Criticizing Lack of Grocery Stores in the South Bronx Means the Twitter Mob Will Try To Get You Fired


screen capture from a TikTok video, TikTok logo, and the word bodega layered on a gray background

“I’ve literally been to like five of those now, and I don’t know what the fuck I’m about to do for dinner,” said NYC newcomer Griffin Green in a TikTok video posted this past week, referring to the bodegas of the South Bronx. “Like, where are the Krogers and the Whole Foods at? I’m about to eat fuckin’ cereal and ramen for dinner,” Green continued.

This, and other TikTok videos in the style of day-in-the-life vlogs (that have since been roasted and riffed on), seem to have gotten him fired from software company Outreach, which had hired him as an entry-level sales development representative. “I’m in the Bronx for a few weeks so I’m like the only white dude in this whole gym, so I got this NAACP shirt so these people vibe with me more,” said Green in one video. He talked about how many gay people there are in NYC (during Pride celebrations) in another, innocuously displaying dude-from-Michigan-lands-in-the-big-city culture shock. He briefly shows his employment offer letter, marked as confidential, in another TikTok, though it’s very hard to make out details within it; in an email to Reason, the company claims this was the reason they fired him but awkwardly follows that statement with a seemingly unrelated one about diversity, equity, and inclusion. “It is against company policy for employees to leak private and confidential information, and grounds for termination,” wrote Andrew Schmitt, vice president of communications. “We remain committed to building our culture that finds strength in our diversity, equity and inclusion—and a company where all can succeed.”

If they were firing Green for the offer letter image alone, it doesn’t make sense why the company’s Twitter account made news of his firing public via a tweeted response to people who were angry about the bodega video or why they responded to the mob at all. When I spoke with Green, he said HR had called him on his second day of work, notifying him that he’d be let go for both the heat that they’d gotten from the videos and the sharing of the confidential offer letter. Green notes that the offer letter had been on TikTok for three weeks prior but only just now caught their attention.

Had Green framed his bodega TikTok as an exploration of the struggles with food deserts in the South Bronx, he’d probably still have a job, having never faced the mob’s ire. He may have even been lauded instead of derided as a racist “Chad” from the Midwest. But a few low-follower Twitter accounts found Green’s TikTok videos, quote-tweeted them, and with comments like “I would reevaluate his employment if I were you,” to which Outreach responded indicating that they’d terminated him. 

“People can be painted as these mean awful people when really they’re just trying to explore new things,” says Green. “I was exploring New York for the first time…I didn’t know that people do grocery shopping at these corner stores.”

“It was more of an intent to almost like make fun of myself for being a new person in the city,” he adds.

With other cancel culture incidents, companies fearing public backlash have moved quickly to rid themselves of employees who might tarnish their reputations. This case is no exception: The company posted at 8:25 p.m. on Tuesday that the video had been brought to its attention. By a little after noon the next day, it said it had fired Green. Green, who just signed a 12-month lease and is worried about finances, says he asked HR for an opportunity to explain himself, but they denied his request; they will also withhold the $2,500 relocation bonus that would’ve come with his first paycheck.

Companies are within their rights to hire and fire whomever they want, and Green was a newly hired recent college grad who’d hardly had time to demonstrate any value to the company. But this kind of corporate wokeness should concern us all. If your out-of-work conduct is on limits to this extent, what types of offenses or pronouncements are fireable? Must workers engage in a constant guessing game? Are software companies in the business of moral adjudication? What types of moral indicators are they looking for, per whose standards?

But companies fear being the mob’s target of the week more than they fear hastily punishing innocent people. Consider the case of Emma Sarley, who in fall 2021 was fired from her job at tech company Bevy after allegedly telling a black couple “stay in your hood” after an altercation in a Williamsburg, Brooklyn, dog park. The black couple included Frederick Joseph, a noted internet fame-seeker and yarn-spinning provocateur who had allegedly indicated earlier in the altercation that he’d lived in a posh neighborhood north of Williamsburg, in Queens, which would have made Sarley’s comments make more sense. (Note that she was not accused of saying “the hood,” but rather “your hood,” which seems relevant when attempting to discern racist intent.)

Sarley’s case took Bevy CEO Derek Andersen less than 48 hours to rule on. She was quickly fired, just as Green was quickly fired from Outreach. Perhaps this indicates appropriate risk calculation from management. Or perhaps it indicates something more insidious: that our poorly worded jokes or clumsy invectives in moments of frustration can be found by bad actors on the internet, trotted out for all to mock, and assumed to be representative of our character. No mercy, no weighing of our own account of what happened, and certainly no job at the end of the public cross-examination.

“All I ask is for a chance to explain myself,” Green wrote in his email to HR asking for a second chance. “This is my dream job and I don’t want it to get taken away because of a stupid tik tok video.”

The post Criticizing Lack of Grocery Stores in the South Bronx Means the Twitter Mob Will Try To Get You Fired appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/xIe6bKp
via IFTTT

First-Half FUBAR: Stocks Worst In 60 Years, Bonds & Bitcoin Worst Ever

First-Half FUBAR: Stocks Worst In 60 Years, Bonds & Bitcoin Worst Ever

It appears the world’s investors were ‘over-stuffed’ full of liquidity just as 2021 ended…

…which meant the first half of 2022 was a bloodbath for most. Stocks were clubbed like a baby seal, bonds were battered, there was carnage in crypto as the dollar soared and gold was steady…

S&P was down 21.01% in 1970 H1, we are currently down 21.22% H1… so, according to Bloomberg data, this would be worst since 1962… 60 years ago

Nasdaq Composite is down 30% to start the year – that is the worst start to a year ever, worse than the H1 2002 collapse.

