday, June 25, that the state would reopen no later than June 30. While that was a welcome development for Oregon businesses, it also raised the question of what purpose was served by not opening a few days earlier when it was obvious the state was about to get scorched.

Some policies were changed, most notably Oregon’s oft-ridiculed ban on self-service gasoline; this regulation was sensibly waived so that station attendants wouldn’t have to suffer in the heat. (What this implies about the necessity of the ban in the first place is a topic for another day.) The state also lifted capacity limits in shopping malls, movie theaters, and swimming pools. That was better than nothing, but why not go all the way?

There wasn’t a hard scientific justification for waiting. Oregon had planned to reopen when 70 percent of adults had received at least one dose of a COVID vaccine, a goal the state expected to meet by June 21. That date came and went as the pace of vaccinations slowed to a crawl. With the rate at 69 percent, Governor Brown committed to opening when the initial goal was reached or on June 30, whichever came first. Explaining her reasoning, she said, “Obviously businesses and venues need certainty in terms of reopening.”

Brown was right to recognize that the pragmatic benefits of reopening outweighed the desire to precisely meet a semi-arbitrary vaccination benchmark. Yet she also failed to be pragmatic enough to see a historically unprecedented weather event as a compelling reason to accelerate the schedule further. With cases low and vaccinations on the cusp of 70 percent, it would have been hubristic to assume that an extra four days of compliance with social distancing mandates would have any meaningful effect on the course of the pandemic. At the same time, the costs imposed on businesses and consumers were obvious and predictable. Having already waved the white flag on opening regardless of the vaccination metrics, the sensible thing would have been to liberate businesses to adapt to the extraordinary temperatures.

The case for reopening was particularly strong in Multnomah County, where Portland is located. The county was at a 71.4% vaccination rate as of the 26th, comfortably exceeding Brown’s statewide goal, with a seven-day average of only 29 new cases. Yet businesses in the state’s largest population center were forced to delay fully reopening due to low rates in other areas. As Morales noted in frustration, “I’m getting penalized for some of the counties on the borders of the state.”

Needlessly waiting a few extra days wasn’t following the science, it was losing sight of tradeoffs. The Cato Institute’s Ryan Bourne, author of the recent book Economics in One Virus, notes that this has been a persistent error throughout the pandemic. “This general problem of tardiness in adjusting policy has meant certain mandates or business capacity restrictions being left in place even when the additional risks of COVID-19 transmission from relaxing them would be vastly exceeded by the benefits,” he says. “There’s been far too rigid a focus on arbitrary COVID-19 case targets or expiry dates even as new information, variants, events, or conditions have fundamentally altered the balance of costs and benefits of the restrictions.”

Policy decisions should obviously be guided by data, but good governance also depends on knowing when to let go. One lesson authorities should take from the pandemic is humility, a recognition that uncertainty abounds and that their power to control such a complex event is limited. When rigidly technocratic adherence to metrics leads to absurd policy outcomes, leaders should step back and reconsider.

That failure to think economically has become a point of frustration for Huffman. Though he was among the first local restaurateurs to close in the early days of the pandemic, he bristled at a third (brief but disruptive) shutdown in April. “The state has been incapable of taking a stand,” he says now of government officials’ obstinate reliance on metrics and deadlines that forced air-conditioned bars and restaurants to turn customers away in 116-degree heat just two days before Oregon fully reopens. “Nobody’s ever had the courage to come out and say this is silly.”

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3yf3pjb
via IFTTT

How Average Inflation Hit A Red Hot 2.4%

How Average Inflation Hit A Red Hot 2.4%

When even lifelong democrat Larry Summers warns that inflation will hit 5% by year-end, and expects it to be anything but “transitory” as the US has “substantial inflation for real. It is not reflected in price indices but it will be or should be soon”…

… you know Joe Biden has an inflation problem, which can be summarized as a staggering 3.4% increase in core PCE.

Of course, there are extreme base effects to consider, and as Goldman’s chief economist Jan Hatzius today suggests, “a simple solution is to look at the average annualized inflation rate since the start of the pandemic”, which captures both the initial decline and the rebound, which would be somewhat consistent with the intellectually dishonest “averaging” approach used by the Fed’s average inflation targeting (FAIT).

If one looks at an average post-covid inflation reading, the core PCE index has risen at a 2.4% average-annualized rate since the start of the pandemic, versus 3.4% year-on-year in May. According to Goldman, this adjustment is particularly useful in travel services categories affected by severe base effects. For example, annualized inflation has averaged -4.3% for hotels since the start of the pandemic (vs. +9.8% YoY), -3.1% for apparel (vs.+6.0% YoY), and +1.6% for transportation services (vs. +5.1% YoY).

