Watch: Biden Says He “Ran To Restore Decency, Honor, And To Treat People With Respect”

Watch: Biden Says He “Ran To Restore Decency, Honor, And To Treat People With Respect”

Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

During a Labor Day speech in Pittsburgh Monday, Joe Biden commented that he ran for president to “restore decency” to the country and to “treat people with respect,” yet he has spent the past week demonising half of the country as a ‘violent extremist threat to the nation’.

Biden made more of the same comments just hours later in another speech in Milwaukee, claiming that “extreme MAGA Republicans” propagate “violence and hatred,” and that those “in Congress have chosen to go backwards to full of anger, violence, hate and division.”

When someone stood up to express dissent, Biden called him “an idiot” and stated “Extreme MAGA Republicans don’t just threaten our personal rights and our social security, they embrace political violence.”

Elsewhere during Biden’s appearances, he reminded Americans that he cannot string sentences together or pronounce words, and he doesn’t know where he is:

Biden also told another outright lie about his shady past:

Literally tens of people were out in force for Biden:

Many watched it online though, all 681 of Biden’s supporters to be exact:

*  *  *

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here. Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Also, we urgently need your financial support here.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 09/06/2022 – 14:45

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

Europe’s Nightmare Scenario Comes True: Energy Bills To Rise By €2 Trillion, Will Reach 20% Of Disposable Income

Europe’s Nightmare Scenario Comes True: Energy Bills To Rise By €2 Trillion, Will Reach 20% Of Disposable Income

What is the scale of the energy challenge?

We got a very shocking sense of the staggering numbers involved in the existential, crippling European crisis earlier today when Norwegian energy giant Equinor echoed what Zoltan Pozsar said in March, warning that “European energy trading risks grinding to a halt unless governments extend liquidity to cover margin calls of at least $1.5 trillion.As Bloomberg put it, in its best non-Zoltan imitation, “aside from inflating bills and fanning inflation, the biggest energy crisis in decades is sucking up capital to guarantee trades amid wild price swings. That’s putting pressure on European Union officials to intervene to prevent energy markets from stalling.”

“Liquidity support is going to be needed,” Helge Haugane, Equinor’s senior vice president for gas and power, said in an interview. The issue is focused on derivatives trading, while the physical market is functioning, he said, adding that the company’s estimate for $1.5 trillion to prop up so-called paper trading is “conservative.””

In other words, massive amounts of newly-printed funding (because with yields blowing up, Europe’s fiscal stimulus will be over before it started unless central banks step in and backstop the latest energy hyperinflation bailout plans) will be required to avert an energy disaster. Alas, the final number will be even more massive, because overnight Goldman’s research team published a must read note (available to pro subs), in which the bank looked at the scale of the energy bill challenge, potential European government responses and industry implications, and quantified the total damage. The numbers are staggering:

According to Goldman, Italian household energy bills could rise from ~€150 to ~€600 in 2023. Some more details:

“For most families and industrial customers, energy bills are renegotiated every twelve months; on our estimates, energy bills for most consumers will peak this winter. We estimate a c.€500/month cost for power and gas currently, implying a c.200% increase vs. 2021 when average bills were c.€160/month. Energy bills could approach €600/month in a zero flows (from Russia) scenario we believe (see here for more on this zero flows scenario). “

The trigger for this exponential surge in costs: since January 2020, 1-year forward gas and power prices – usually the reference when signing new energy supply contracts for families or industrial customers – have each increased by more than 13x. The following exhibit shows this evolution, rebased to 100.

For Europe as a whole, this would be equivalent to a near €2 TRILLION increase in gas and power spending (equivalent to c.15% of GDP).

Goldman next calculates that if current 1-year forward prices remain unchanged for the coming six months, supply contract renegotiations would lift the EU’s power and gas unitary bills by c.200%, vs. 2021. As a reference, the exhibits below show (using Italy as an example) the unitary cost of energy (€/MWh) evolution of gas and electricity, for both industrial users and households.

In this nightmare scenario, Energy bills would constitute over 20% of EU household gross disposable income.

The next table shows a sensitivity analysis in the surge in energy bills for Europe, depending on the development of gas and power prices.

And while Goldman does not say it, the biggest winner from this historic transfer of wealth – one which sees Europe’s standard of living implode as disposable income evaporates going instead into staples like power and heat… is none other than Vladimir Putin.

But we already knew that: last weekend Credit Suisse repo guru Zoltan Poszar published what may have been the most insightful snippet of the entire European energy crisis (to date) when he extended the infamous “Minsky Moment” framework to Europe, and specifically Germany, which he said “can’t cover its payments without Russian gas and the government is asking citizens to conserve energy to leave more for industry.” He then elaborated that “Minsky moments are triggered by excessive financial leverage, and in the context of supply chains, leverage means excessive operating leverage: in Germany, $2 trillion of value added depends on $20 billion of gas from Russia… …that’s 100-times leverage – much more than Lehman’s.” 