Year-to-date, US stocks have been hammered lower with 3 small BTFD efforts…

Only the energy sector is green year-to-date with Consumer Discretionary the worst horse in the glue factory…

Source: Bloomberg

Of course, the ugly quarter has prompted many calls for a rebound based on history… the question is – how many of those times saw stagflationary pressures as large as the current quagmire…

The US economy saw false hopes of recovery in Q1 of 2022, only to have that slapped in the face of optimists in Q2 as May and June saw macro data collapse…

Source: Bloomberg

US Treasuries suffered their worst first half of a year ever…

The Short-end of the curve was the hardest hit, with 2Y rising 220bps in H1 and 30Y up 123bps…

Source: Bloomberg

For a different perspective on this shift, here is the before and after of the US yield curve…

Source: Bloomberg

The credit side of the bond market was also a bloodbath with HYG suffering its worst H1 losses ever…

Commodities, broadly speaking, were up 18% in the first half of 2022 (but we note they were up 22% in the first half of 2021 – which is weird because we are pretty sure that Putin didn’t invade Ukraine in 2021).

Oil prices soared 40% in the first half of 2022, but that is less than the surge to start 2021…

Crypto was carnage as Bitcoin fell 59% in the first half of the year – that is the worst start to a year ever for the crypto currency (worse than the 57.99% drop in 2017). Ethereum was worse, falling 72% YTD…

Source: Bloomberg

The Dollar soared in the first half of the year, up almost 10% – its biggest start to a year since 2010…

So having got all that off our chest, let’s focus back in on this week…

Stocks rollercoastered today, weakness overnight and then dumping early on in the cash session led to a bid into and across the European close which managed to get the majors back to unchanged on the day… only to see selling return in the afternoon

Interestingly, today’s dead-cat-bounce managed to get stocks up to last Friday’s cash open level before stocks went panic-bid into OpEx…

Credit markets are breaking bad and signaling significantly more pain ahead for stocks…

Source: Bloomberg

Treasuries were bid today with the short-end outperforming (5Y -14bps, 30Y -9bps) and the belly continues to outperform strongly into the quarter-end…

Source: Bloomberg

This pushed the 10Y Yield back below 3.00%, back below the CPI-spike lows on June 10th…

Source: Bloomberg

Global inflation expectations are starting to really tumble with US 10Y Breakevens at their lowest since Sept 2021. Japanese inflation expectations have fallen the least…

Source: Bloomberg

Rate-hike expectations fell further today and subsequent rate-cut expectations rose as recession fears rise…

Source: Bloomberg

And stagflation is here…

Source: Bloomberg

The Dollar had a big month, quarter, and half; surging back to near COVID safe-haven spike highs…

Source: Bloomberg

On the day, the dollar was lower but still up on the week (and notably higher since CPI on June 10th)

Source: Bloomberg

Bitcoin fell back below $19,000 and then hovered around there today…

Source: Bloomberg

Commodities crashed today, falling down towards pre-Putin levels…

Source: Bloomberg

US Nat Gas tumbled further today on another bigger than expected storage build, plunging to 3-month lows…

Notably this smashed US NatGas below WTI (on an oil barrel equivalent basis) and the widened the spread to EU NatGas dramatically…

Source: Bloomberg

Oil suffered its first monthly decline since November…

Gold extended the week’s losses back down towards $1800 with every bounce getting monkeyhammered to a new low…

Finally, we note that global equity and debt capital markets lost a stunning $31 trillion in the first half of the year…

Source: Bloomberg

…a record by a massive margin…

Source: Bloomberg

And that was triggered by just $1 trillion drop in global central bank balance sheets…

Source: Bloomberg

The Biden Bloodbath!

And it could get worse…

 

Tyler Durden
Thu, 06/30/2022 – 16:00

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/NXbagRW Tyler Durden

The Jaws Of Trade Squeezing The Supply Chain

The Jaws Of Trade Squeezing The Supply Chain

By FreightWaves

The jaws of the supply chain vise are squeezing trade so tight that the headache it is creating will be a whopper for logistics managers this peak season. Port congestion is growing again as a result of labor and equipment inefficiencies. Trade requires people, and what we see in the CNBC Supply Chain Heat Maps is the people component in trade is behind this latest squeeze.

Shanghai is still in the process of reopening, and while there are more green lights on the screen, the supplying of drivers and people to move and make the product is slower than normal. This is affecting the delivery of critical medical devices. 

“The manufacturing plant in Shanghai was down for 75 days because of the ‘zero-COVID’ restrictions,” explained Gerry LoDuca, president of Dukal, which sells infection-control products and has manufacturing plants in Shanghai, Wuhan and Xingtai, China. “They are now operating 24/7 and they will be caught up by the end of July. Then the products will need to be packed up, shipped to Shanghai port and moved by vessel.”

Unfortunately, this delay is one of many being experienced by global importers.

Another vise squeezing trade is Europe.