Of course, while these revised categories help explain why the year-over-year rate of core PCE inflation is so high, they do not explain why the average annualized rate since the start of the pandemic is already above 2% after failing to reach the target on a sustainable basis during the last cycle and averaging only 1.8% in the last few years of the longest economic cycle on record.

As a reminder, on Monday we presented Goldman’s thoughts how production cutbacks, supply chain disruptions, elevated demand for durable goods, and higher shipping costs have led to significant price increases in several goods categories. For example, used car prices have increased at an average annualized rate of +27.4% since the start of the pandemic (vs. +37.9% YoY and-1.3% on average between 2017–2019), furnishings prices by +4.0% (vs. +5.6% YoY and-0.9% over 2017–2019), recreational goods and vehicles prices by +0.3% (vs. +2.5% YoYand -3.7% over 2017–2019), and other durable goods prices by +0.6% (vs. +1.8% YoY and -2.0% over 2017–2019).

The chart below shows the average annualized inflation rate of various goods and services since the start of the pandemic; the particularly supply-constrained goods categories are denoted by striped bars.

Another way of seeing the data: the next chart combines these average annualized inflation rates with category weights to show the component-level contributions to average annualized core PCE inflation since the start of the pandemic. Supply-constrained goods (again indicated by striped bars) have contributed almost 80bp more than usual to average annualized core PCE inflation,of which 40bp comes from used cars, and roughly 10bp comes from each of the household furnishings (which includes appliances and furniture) and recreational goods and vehicles categories (which includes sports equipment and televisions). If supply-constrained categories were instead running at their pre-pandemic rates, core PCE inflation would have averaged a more moderate +1.6% since the start of the pandemic.

Now, as we discussed on Monday, Goldman is firmly in the “transitory inflation” camp, and as the bank adds today “looking ahead inflation in these categories is likely to slow, undershooting their normal inflation rate as supply-demand imbalances resolve and price levels partially return to trend.”

However, as we pointed out yesterday when we observed the record increase in rents across the US, Goldman also expects a pickup in inflation in slack-sensitive categories “like shelter, where average annualized inflation during the pandemic has been softer so far (+2.2% since the start of the pandemic vs. +3.3% over 2017-2019, both annualized).”

All told, the vampire squid expects these offsetting effects, combined with fading base effects, “to lead year-on-year core PCE to a bottom of 1.6% in mid-2022 before reaching 2% at end-2022”, though as even the bank admits, “the average annualized rate should remain modestly above 2% throughout.” It was not clear what “modestly” means although in a world where nobody can define “transitory” this is to be expected.

Then, beyond 2022 when Goldman expects the effect of payback for price spikes in supply-constrained categories to fade, the bank expects “core PCE inflation to moderately exceed 2% on both a year-on-year and average annualized basis.” However, greater payback or a more limited acceleration than ot expects in cyclical categories “could leave year-on-year core inflation back in the sub-2% range seen late last cycle.”

Finally, Goldman’s economists conclude that “if below-2% inflation lasted for a while or lowered the average annualized inflation rate back below 2%, Fed officials might have to reconsider the appropriate inflation threshold for liftoff under their new average inflation targeting framework.” Which is great… but first let’s get inflation to stop rising.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 06/30/2021 – 13:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3AiKfe6 Tyler Durden

Bill Cosby Conviction Overturned On Technicality, Will Be Released From Prison Within Hours

Bill Cosby Conviction Overturned On Technicality, Will Be Released From Prison Within Hours

Bill Cosby’s sexual assault conviction was overturned by Pennsylvania’s highest court on Wednesday, after finding that an agreement with a previous prosecutor prevented him from being charged in the case.

Cosby, 83, has been locked up for more than two years of a 3-10 year sentence at a state prison near Philadelphia, according to AP. When convicted, he had vowed to serve all 10 years rather than admit remorse over a 2004 encounter with accuser Andrea Constand, who he invited to an estate he owns in Pennsylvania, then drugged and sexually assaulted her.

The former comic and actor has been accused of rape, drugging women, sexual battery, child sexual abuse and sexual misconduct dating back to the mid-1960s.

He was charged in late 2015, when a prosecutor armed with newly unsealed evidence — Cosby’s damaging deposition from her lawsuit — arrested him days before the 12-year statute of limitations expired.

The trial judge had allowed just one other accuser to testify at Cosby’s first trial, when the jury deadlocked. However, he then allowed five other accusers to testify at the retrial about their experiences with Cosby in the 1980s.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court said that testimony tainted the trial, even though a lower appeals court had found it appropriate to show a signature pattern of drugging and molesting women. –AP

So – because five additional women were allowed to testify to Cosby’s pattern of sexual predation, the trial was deemed ‘tainted’ due to an agreement with prosecutor Bruce Castor (who later represented Donald Trump at impeachment).