Guess what: Russian gas will never cost $20 billion again, and meanwhile the margin call on that 100x leverage is now due.

So what solutions could governments use to cushion the consumer hit in Europe? According to Goldman, two come to mind:

Windfall tax on European utilities would have very little impact (only €30bn of income per year).

 

Price caps in power generation would be more effective and could save €650bn p/a. This is based on fact that a large part of power generation costs less than the marginal source of energy. These could follow the example set in Spain, where there are two co-existing caps:

  1. a cap on gas prices that CCGTs are permitted to translate to the electricity price (c.€70/MWhg, which compares with current TTF levels of c.€200/MWhg); and
  2. a cap on the level of remuneration fixed-cost technologies (hydro, nuclear, wind, solar) are allowed to receive (c.€75/MWh).

But price caps would not fully solve the affordability issue, as the increase in gas and power bills would still be +€1.3 tn, or c.10% of GDP on the team’s estimates.

 

This is why Goldman believes that the introduction of a “tariff deficit” might eventually be needed, to spread the recent spike in bills over 10-20 years, and allowing the Utilities to securitize promptly these future payments. Although this scheme would limit demand destruction, it would smooth the increase in tariffs, limit the near-term decline in industrial production, and largely defuse regulatory risk.

Whatever the band aid solution that is applied, however, the reality is grim. And while we wait for the latest Zoltan note to quanity it in a way only he can, the math is simple: Europe can’t print more nat gas, oil, coal, etc, so one way or another, it will have to offset the surge in costs, first in commodities and then in all downstream chains, which in the very near future will mean governments will soon be subsidizing Europe’s cost of living as the alternative is a violent revolution. In short: we are about to see the printers go brrrr like never before, if only to prevent Europeans from going brrrr this winter…

Much more in the full Goldman note available to pro subs.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 09/06/2022 – 14:25

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/16ednxK Tyler Durden

Tchir: Wake Me Up When September Ends

Tchir: Wake Me Up When September Ends

Authored by Peter Tchir via Academy Securities,

Summer has come and passed. It was a long and difficult summer and I don’t see that changing as we head into September.

Admittedly I started this chart back in April, but we had a 22% drop in the Nasdaq 100, followed by a short (but sharp) 10% rally, which led to a quick and ugly drop of 14%. Then we managed to rally 23% from the “lows” only to end the summer with a 12% drop. Not exactly a restful or stress-free summer. I could have pulled up similar charts in rates, credit, curve shapes, commodities, or pretty much anything we trade and they would have been just as gut wrenching. That ignores the other problem managers and traders faced this summer – rapid shifts in correlation.

Before diving into this week’s September outlook, please see last week’s reports:

Four Main Themes for September

There are a lot of moving parts for the global economy and markets, but a few stand out. I suspect that getting these factors right will determine success in navigating markets and the economy this autumn.

Russia and the European Energy Crisis.

Academy’s Geopolitical Intelligence Group has been saying since March that the conflict in Ukraine is likely to grind to a standstill with no resolution in sight. Advanced weaponry helps Ukraine defend against Russia, but attrition of their personnel is a major issue. Russia has a seemingly endless supply of conscripts to continue the relatively ineffective advances they continue to make. Sadly, but quite realistically, the attention has shifted from the fighting in Ukraine to energy in Europe. The narrative there is getting worse by the day. The “leak” that Gazprom said it found in Nord Stream 1 (ensuring that the pipeline would remain closed) caused gas prices to spike in Europe. Even the most naïve person in Europe is now being forced to accept that Russia has weaponized energy availability (and prices) against them. This is having a widespread impact on morale in the region and it will affect spending (energy bills are already out of control, and winter isn’t even here yet). I am hearing that companies are struggling with what to do as costs become prohibitive. Nothing that Europe can do in the next few months will alleviate this pressure. Europe, quite literally, is dependent upon a mild winter (less demand) and more wind (so Germany’s commitment to wind can pay off). Sanctions have backfired. Virtually every part of the West’s sanction policy can be deemed to have been marginally useful (to actually backfiring on us). More on that in a separate piece, but this winter is shaping up to be costly and dangerous for Europe.

Inventories and New Orders.

My single biggest fear for the U.S. economy is clear evidence that inventories are too high and that orders and shipments are slowing dramatically in response.

On a simple straight line extrapolation, inventories are easily 7% or more above where they should be.