Labor strife between the German trade union ver.di and the Central Association of German Seaport Companies (ZDS) is white-hot. Almost all ports in the German Northern Sea were impacted by a second warning strike last week that lasted 24 hours.  

According to sources, a final offer of a wage increase of up to 11% in 18 months was offered. Some hope for a conciliation procedure in which politicians or a neutral person become involved in mediation.

The delays created by the latest warning strike have added to the congestion already plaguing the German ports. Container ships are currently delayed by several weeks at some German ports. Logistics executives are concerned the congestion is going to get worse, as will the availability of empty containers to be filled with trade.

“The overall situation in North European ports is deteriorating,” warned Andreas Braun, EMEA ocean product director for Crane Worldwide Logistics. “Port congestion is on the increase as well as yard occupancy. The first shipping lines like MSC are reacting to the current scenario with emergency storage surcharges for both imports and exports. These surcharges will be applied after exceeding the standard storage free time and are in addition to the standard tariffs.  Although this surcharge is currently limited to Dutch ports only, and to date only MSC has circulated communication relating to the additional fees, we can assume that other ports and shipping lines will follow.”

Ocean carrier Hapag-Lloyd issued a notice on the increased demand on trucks as a result of this labor slowdown. And Maersk reported it would “absorb” the stoppage at its German terminals, telling customers that “in the interest of minimizing any further disruption to your supply chain, we will be keeping a close eye on developments up to and during the next round of meetings between trade union ver.di and ZDS, acknowledging that further strike action is possible.”

The U.S. logistics system continues to have its own host of issues with the persistent rail problems, chassis shortages and warehouses at capacity.

“Consumer trends are changing,” explained Spencer Shute, senior consultant at Proxima. “Buying patterns have shifted from home, electronics, casual apparel to more services. We are seeing buying apparel for travel and cosmetics coming back to pre-pandemic levels. Luggage, sunscreen, bug spray, these are items in higher demand because consumers need them in their experience pursuits. Larger appliances are not being purchased anymore. It’s an interesting dynamic to see how quickly the consumer has flipped considering what is going on in the economy.”

Despite the historic volume of containers, a pullback is expected as future orders for Chinese manufacturing have dropped anywhere from 20% to 30%, according to shippers surveyed.  Lumber orders have been cut along with orders for furniture, appliances and DIY products.

“But for other sectors like garments, sporting goods and e-commerce, they are still seeing strong demands,” explained Akhil Nair, senior vice president of products for Asia-Pacific at Seko Logistics.

Steve Lamar, CEO of the American Apparel and Footwear Association, explained the continued strength in orders is a result of consumers looking to outfit themselves for experiences like back to school, back to in-office work and travel. But despite this demand, the impact of inflation is a top worry.

“We remain deeply concerned that persistently high prices — in our sector and throughout the economy — will begin to dampen consumer spending and harm American families,” Lamar said. “That is why, with consumers still being a driver for economic growth in our economy, we continue to push for the [Biden] administration to avail itself of all its own inflation-cutting tools, including relief from the high and regressive tariffs that are currently being charged on products in our industry.”

Alan Baer, CEO of OL USA, tells American Shipper the decrease in container volume is being seen.

“We are seeing drops by some customers from 30-50 FEU per week down to 10 FEU per week,” Baer said. 

The squeeze is on. Time to pop that aspirin.

Tyler Durden
Thu, 06/30/2022 – 15:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/K9gm5sL Tyler Durden

Criticizing Lack of Grocery Stores in the South Bronx Means the Twitter Mob Will Try To Get You Fired


screen capture from a TikTok video, TikTok logo, and the word bodega layered on a gray background

“I’ve literally been to like five of those now, and I don’t know what the fuck I’m about to do for dinner,” said NYC newcomer Griffin Green in a TikTok video posted this past week, referring to the bodegas of the South Bronx. “Like, where are the Krogers and the Whole Foods at? I’m about to eat fuckin’ cereal and ramen for dinner,” Green continued.

This, and other TikTok videos in the style of day-in-the-life vlogs (that have since been roasted and riffed on), seem to have gotten him fired from software company Outreach, which had hired him as an entry-level sales development representative. “I’m in the Bronx for a few weeks so I’m like the only white dude in this whole gym, so I got this NAACP shirt so these people vibe with me more,” said Green in one video. He talked about how many gay people there are in NYC (during Pride celebrations) in another, innocuously displaying dude-from-Michigan-lands-in-the-big-city culture shock. He briefly shows his employment offer letter, marked as confidential, in another TikTok, though it’s very hard to make out details within it; in an email to Reason, the company claims this was the reason they fired him but awkwardly follows that statement with a seemingly unrelated one about diversity, equity, and inclusion. “It is against company policy for employees to leak private and confidential information, and grounds for termination,” wrote Andrew Schmitt, vice president of communications. “We remain committed to building our culture that finds strength in our diversity, equity and inclusion—and a company where all can succeed.”

If they were firing Green for the offer letter image alone, it doesn’t make sense why the company’s Twitter account made news of his firing public via a tweeted response to people who were angry about the bodega video or why they responded to the mob at all. When I spoke with Green, he said HR had called him on his second day of work, notifying him that he’d be let go for both the heat that they’d gotten from the videos and the sharing of the confidential offer letter. Green notes that the offer letter had been on TikTok for three weeks prior but only just now caught their attention.