Cosby was denied parole in May after refusing to participate in sex offender programs while in state prison – and has long said he would never go to them, while continuing to acknowledge wrongdoing. Cosby’s spokesperson Andrew Wyatt called the decision “appalling.”

Cosby, a groundbreaking Black actor who grew up in public housing in Philadelphia, made a fortune estimated at $400 million during his 50 years in the entertainment industry. His trademark clean comedy and homespun wisdom fueled popular TV shows, books and standup acts.

He fell from favor in his later years as he lectured the Black community about family values, but was attempting a comeback when he was arrested.

“There was a built-in level of trust because of his status in the entertainment industry and because he held himself out as a public moralist,” Assistant District Attorney Adrienne Jappe, of suburban Montgomery County, argued to the justices. -AP

Prosecutors did not say whether they would appeal or attempt to try Cosby for a third time.

 

Tyler Durden
Wed, 06/30/2021 – 13:03

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2UKRfzS Tyler Durden

In an Unprecedented Heat Wave, Portland’s Lingering COVID Restrictions Hurt Bars and Restaurants Again


ddpphotos345150

Staying cool in Portland, Oregon, for the past few days would have been challenging even in normal circumstances. Gloriously temperate summers are supposed to be the payoff here for slogging through the rainy gray winters, but on Monday, a record-shattering heatwave culminated with temperatures rising all the way up to 116 degrees Fahrenheit.

That’s hotter than has ever been recorded in Atlanta or Houston, cities where buildings are designed for that kind of heat. The handful of Portland bars and restaurants with air conditioning up to the task would have been rewarded with booming business on these days if not for one thing: the state’s COVID restrictions, due to expire today, were still limiting their indoor spaces to half capacity. Few industries have been as hard hit by rigid and often-nonsensical pandemic policies over the last year as the service sector. This week’s failure to adjust at a time when it might have helped both businesses and patrons is just one more blow to the state’s struggling bar and restaurant scene.

The heat drove many hospitality businesses, particularly food carts, to shut down preemptively. Others made a go of it but threw in the towel when refrigerators failed, doughs over-proofed, or kitchens got too damn hot. “Eighty percent of places we’re associated with had to close either because it was so hot that it was unsafe to have people inside or because the equipment got so overwhelmed that we couldn’t keep food at temperature,” says Kurt Huffman, owner of ChefStable, a group that partners on operations with some of the city’s most well-known restaurants.

Businesses in newer buildings with efficient air conditioners, such as ChefStable’s beer bar Loyal Legion, were able to stay open. “We had employees that were asking us to stay open during the heatwave because it was so much cooler than their homes,” Huffman says. Loyal Legion could have provided a beery oasis for more than 200 Portlanders, but state restrictions cut its capacity in half. (Exceptions are available for restaurants that screen guests by vaccination status, a step many have been reluctant to take.)

The intense heat reversed pandemic business trends, rendering outdoor dining setups worthless and putting cool indoor spaces at a premium. “This weekend was bonkers,” says Israel Morales of Russian restaurant Kachka, a success he credits to having really good air conditioning and a slushie machine. “We were at max capacity from open to close.” The catch? Maximum capacity was just 30 people. With half of his dining area in a suddenly intolerably hot outdoor space, he lost half his potential business. He could have welcomed those guests inside if not for Oregon’s lingering COVID rules.

Oregon is one of the last four states in the country to fully re-open. Governor Kate Brown announced on Friday, June 25, that the state would reopen no later than June 30. While that was a welcome development for Oregon businesses, it also raised the question of what purpose was served by not opening a few days earlier when it was obvious the state was about to get scorched.

Some policies were changed, most notably Oregon’s oft-ridiculed ban on self-service gasoline; this regulation was sensibly waived so that station attendants wouldn’t have to suffer in the heat. (What this implies about the necessity of the ban in the first place is a topic for another day.) The state also lifted capacity limits in shopping malls, movie theaters, and swimming pools. That was better than nothing, but why not go all the way?

There wasn’t a hard scientific justification for waiting. Oregon had planned to reopen when 70 percent of adults had received at least one dose of a COVID vaccine, a goal the state expected to meet by June 21. That date came and went as the pace of vaccinations slowed to a crawl. With the rate at 69 percent, Governor Brown committed to opening when the initial goal was reached or on June 30, whichever came first. Explaining her reasoning, she said, “Obviously businesses and venues need certainty in terms of reopening.”

Brown was right to recognize that the pragmatic benefits of reopening outweighed the desire to precisely meet a semi-arbitrary vaccination benchmark. Yet she also failed to be pragmatic enough to see a historically unprecedented weather event as a compelling reason to accelerate the schedule further. With cases low and vaccinations on the cusp of 70 percent, it would have been hubristic to assume that an extra four days of compliance with social distancing mandates would have any meaningful effect on the course of the pandemic. At the same time, the costs imposed on businesses and consumers were obvious and predictable. Having already waved the white flag on opening regardless of the vaccination metrics, the sensible thing would have been to liberate businesses to adapt to the extraordinary temperatures.

The case for reopening was particularly strong in Multnomah County, where Portland is located. The county was at a 71.4% vaccination rate as of the 26th, comfortably exceeding Brown’s statewide goal, with a seven-day average of only 29 new cases. Yet businesses in the state’s largest population center were forced to delay fully reopening due to low rates in other areas. As Morales noted in frustration, “I’m getting penalized for some of the counties on the borders of the state.”

Needlessly waiting a few extra days wasn’t following the science, it was losing sight of tradeoffs. The Cato Institute’s Ryan Bourne, author of the recent book Economics in One Virus, notes that this has been a persistent error throughout the pandemic. “This general problem of tardiness in adjusting policy has meant certain mandates or business capacity restrictions being left in place even when the additional risks of COVID-19 transmission from relaxing them would be vastly exceeded by the benefits,” he says. “There’s been far too rigid a focus on arbitrary COVID-19 case targets or expiry dates even as new information, variants, events, or conditions have fundamentally altered the balance of costs and benefits of the restrictions.”

Policy decisions should obviously be guided by data, but good governance also depends on knowing when to let go. One lesson authorities should take from the pandemic is humility, a recognition that uncertainty abounds and that their power to control such a complex event is limited. When rigidly technocratic adherence to metrics leads to absurd policy outcomes, leaders should step back and reconsider.

That failure to think economically has become a point of frustration for Huffman. Though he was among the first local restaurateurs to close in the early days of the pandemic, he bristled at a third (brief but disruptive) shutdown in April. “The state has been incapable of taking a stand,” he says now of government officials’ obstinate reliance on metrics and deadlines that forced air-conditioned bars and restaurants to turn customers away in 116-degree heat just two days before Oregon fully reopens. “Nobody’s ever had the courage to come out and say this is silly.”

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3yf3pjb
via IFTTT

Virginia Says You Can Gamble On This, But Not That


dreamstime_m_101441847

Come Thursday, Virginians will be able to bet on sports from their phones, but not on electronic skill games at gas stations. 

Once casinos open within a few years’ time, people will be able to play video slots at the casino but not at the truck stop in the next town over.

Meanwhile, a “family entertainment center” can put the same games out and offer tickets that can be redeemed for prizes at ridiculous markups, but the bar next door can’t put the same game out unless it rebrands itself as a family venue.

Of course, Virginians will still be able to gamble on a state-run scratch-off or lottery ticket bought at a convenience store. 

If that sounds like a confusing standard, that’s because it is. Even some Virginia legislators can’t figure out what’s legal and what isn’t.

“If you read the bill, it is so vague and ambiguous to the point where I can’t tell who’s legal or not legal,” State Sen. Bill Stanley (R–Franklin County), told Reason. “The law is so poorly written that its enforceability is suspect at best.”

For decades, electronic skill games—any electronic gambling game that does not rely sheerly on chance—have been unregulated in Virginia. For the past year, they were regulated and taxed as part of a one-year deal “that allowed the state to collect more than $100 million in new taxes on the machines while protecting income for small businesses that house them,” The Richmond Times-Dispatch reported.

The new law Virginia passed seeks to permanently clarify what kind of gambling is allowed (and where) going forward. As Stanley explained it, the law bans skill games statewide, except at family entertainment centers. An establishment must advertise itself as a place for kids and families to meet that definition and get the exemption. That’s why Dave & Buster’s and Chuck E. Cheese aren’t sweating the ban on skill games. 

Stanley is also a lawyer and is representing truck stop owner and former NASCAR driver Hermie Sadler in a suit seeking to overturn the ban on First Amendment grounds.

What does free speech have to do with a ban on a certain type of gambling? “[Sadler] … would have to conform his speech to say ‘Come to the Sadler Truck Stop, a family entertainment center.’ So the government is forcing him to conform his speech in order for him to transact an otherwise lawful business,” says Stanley.

On Monday, a separate legal complaint was filed by the Asian American Business Owners Association, alleging that the ban disproportionately harms businesses owned and frequented by racial minorities. State Sen. Joe Morrissey (D–Richmond) cited discrimination as a reason to undo the ban.