Had Green framed his bodega TikTok as an exploration of the struggles with food deserts in the South Bronx, he’d probably still have a job, having never faced the mob’s ire. He may have even been lauded instead of derided as a racist “Chad” from the Midwest. But a few low-follower Twitter accounts found Green’s TikTok videos, quote-tweeted them, and with comments like “I would reevaluate his employment if I were you,” to which Outreach responded indicating that they’d terminated him. 

“People can be painted as these mean awful people when really they’re just trying to explore new things,” says Green. “I was exploring New York for the first time…I didn’t know that people do grocery shopping at these corner stores.”

“It was more of an intent to almost like make fun of myself for being a new person in the city,” he adds.

With other cancel culture incidents, companies fearing public backlash have moved quickly to rid themselves of employees who might tarnish their reputations. This case is no exception: The company posted at 8:25 p.m. on Tuesday that the video had been brought to its attention. By a little after noon the next day, it said it had fired Green. Green, who just signed a 12-month lease and is worried about finances, says he asked HR for an opportunity to explain himself, but they denied his request; they will also withhold the $2,500 relocation bonus that would’ve come with his first paycheck.

Companies are within their rights to hire and fire whomever they want, and Green was a newly hired recent college grad who’d hardly had time to demonstrate any value to the company. But this kind of corporate wokeness should concern us all. If your out-of-work conduct is on limits to this extent, what types of offenses or pronouncements are fireable? Must workers engage in a constant guessing game? Are software companies in the business of moral adjudication? What types of moral indicators are they looking for, per whose standards?

But companies fear being the mob’s target of the week more than they fear hastily punishing innocent people. Consider the case of Emma Sarley, who in fall 2021 was fired from her job at tech company Bevy after allegedly telling a black couple “stay in your hood” after an altercation in a Williamsburg, Brooklyn, dog park. The black couple included Frederick Joseph, a noted internet fame-seeker and yarn-spinning provocateur who had allegedly indicated earlier in the altercation that he’d lived in a posh neighborhood north of Williamsburg, in Queens, which would have made Sarley’s comments make more sense. (Note that she was not accused of saying “the hood,” but rather “your hood,” which seems relevant when attempting to discern racist intent.)

Sarley’s case took Bevy CEO Derek Andersen less than 48 hours to rule on. She was quickly fired, just as Green was quickly fired from Outreach. Perhaps this indicates appropriate risk calculation from management. Or perhaps it indicates something more insidious: that our poorly worded jokes or clumsy invectives in moments of frustration can be found by bad actors on the internet, trotted out for all to mock, and assumed to be representative of our character. No mercy, no weighing of our own account of what happened, and certainly no job at the end of the public cross-examination.

“All I ask is for a chance to explain myself,” Green wrote in his email to HR asking for a second chance. “This is my dream job and I don’t want it to get taken away because of a stupid tik tok video.”

The post Criticizing Lack of Grocery Stores in the South Bronx Means the Twitter Mob Will Try To Get You Fired appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/xIe6bKp
via IFTTT

Nvidia GPU Prices Plummet As Crypto Mining Craters

Nvidia GPU Prices Plummet As Crypto Mining Craters

Between the recent crash in cryptos and an upcoming protocol change that will make it more difficult to mine Ethereum, the price of video cards has plummeted more than 50% in the used market, according to Bloomberg, citing RW Baird & Co. analyst Tristan Gerra.

Long popular with computer gaming nerds, these cards enjoyed a second life during the crypto boom as an essential component of the systems that generate digital coins. Even as Nvidia tried to limit its exposure to the industry, the crypto rally had helped send prices of the company’s products soaring on secondary markets like EBay. -Bloomberg

Gerra estimates that over 1/3 of the consumer GPU market could disappear as crypto mining enthusiasts ditch their plans, resulting in a flood of inventory on Ebay and other marketplaces.

People don’t want to buy GPUs knowing it’s potentially going to be obsolete in two quarters,” he said, adding “We believe that crypto-related purchases have steadily declined.”

According to MarketSight, the price for Nvidia’s GeForce RTX 3080 fell from $1,100 in late April to $793 on Ebay, which means gamers can finally scoop up a card.

Meanwhile, Reddit’s “EtherMining” forum is a hot mess.

According to New Street analyst Pierre Ferragu, an Nvidia graphics card with a list price of $1,499 was fetching double that price during the peak mining frenzy – with some $3 billion worth of cards having been bought for mining since the beginning of 2021. “They are now flushing into the secondhand market,” he added.

Nvidia expects to take a hit from reduced demand for GPUs – even though they had been trying to dissuade miners from soaking up inventory from gamers by employing hashrate limiters to reduce how quickly each card can mine.

Nvidia has already spent years struggling with how to handle the crypto industry. Though demand from miners has helped fuel sales, the vagaries of the market suddenly made results harder to predict. That came to a head in late 2018 when the company blamed a crypto retreat for a weak forecast. Nvidia warned that revenue would be hundreds of millions of dollars lower than Wall Street projected, sending its shares down 20% in just two days.

The company didn’t want a repeat of that scenario, so it made its gamer GPUs — sold under the GeForce brand — less effective at mining. It also released a card designed for the crypto market that can’t be used for gaming. The product lacks the hardware needed to connect to monitors. -Bloomberg

“The reduced pace of increase in Ethereum network cash rate likely reflects lower mining activity on GPUs,” Nvidia Chief Financial Officer Colette Kress said during the company’s quarterly conference call last month. “We expect a diminishing contribution going forward.”