Regardless of the legal approach to challenging the ban, the gist of these suits is the same: The Virginia government is picking winners and losers in the gambling world. Legislators may think the games are low-class (one called them “unseemly” and “sleazy”), crowding out the state lottery (Stanley says evidence shows otherwise), or preying on low-income Virginians (what do they think the state lottery does?), but there’s no moral or economic reason that electronic skill games should be banned if other forms of gambling get to thrive.

Stanley voted against the 2020 bill to allow five casinos to open in Virginia, but he now says, “If you’re going to allow casino gambling…you better just rip the band-aid off and [say] all gambling is okay, and it should be available to all people who choose to spend their extra money that way, regardless of their socioeconomic status or location geographically in Virginia. I mean, it’s just not fair.”

Of course, this double standard is not unique to Virginia. In Georgia, for example, people can play the lottery but nearly every other form of gambling is illegal, even poker games played among friends in private. Kentuckians can play the lottery and bet on horses but not on other sports. Californians can go to tribal casinos, bet on horses, and play daily fantasy sports, but can’t bet on sports in other ways.

Hopefully, legislators in every state will soon realize all gambling should be treated the same and stop trying to pick the right way for people to spend (or earn) their money. But don’t bet on it.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3dxmR2q
via IFTTT

Kim Jong Un Issues Rare Attack On Own Officials For Setting Off “Great Crisis”

Kim Jong Un Issues Rare Attack On Own Officials For Setting Off “Great Crisis”

Despite long denying – or at least never confirming – that his country has a severe COVID-19 pandemic outbreak in its midst, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un issued extremely rare public biting criticism of the reaction of top government officials in a speech published Wednesday. He basically admitted government “failure” to handle a national health crisis, again which comes long after Pyongyang has carefully hidden how coronavirus may have impacted the isolated country for more than the past year.

Further his remarks in state media sparked widespread speculation given his reference to a mysterious “grave incident” – or elsewhere translated as a “great crisis” which threatened the “safety of the country and its people”. 

Via Reuters

“By neglecting important decisions of the party in its national emergency antivirus fight in preparations for a global health crisis, officials in charge have caused a grave incident that poses a huge crisis to the safety of the nation and its people,” state-run KCNA cited Kim as saying.

“A major factor that hampers the execution of important tasks is inability and irresponsibility of senior officials,” he added. “Party-wide fight should be carried out against ideological defects and all kinds of negative factors found among senior officials.”

The Workers’ Party of Korea politburo meeting where the address was made highlighted what’s increasingly looking like an unprecedented level of inter-government infighting within the reclusive nation. 

It’s no doubt also connected to the acknowledged national food crisis of the past months. Earlier in June Kim admitted to senior leaders that “The people’s food situation is now getting tense”. He’s also recently emerged looking unusually gaunt himself, setting off questions over his health, given how rapidly it appears he lost the weight. 

Last year’s typhoon season left the agricultural sector devastated at a time the north took extreme measures to isolate the population from the global pandemic, sealing of the borders, which also impacted food and medicines making it across the border. 

Weeks ago NK News reported that a kilogram of bananas, for example, has hit $45 and that whole swathes of the population could face starvation. This latest speech by Kim confirms that North Korea is desperately attempting to stave off disaster, whether the possibly unprecedented foot shortage emergency, or the equally unprecedented pandemic situation.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 06/30/2021 – 12:55

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/364evLK Tyler Durden

Virginia Says You Can Gamble On This, But Not That


dreamstime_m_101441847

Come Thursday, Virginians will be able to bet on sports from their phones, but not on electronic skill games at gas stations. 

Once casinos open within a few years’ time, people will be able to play video slots at the casino but not at the truck stop in the next town over.

Meanwhile, a “family entertainment center” can put the same games out and offer tickets that can be redeemed for prizes at ridiculous markups, but the bar next door can’t put the same game out unless it rebrands itself as a family venue.

Of course, Virginians will still be able to gamble on a state-run scratch-off or lottery ticket bought at a convenience store. 

If that sounds like a confusing standard, that’s because it is. Even some Virginia legislators can’t figure out what’s legal and what isn’t.

“If you read the bill, it is so vague and ambiguous to the point where I can’t tell who’s legal or not legal,” State Sen. Bill Stanley (R–Franklin County), told Reason. “The law is so poorly written that its enforceability is suspect at best.”

For decades, electronic skill games—any electronic gambling game that does not rely sheerly on chance—have been unregulated in Virginia. For the past year, they were regulated and taxed as part of a one-year deal “that allowed the state to collect more than $100 million in new taxes on the machines while protecting income for small businesses that house them,” The Richmond Times-Dispatch reported.

The new law Virginia passed seeks to permanently clarify what kind of gambling is allowed (and where) going forward. As Stanley explained it, the law bans skill games statewide, except at family entertainment centers. An establishment must advertise itself as a place for kids and families to meet that definition and get the exemption. That’s why Dave & Buster’s and Chuck E. Cheese aren’t sweating the ban on skill games. 

Stanley is also a lawyer and is representing truck stop owner and former NASCAR driver Hermie Sadler in a suit seeking to overturn the ban on First Amendment grounds.

What does free speech have to do with a ban on a certain type of gambling? “[Sadler] … would have to conform his speech to say ‘Come to the Sadler Truck Stop, a family entertainment center.’ So the government is forcing him to conform his speech in order for him to transact an otherwise lawful business,” says Stanley.

On Monday, a separate legal complaint was filed by the Asian American Business Owners Association, alleging that the ban disproportionately harms businesses owned and frequented by racial minorities. State Sen. Joe Morrissey (D–Richmond) cited discrimination as a reason to undo the ban.

Regardless of the legal approach to challenging the ban, the gist of these suits is the same: The Virginia government is picking winners and losers in the gambling world. Legislators may think the games are low-class (one called them “unseemly” and “sleazy”), crowding out the state lottery (Stanley says evidence shows otherwise), or preying on low-income Virginians (what do they think the state lottery does?), but there’s no moral or economic reason that electronic skill games should be banned if other forms of gambling get to thrive.

Stanley voted against the 2020 bill to allow five casinos to open in Virginia, but he now says, “If you’re going to allow casino gambling…you better just rip the band-aid off and [say] all gambling is okay, and it should be available to all people who choose to spend their extra money that way, regardless of their socioeconomic status or location geographically in Virginia. I mean, it’s just not fair.”

Of course, this double standard is not unique to Virginia. In Georgia, for example, people can play the lottery but nearly every other form of gambling is illegal, even poker games played among friends in private. Kentuckians can play the lottery and bet on horses but not on other sports. Californians can go to tribal casinos, bet on horses, and play daily fantasy sports, but can’t bet on sports in other ways.

Hopefully, legislators in every state will soon realize all gambling should be treated the same and stop trying to pick the right way for people to spend (or earn) their money. But don’t bet on it.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3dxmR2q
via IFTTT

Rabo: The Second Half Of 2021’s Inflationistas Vs. Deflationistas Is About To Get Underway

Rabo: The Second Half Of 2021’s Inflationistas Vs. Deflationistas Is About To Get Underway

By Michael Every of Rabobank

A Game of Two Halves

“So just a few seconds on the clock left in the first half, and what have you made of it so far?”

“Well, to be fair Inflationistas must be feeling sick as a parrot. They came out storming against Deflationistas and managed to take that key early lead, Bullwhip heading in at both the left and the right post, totally unmarked – 1-0, 2,-0, bam!“

“That’s right. Powell in the heart of the Deflationistas defence looked totally confused. Is his head right? I am sure they will keep him on for the second half because the only real sub, Brainard, is untested at this level: but if it goes to extra time, do you think we will see a substitution?”

“Very likely in my opinion. But would that help the defence or not?”

“Indeed. After going 2-0 up, Inflationistas kept pressing, and sent Biden off on a mazy run – but each he ran into his own team-mate, Manchin, before he could shoot!”

“Inflationistas had many other opportunities too. The powerhouse center-forward Labour -controversially given a one-off bonus even if he wasn’t picked to play- really looked like he might score for the first time in years. But that niggling hamstring injury the team never seem to treat right saw him pull up – why don’t they ever get that treated properly?”

“Yes, you could see it really deflated the whole team psychology – even the crowd too.”

“Then one of the best-performing players for Inflationistas, Beijing, sat back just when the crowd thought he would press forward. He seems really out of puff – would you credit it?”

“Well, he has been doing so much running for the past few years – really carrying the rest. Maybe he is saving something up for extra time, or if there has to be a replay?”

“Perhaps. But then back came Deflationistas to score three times! Lumber smashed in an outrageous goal that really turned a lot of heads; and then Inflationistas were caught napping in their own half twice in quick succession, and Transitory-Rhetoric -who frankly has been trying the same predictable strategy over and over- went through and scored easy goals.”

“That’s right. So 2-3 to Deflationistas, and so much to look forward to in the second half.”

“For me the critical question is if Biden will get his act together with Manchin or not. But they will both need much better supply, otherwise all their efforts are going to be wasted.”