CEO Jensen Huang has warned that while demand remains strong from gamers and data-center customers which use the chips to power AI, the company’s days as in the crypto space are already waning.

“The underlying dynamics of the gaming industry is really solid,” said Huang during last month’s quarterly conference call.

Tyler Durden
Thu, 06/30/2022 – 15:25

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/9MXZTks Tyler Durden

Here’s What Happened When Other Countries Rolled Back Abortion Rights


Pro-abortion protesters assemble outside of Poland's parliament

With the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the United States has become the fourth country in the world to roll back abortion rights since 1994. Following the Court’s decision, almost all abortions will become illegal in 13 states as so-called trigger laws took effect. 

Unlike laws implemented in other countries following abortion rights rollbacks, many trigger laws preserve exceptions, like if the mother’s life is in danger. Others also include exceptions for rape and incest. Still, as both sides of the U.S. abortion debate try to make sense of what a post-Roe world looks like, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Poland offer a glimpse of how countries enforce laws prohibiting elective abortion. 

Since 1998, El Salvador’s constitution has enshrined into law the idea that personhood begins at conception. All abortions are prohibited under the law, with no exceptions for rape, incest, or danger to the mother’s life. Over 140 women in the last 24 years have been arrested and imprisoned under El Salvador’s abortion law, some of whom did not have an abortion but experienced a miscarriage. Charged with aggravated homicide, some women have received decades long prison sentences. El Salvador’s abortion ban has also disproportionately impacted poor women, indigenous women, and rural women, according to abortion rights advocates.

Nicaragua similarly implemented a total ban on abortion in November 2006. This overturned a long-standing law that allowed “therapeutic” abortions when the life of a pregnant woman was in danger, provided she had the consent of three doctors. According to a study conducted by Ipas, a reproductive rights group, 1,300 girls between the ages of 10 and 14 become pregnant through rape each year in the country. 

Comprehensive data are hard to come by, given crackdowns by the government of President Daniel Ortega, but the Ipas report also raised concerns about frequent cases of pregnancy-related deaths. By October 2007, at least 80 women had reportedly died as a result of the abortion ban, according to Human Rights Watch. Dozens of women died in successive years, according to Amnesty International. Those numbers are expected to have continued climbing amid economic downturns in the country.

Doctors in Nicaragua have described a chilling effect on obstetric care. Afraid of potential criminal liability, doctors often refuse to treat women experiencing hemorrhages, even post-menopausal hemorrhaging, as they worry they might be charged as accomplices to abortions. Women have also been driven to alternative methods of terminating their pregnancies, including the usage of herbal medicines and underground abortion clinics.

Though Nicaragua rarely prosecutes women under the law, women still have been the targets of regular criminal complaints. One study found that hundreds of women have been investigated since the 2006 law took effect, many reported by partners and family members.

Anti-abortion legislation is not exclusive to Latin America. Poland, one of the first countries in Europe to allow abortion in limited cases, has seen a rapid reversal in its abortion laws. First legalized in 1932, abortion was initially allowed in Poland just for medical purposes. Later, Poland’s communist government introduced several liberalizing reforms to the law, increasing access and legal rights to abortions.

However, following the end of communist rule, activists in Poland began an aggressive push to ban abortion. Buoyed by the backing of the Catholic Church, campaigners began chipping away at Poland’s liberal abortion law through legal challenges and new legislation. After three decades, Poland officially abolished abortion in 2021 in almost all circumstances, even in the case of a detected fetal impairment. Abortion is now only legal in cases where the mother’s life is in danger and when the pregnancy is the result of a criminal act, such as rape. The law also bans individuals from helping others access abortion, including ordering abortion pills.

One part of Poland’s abortion law that has received intense scrutiny is its national database of patient information. Earlier this month, Polish Health Minister ​​Adam Niedzielski announced that pregnancies would now be recorded in a national patient information database. Though the Polish government has assured citizens that only medical professionals would have access to this information, many womens rights advocates worry about the consequences.

“Being pregnant means that police can come to you any time and prosecutors can come to you to ask you questions about your pregnancy,” Marta Lempart, a Polish activist, told the Associated Press earlier this month.

These laws had already been on the minds of many U.S. abortion activists before Dobbs. Now, some worry about what will happen in trigger-law states as authorities begin enforcing these bans.

What is happening today with Roe v. Wade, is worrying because what is going to happen in the United States, unfortunately, is that it will become Central America,” Sara García Gross, a Salvadoran activist, told The Independent. 

The post Here's What Happened When Other Countries Rolled Back Abortion Rights appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/s3K0fEJ
via IFTTT

Biden Energy Secretary Violated Federal Hatch Act When She Promoted Democrats: Special Counsel

Biden Energy Secretary Violated Federal Hatch Act When She Promoted Democrats: Special Counsel

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

U.S. Energy Secretary and former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm violated the Hatch Act when she endorsed the Democratic Party in her capacity as a federal official during an interview last year, said the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) this week.

Granholm, the OSC said, explicitly endorsed Democrats during an Oct. 6 interview in her official capacity as Secretary of Energy with Marie Clare.