“Also key is the new signing for Inflationistas, Pfizer-Moderna-AZ-Johnson-and-Johnson. He was really putting up a solid defence against pressing attacks from Covid for Deflationistas, but as the half progressed Covid started varying his play more. The other defenders, Sinovac and Sputnik, have not really imposed themselves on the game yet. So it’s really all to play for.”

“Yes, and Deflationistas have a real problem with energy – and Powell really does look wobbly. Meanwhile, Inflationistas still have Steel pushing up, and Drought waiting to make an impact on the wing – and Rent and Housing can always do damage given a chance when they come on, as we saw in yesterday’s stats. But will the manager treat Labour’s old injury, make sure Manchin doesn’t get in Biden’s way – and, crucially, tell the team to keep the ball more rather than always giving away possession to the other team so cheaply?”

“At the end of the day, it’s a game of two halves, and the team who scores the most goals wins.”

Sticking with a football theme today, I must add: “They think Brexit is all over – it is now!” This after England beat Germany 2-0, winning only their second major knock-out game at the Euros since 1996, the first not involving penalties since goodness knows when, and setting up a quarter final with Ukraine – which on paper even looks winnable. The majority of readers of this Daily are not English, but this news still provides an interesting sociological snapshot of how a country’s media reacts:

  • The Guardian: England beat Germany as Sterling and Kane send them to Euro 2020 last eight

  • The Times: England beat Germany to reach quarter-finals

  • The Telegraph: Finally something to cheer about: England knock out Germany to advance to the quarter finals

  • The Daily Mail: By George, We Did It!

  • The Daily Express: Thunderstorm erupts over ‘devastated’ Germany fans in Berlin after Euros thrashing, which is rather sedate for such an anti-EU paper – but only because the main headline is about Boris’s new masterplan to de-regulate the UK into a new global role.

  • The Mirror: Time to Dream (which might apply to the Boris news as much as the football).

  • The Sun: It’s Coming Rome! England 2 Germany 0

So set your super soar-away pun-o-meters to Ukraine, which will prove a challenge (‘Chicken Kyiv’ is surely going to be in the mix, ‘O-dear-sa’ a strong second place, and perhaps a punt at something along the lines of ‘Not very Dni-pro’ or ‘From England with Lviv’), your geolocation to Rome, where the game is hosted, and your calendar to this Saturday night Central European time.

And for everyone else, the second half of 2021’s Inflationistas vs. Deflationistas is about to get underway – and did you see the absolute scorcher from rent and housing reports in the US yesterday?

Tyler Durden
Wed, 06/30/2021 – 12:33

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3yaGjKg Tyler Durden

At Least 5 Justices Seem To Think the CDC’s Eviction Moratorium Is Illegal. SCOTUS Left It in Place Anyway.


Brett-Kavanaugh-4-26-21-Newscom

The Supreme Court yesterday declined to remove a stay on a decision against the nationwide eviction moratorium that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) imposed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. A concurring statement by Justice Brett Kavanaugh nevertheless indicates that a majority of the Court thinks the CDC’s order, which was recently extended and is now scheduled to expire at the end of July, exceeds its statutory authority.

On May 5, Dabney Friedrich, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., ruled that the moratorium, which applies to tenants who claim financial hardship, is not authorized by the Public Health Service Act, the statute that the CDC cited as the basis for its order. “Because the plain language of the Public Health Service Act…unambiguously forecloses the nationwide eviction moratorium,” Friedrich wrote, “the Court must set aside the CDC Order, consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act…and D.C. Circuit precedent.”

Friedrich granted a stay of her order pending the government’s appeal, and on June 2 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit declined to lift that stay. The plaintiffs—landlords, real estate companies, and trade associations—appealed that decision to the Supreme Court.

Four justices—Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett—thought the stay should be lifted, meaning that Friedrich’s decision against the CDC would take effect immediately. Chief Justice John Roberts and four of his colleagues—Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Brett Kavanaugh—disagreed. But Kavanaugh, whose vote against lifting the stay was crucial, said he thought Friedrich was right.

“I agree with the District Court and the applicants that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention exceeded its existing statutory authority by issuing a nationwide eviction moratorium,” Kavanaugh wrote. “Because the CDC plans to end the moratorium in only a few weeks, on July 31, and because those few weeks will allow for additional and more orderly distribution of the congressionally appropriated rental assistance funds, I vote at this time to deny the application to vacate the District Court’s stay of its order….In my view, clear and specific congressional authorization (via new legislation) would be necessary for the CDC to extend the moratorium past July 31.”

Since the CDC says it does not plan to further extend the moratorium, it is not clear whether the order’s legality will ever be definitively resolved. The D.C. Circuit differed with Friedrich, saying “the CDC’s eviction moratorium falls within the plain text” of the Public Health Service Act. But three other federal judges and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit have agreed that the moratorium is legally invalid.

The Public Health Service Act authorizes the secretary of health and human services to issue regulations that “in his judgment are necessary” to prevent the interstate spread of “communicable diseases.” One of those regulations delegates a similar authority to the CDC’s director.

The statute mentions these examples of disease control measures: “inspection, fumigation, disinfection, sanitation, pest extermination,” and destruction of infected or contaminated “animals or articles.” It then refers to “other measures” deemed “necessary,” which according to the CDC encompasses pretty much anything.

Friedrich, two other federal judges, and the 6th Circuit concluded that the CDC was wrong about that, saying “other measures” must be similar in kind to the specific examples. Another federal judge ruled that even Congress does not have the authority to impose a moratorium like the CDC’s, because forcing landlords to continue housing tenants who fail to pay their rent exceeds the federal government’s power to regulate interstate commerce.

The CDC’s justification for the moratorium, which it first imposed in September, is that evicted tenants might become homeless or move in with other people, thereby increasing the risk of virus transmission. That malleable rationale, coupled with the CDC’s broad reading of the Public Health Service Act, implies that the agency has boundless authority to dictate how Americans can behave and interact with each other, provided it thinks the edicts are “reasonably necessary” to prevent the interstate spread of “any” communicable disease.

South Texas College of Law professor Josh Blackman is not impressed by Kavanaugh’s explanation for leaving the CDC’s order in place. “The application [to remove the stay] was filed on June 3,” he writes in a Volokh Conspiracy post. “The response was due on June 10. The application has been pending for 19 days. It did not take 19 days to write a one-paragraph concurrence. No one wrote a dissent in response. The Court was no doubt hoping Biden would decline to extend the moratorium so the case would go away. But the administration did extend it. And with 31 days remaining on the order,  Justice Kavanaugh now says there are only a ‘few weeks’ left….Therefore, he will decline to grant relief. If the Court moved with alacrity, the rule of law would have already been restored.”

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3qISNX5
via IFTTT

Amazon Seeks Recusal Of FTC Head Lina Khan As Antitrust Probe Ramps Up

Amazon Seeks Recusal Of FTC Head Lina Khan As Antitrust Probe Ramps Up

Amazon is pushing back against the Biden Administration’s effort to impose new anti-trust strictures on Big Tech by filing a complaint with the FTC asking that Lina Khan, recently confirmed as head of the commission, recuse herself from all dealings involving Amazon.

In its request, filed with the agency on Wednesday, the company argued that Khan should be barred from handling enforcement decisions involving Amazon because Khan “on numerous occasions argued that Amazon is guilty of antitrust violations and should be broken up.” Amazon added that “these statements convey to any reasonable observer the clear impression that she has already made up her mind about many material facts relevant to Amazon’s antitrust culpability as well as about the ultimate issue of culpability itself.”

“Given her long track record of detailed pronouncements about Amazon, and her repeated proclamations that Amazon has violated the antitrust laws, a reasonable observer would conclude that she no longer can consider the company’s antitrust defenses with an open mind,” Amazon said in a statement. “Indeed, doing so would require her to repudiate the years of writings and statements that are at the foundation of her professional career.”

The petition has been filed as the FTC is in the middle of a review of Amazon’s deal with movie studio MGM, which it’s seeking to acquire for a whopping $8.45 billion.

Other antitrust talking heads have said the deal would likely be difficult for the government to stop, though it did help revive complaints about the economic power of Big Tech. The FTC is also pursuing a wide-ranging anti-trust probe into Aamzon’s business practices.

Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren asked Khan on Wednesday to ensure she conducts a “broad and meticulous review” of the MGM deal, saying the deal could have anti-competitive effects on video streaming.

“The FTC should disfavor approving deals involving parties with a known pattern of inhibiting competition and harming consumers and workers,” Warren said. “Allowing such firms to continue buying up competitors would only exacerbate these abuses of market power.”

Khan established her profile in the antitrust world with a 2017 paper she wrote while still a law student exploring Amazon’s dominance. Entitled “Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox,” the paper explained how the online retailer came to control key infrastructure of the digital economy and how traditional antitrust analysis fails to consider the danger to competition posed by the company.

Khan, a Democrat, currently leads the five-member commission which enjoys a 3-2 majority.

A federal judge recently delivered Facebook a major victory by dismissing an anti-trust lawsuit brought by the DoJ and a group of states’ AGs. Is Amazon hoping for a Hail Mary of its own?

Tyler Durden
Wed, 06/30/2021 – 12:15

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3xe8yba Tyler Durden