“OSC has concluded that Secretary Granholm engaged in political activity when she gave this response promoting the electoral success of the Democratic Party,” Erica Hamrick, the deputy chief of the OSC’s Hatch Act Unit, told the Foundation for Accountability & Civic Trust in a response letter. The group requested that the OSC investigate whether she violated the Hatch Act after the interview was released.

“While she then attempted to backpedal by stating that she was using ‘Democrats as a substitute’ for certain policies, at bottom she told listeners that they needed to vote for Democrats so that more Democrats would be elected to pass the legislation they wanted,” Hamrick also wrote, according to several news outlets.

“Her attempt to backpedal does not change the meaning of her words or undo the fact that she was talking about the Democratic Party throughout her statement.”

The OSC, which is tasked with investigating possible Hatch Act violations, said that “Granholm has been advised that if in the future she engages in prohibited political activity while employed in a position covered by the Hatch Act, we will consider such activity to be a willful and knowing violation of the law,” reported the Detroit Free Press. Without elaborating, the office added that she did not have “significant” training on Hatch Act matters when she conducted the interview last year and has since received that training.

During her October 2021 interview with Marie Claire, Granholm was asked about how voters could become more involved in having specific policies addressed in Congress.

“The good news is that … voting gave Democrats a bare majority [in Congress],” Granholm said in response.

She then quickly went back on her statement, saying, “I am using Democrats as a substitute for the policies that you believe in, the policies that you would like to see happen.”

The Hatch Act, which was passed in 1939, prohibits federal government officials from partaking in activities that attempt to bring success or failure to a certain political party, a political candidate, or a political group when that person is on duty, in a federal room or federal building, using a federally owned or leased vehicle, or while wearing a uniform or wearing official insignia, according to the OSC’s website.

The Epoch Times has contacted the Department of Energy’s office for comment.

A spokesperson for the agency said that Granholm received the training since her interview.

“Secretary Granholm takes her ethics obligations seriously,” the spokesperson told Fox News. “And, she remains laser focused on delivering President Biden’s equitable clean energy agenda which will help lower energy costs for American families and enhance our nation’s security.”

Tyler Durden
Thu, 06/30/2022 – 15:05

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/VJ5DUWu Tyler Durden

The FDA’s War on Juul Will Kill People


woman vapes with Juul

There’s something terrifying about a government so powerful that it can shut down your business overnight without even bothering to offer substantive arguments. Yet that’s what U.S. Food and Drug Administration bureaucrats just did to the e-cigarette company Juul. While Juul got a stay of execution from a court, the company is one of the many victims of the FDA’s counterproductive war on nicotine. Most of the other victims will be cigarette smokers.

I have followed the issue for several years and there is no doubt in my mind that Juul is an effective way to transition away from smoking into alternative, safer sources of nicotine. Vaping doesn’t end nicotine consumption, but it’s still a real step toward a world without cigarettes. In fact, it is now proven that e-cigarettes are more effective than traditional, FDA-approved nicotine-replacement therapies at getting smokers to quit entirely.

In its 125,000-page application to the FDA, Juul reminded the agency of more than 110 studies showing the benefits of e-cigarettes over traditional nicotine consumption. The company has also been a good team player, jumping through all the hoops thrown at it by the anti-vaping brigades. As the Reason Foundation’s Guy Bentley reminds us in the New York Daily News, “Juul complied with nearly every request made by critics including pulling its original marketing campaigns in 2016, voluntarily removing all of its non-tobacco and menthol flavors from the market in 2019, and supporting an increase in the tobacco age from 18 to 21.”

And yet the FDA has ordered all Juul e-cigarette products off the market even though its own decision features this remarkable admission: “To date, the FDA has not received clinical information to suggest an immediate hazard associated with the use of the JUUL device or JUULpods.” In other words, neither Juul’s effectiveness in turning smokers away from more dangerous products nor its success at getting some smokers to quit altogether is, for the FDA, sufficient evidence of the product’s benefit to public health.

Don’t hold your breath waiting for good arguments coming from the FDA. The Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Michelle Minton writes that “the FDA’s rationale that Juul products lacked sufficient toxicological evidence is confusing, given that the agency has previously approved IQOS heated tobacco products and lower-nicotine content combustible cigarettes, ‘both of which obviously have worse [toxicological] profiles than a Juul.'” She adds that “the FDA has granted marketing approval for other e-cigarette brands” despite these products being no safer.

As for concerns over kids’ nicotine use, the FDA’s decision comes at a time when Juul is no longer the most popular vaping product among young people and when vaping is becoming remarkably less popular among the young. Bentley notes, for instance, that “according to the latest National Youth Tobacco Survey, 89% of [high school age] youth don’t vape and 95% don’t vape frequently.” Meanwhile, in the Centers for Disease Control’s latest data, only 7.6 percent of high school and middle school students reported any past-month vaping, down from 27.5 percent in 2019.

Instead of applauding the improvements, the agency has continued to wage a war on nicotine. This war includes, among other measures, rules to ban vapers’ favorite flavors and reduce nicotine in cigarettes to trace amounts. However, in the absence of the most popular alternative, Juul, the FDA all but guarantees that smokers will smoke more cigarettes, turn to less-established products or even go to the black market to get their nicotine fixes.

The FDA has forgotten why it entered the battlefield in the first place. Every year in the United States, 480,000 people die due to cigarette smoking. They die of illnesses caused by the repeated inhaling of tar, an especially dangerous product of combustion. And here’s the key point: They may be smoking for the buzz of nicotine, but they don’t die from nicotine. This simple fact explains why e-cigarettes came to be. The importance of the innovation lays precisely in its ability to deliver nicotine without the combustion and tar.

All wars kill. The FDA’s war against nicotine might claim Juul, but it will just as likely claim hundreds of thousands of adults who continue to inhale tar from cigarettes thanks to the agency’s refusal to allow safer, but also appealing, alternatives. If these overzealous regulators win their battle against Juul, the only other winners will be tobacco companies, contraband dealers, and health care providers who will have to keep treating captive smokers.

COPYRIGHT 2022 CREATORS.COM.

The post The FDA's War on Juul Will Kill People appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/KPjMBao
via IFTTT

Here’s What Happened When Other Countries Rolled Back Abortion Rights


Pro-abortion protesters assemble outside of Poland's parliament

With the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the United States has become the fourth country in the world to roll back abortion rights since 1994. Following the Court’s decision, almost all abortions will become illegal in 13 states as so-called trigger laws took effect. 

Unlike laws implemented in other countries following abortion rights rollbacks, many trigger laws preserve exceptions, like if the mother’s life is in danger. Others also include exceptions for rape and incest. Still, as both sides of the U.S. abortion debate try to make sense of what a post-Roe world looks like, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Poland offer a glimpse of how countries enforce laws prohibiting elective abortion. 

Since 1998, El Salvador’s constitution has enshrined into law the idea that personhood begins at conception. All abortions are prohibited under the law, with no exceptions for rape, incest, or danger to the mother’s life. Over 140 women in the last 24 years have been arrested and imprisoned under El Salvador’s abortion law, some of whom did not have an abortion but experienced a miscarriage. Charged with aggravated homicide, some women have received decades long prison sentences. El Salvador’s abortion ban has also disproportionately impacted poor women, indigenous women, and rural women, according to abortion rights advocates.

Nicaragua similarly implemented a total ban on abortion in November 2006. This overturned a long-standing law that allowed “therapeutic” abortions when the life of a pregnant woman was in danger, provided she had the consent of three doctors. According to a study conducted by Ipas, a reproductive rights group, 1,300 girls between the ages of 10 and 14 become pregnant through rape each year in the country. 

Comprehensive data are hard to come by, given crackdowns by the government of President Daniel Ortega, but the Ipas report also raised concerns about frequent cases of pregnancy-related deaths. By October 2007, at least 80 women had reportedly died as a result of the abortion ban, according to Human Rights Watch. Dozens of women died in successive years, according to Amnesty International. Those numbers are expected to have continued climbing amid economic downturns in the country.

Doctors in Nicaragua have described a chilling effect on obstetric care. Afraid of potential criminal liability, doctors often refuse to treat women experiencing hemorrhages, even post-menopausal hemorrhaging, as they worry they might be charged as accomplices to abortions. Women have also been driven to alternative methods of terminating their pregnancies, including the usage of herbal medicines and underground abortion clinics.

Though Nicaragua rarely prosecutes women under the law, women still have been the targets of regular criminal complaints. One study found that hundreds of women have been investigated since the 2006 law took effect, many reported by partners and family members.

Anti-abortion legislation is not exclusive to Latin America. Poland, one of the first countries in Europe to allow abortion in limited cases, has seen a rapid reversal in its abortion laws. First legalized in 1932, abortion was initially allowed in Poland just for medical purposes. Later, Poland’s communist government introduced several liberalizing reforms to the law, increasing access and legal rights to abortions.

However, following the end of communist rule, activists in Poland began an aggressive push to ban abortion. Buoyed by the backing of the Catholic Church, campaigners began chipping away at Poland’s liberal abortion law through legal challenges and new legislation. After three decades, Poland officially abolished abortion in 2021 in almost all circumstances, even in the case of a detected fetal impairment. Abortion is now only legal in cases where the mother’s life is in danger and when the pregnancy is the result of a criminal act, such as rape. The law also bans individuals from helping others access abortion, including ordering abortion pills.

One part of Poland’s abortion law that has received intense scrutiny is its national database of patient information. Earlier this month, Polish Health Minister ​​Adam Niedzielski announced that pregnancies would now be recorded in a national patient information database. Though the Polish government has assured citizens that only medical professionals would have access to this information, many womens rights advocates worry about the consequences.

“Being pregnant means that police can come to you any time and prosecutors can come to you to ask you questions about your pregnancy,” Marta Lempart, a Polish activist, told the Associated Press earlier this month.

These laws had already been on the minds of many U.S. abortion activists before Dobbs. Now, some worry about what will happen in trigger-law states as authorities begin enforcing these bans.

What is happening today with Roe v. Wade, is worrying because what is going to happen in the United States, unfortunately, is that it will become Central America,” Sara García Gross, a Salvadoran activist, told The Independent. 

The post Here's What Happened When Other Countries Rolled Back Abortion Rights appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/s3K0fEJ
via IFTTT

Market Starting Down The Abyss Of Contraction

Market Starting Down The Abyss Of Contraction

Two days ago Nomura’s Charlie McElligott laid out the market’s pernicious recession/non-recession feedback loop as well as the conditions tracked by traders to gauge if the “all-clear” has arrived, to wit:

A flush down to 3300-3400 is the perceived “all-clear” on the valuation case for Equities, with the whole world seemingly bid “out loud” down there for size, which means it either, i) it doesn’t happen and we don’t trade low enough, or conversely, or ii) we do trade down there, but the supposed size demand doesn’t materialize, and we get the puke through 3k.

Today, McElligott doubles down with some “gory details” on how the quad diagram shows the economy careening into contraction (more below) starting with European inflation which continues its escalation, perversely increasing the likelihood of an “accident” there against a still-toiling ECB who risks a “catch-up” hiking spasm into a hard recession—and accordingly EUR Credit markets are staring into the abyss, with Xover earlier printing through 600bps for the first time since “peak COVID” stress

Well, as we have been saying for months, Charlie notes that the market “gets the joke” on Central Banks being incapable of address “supply side” issues — so they pull the only lever they have on the “demand” side, hence “Recession” gap-risk repricing hard and fast.

And this, according to Elligott, is the brutal truth (something we have been saying since 2020):

in the absence of being able to print oil and gas, refinery capacity, very large crude carriers (VLCCs), fertilizers, grains, rare earth metals for EVs etc…Central Banks are really left with no choice but to drive economies into recession in order to curtail “demand” -pressure on prices, even though they’re a much smaller attributing factor to inflation.

Indeed, with “Demand” the only “lever” they can pull here, since governments (particularly due to their ‘pie-in-the-sky’ aspirational climate goals, but without viable energy transition alternatives in the meantime) and industry (burned in the past from overzealous cash-burning overbuilding and overcapacity, into a future state where western governments are actively seeking to erase them) are unable to come to terms on addressing “supply” side dynamics. So it is a “pick your poison” trade:

Stomp inflation from the “demand” side while global economies still show a remaining semblance of “juice,” but cause a recession and loss of employment—because the alternative case of “unanchored” forward inflation is being painted as an even uglier long-term economic outcome.

As an aside, Biden “punishing” Putin for unleashing global commodity hyperinflation by sending the US economy into a recession and starting a harrowing bear market and the worst tech crash since Lehman is so… 2022. As for a recession with mass layoffs being uglier than inflation, well… we give Biden’s handlers a few more days before they completely change their mind on this once the violent protests break out.

This slide into recession is manifesting itself across recent destruction in Cyclicals, Commods and Inflation Breakevens (which have collapsed to 2018 levels), along with resumption of widening in Corp Credit despite the Equities bounce off the cycle lows over the past 2 weeks

To this point, Nomura’s Economics team “upped the ante” regarding the risk of unanchored inflation and again, increases the risk of Fed tightening induced “accident” (in a note titled “The Fed’s Inflation Expectations Angst Grows” available to pro subscribers).

And accordingly, the STIRs market is anticipating this “breakage” due to the final throes of this “tightening into a Contraction” dynamic then leading to a 4Q22 recession and 2023 policy reversal: EDZ2EDZ3 (Dec22-Dec23) now shows 53.5bps of CUTS priced in the US for next year, where even Z2H3 (Dec22-Mar23, aka Q1 2023 ) shows a -5bps inversion as of today…

… and the H3M3 (Mar23-Jun23) inversion goes to -15.5bps; while H3H4 (Mar23-Mar24) extends to -60bps vs -44.5bps Tuesday

Looking at markets, equities risk-premia continues to trade this “recession” dynamic as currently expressed by “Momentum,” “Defensive Value,” “Low Risk,” “Quality” and “Dividends” leadership, versus renewed moves lower this week in the prior YTD “losers” of “High Short Interest,” “Leverage,” “Hedge Fund Crowding” and “ISM Manufacturing PMI” (weak balance sheet / high realized vol / unprofitable / low quality / growth sensitive -stuff).

This also matches the current economic quadrant trajectory (see above) which shows us “careening into Contraction” from what is an already embedded “Slowdown” phase…

which then too corresponds with historical precedent for the next Yield Curve phase-shift into a likely “Bull-Flattener.”

Meanwhile, as discussed earlier this week, equities also now too feeling that “next shoe to drop” of the long-overdue “negative earnings revisions” transition, which is finally kicking-off with a bang as the Street suddenly spasms into taking down estimates in a number of key sectors / industries.

Nonetheless from the Vol side, there remains almost no demand for new “Crash” here (hence VVIX sub-90), as with fund exposures so low, clients are more worried about missing the “right tail” (e.g. some sort of “dovish pivot” scenario from the Fed) than “left tail.”

As such, a part of the “extreme flat Skew” dynamic is wingy Calls looking relative to wingy Puts, and that is “skewing Skew” (and Put Skew) to look so incredibly, historically low / flat, despite SPX ATM Vols remaining historically high.

Finally and tactically with Equities, McElligott reminds us that today is the roll of the infamous JPM Put/Spread Collar which is “gonna be fun” – per Nomura index trader Jordan Farkas, the new structure should look like them selling 42k 6/30 4285 Puts to buy 42k 9/30 3000-3575-3875 PS Collar. This will sell a massive 16mm Vega and will buy 4.7B of Delta, but they will structure the trade such that its neutral at time of trade and will shift Delta to MOC

Tyler Durden
Thu, 06/30/2022 – 14:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/7mnWcZK Tyler Durden