Inventories slightly built up for years (on average). The pattern of build, drawdown, build, drawdown was nice and reasonably symmetrical. Now we’ve seen inventories build 14 months in a row! Many of those months saw relatively high increases and we have built inventories for 23 out of the last 24 months (yes, a post Covid recovery was needed, but this seems absurd).

In the past few months, we have seen new orders roll over. ISM has been 49.2, 48, and 51.3 for the past three months (not conducive for the pace of inventory build that we are seeing). According to the U.S. Census Bureau, new orders dropped 1% in July, the largest monthly decline since Covid hit.

Baltic Dry shipping costs have dropped dramatically. That is clearly linked to fewer exports from China. The economic bulls will argue that the decline in Chinese exports is a function of lockdowns, but the bears (of which I am one of them) will argue that this is more likely a response to already having been over-ordered. China is stimulating their economy (they did more over this long weekend) because they are seeing weakness not just domestically, but globally. I’ve seen a number of pieces recently highlighting rapidly declining costs for freight, which indicates that the problem with inventory overbuild is widespread and is starting to be addressed.

Higher Yields, Housing, Real Estate, and Autos.

The 10-year yield gets a lot of attention. Deservedly so, but I’m more concerned about shorterterm rates and mortgage rates. Lots of companies fund themselves on a relatively short-term basis (many did a great job locking in low yields for long maturities, but there is still sensitivity to short-term rates, especially as inventories build). The housing market is dependent on mortgage rates to a large extent. The housing data has been ranging from bad to abysmal for months. I’m told that “home prices won’t go down because there won’t be forced selling”. Against that, I would argue that forced selling does come in over time, but more importantly, people aren’t stupid and they understand that their house is worth less than it was a few months ago and that the outlook for at least the next few months isn’t positive. With over 60% of U.S. households owning their homes, that is a big deal. On the auto front, my inbox went from being clogged with messages about people wanting to buy my used car to receiving some interesting offers. Just like mortgages, auto loan costs are going up, which has to have some impact. Finally, consumers responded to shortages by buying more cars (a surge in demand was also related to work from home/work local). That surge may be over. Commercial real estate remains very “local” and many companies (especially those with a big exposure to commercial real estate) are pushing for a return to office, but if that push fails and rates remain stubbornly high, there could be more pressure on that space.

Wealth Effect.

Add in crypto and disruptive stocks to the losses in more traditional stock indices (and the housing market) and we have a recipe for less spending. While the jobs data remains decent, Friday’s NFP had a revision of -105,000 jobs to the June report. June jobs went from 398k to 293k (not a bad number, but off by 26% from the original estimate). Call me skeptical, but I suspect that when they get done revising July and even August, the numbers won’t look so great.

We could discuss the possibility of China being more aggressive against Taiwan (see link above to our Around the World report), how quantitative tightening is a risk to asset values, Europe’s quagmire of no growth but high inflation, or any number of topics, but I’ll stick to the big 4 for now. 

Rates

Given my outlook on the economy I’m looking for lower yields and steeper (or at least less inverted) curves.

Yes, the Fed is going to raise rates at least 50bps at the next meeting, but if I’m correct on the direction of the economic data, they will have to tone down after that. We are already seeing many commodity prices roll over (energy is bouncing with Russia’s latest pipeline gambit), but I’m convinced that by the end of this year there will be as much concern about deflation as inflation! Many of the same people who brought us “transitory” (when we felt it wasn’t transitory) have “magically” appeared in the “inflation will be higher for longer” camp. There are factors that support this (rise of India and the rapid buildout of the energy industry), but for now, I think that we will lament the day that we wished for much lower inflation (historically, lower commodity prices go hand in hand with weaker equity prices).

In order of preference:

  • Buying 2 years and in.

  • 2s vs 10s steepeners (or the steepener of your choice).

  • 20-year Treasury. I think I’d have an easier time convincing someone to run blindfolded through traffic than buy the 20-year Treasury. In a world where nothing is free or easy, the 20-year stands out like a sore thumb and while I still can’t find any takers, it does seem that the relentless pressure on this part of the curve has been exhausted.

Credit

Credit is a little more nuanced.

Given my outlook on the economy:

I prefer investment grade to non-investment grade.

  • While credit spreads will be linked to equity market performance (IG tends to be better correlated to the S&P 500 while HY is more tied to the Russell 2000), this remains more of a “valuation” and “profit margin” story than a real credit concern.

  • To the extent that lending standards are tightening (and they are), there will be no shortage of capital available to IG, but some lower rated companies may find it difficult to raise money (at least from banks).

I prefer high yield bonds to leveraged loans and really like new private credit while wanting to avoid “old” private credit.

  • The high yield bond market has fewer issuers than it used to. They are typically bigger companies and more often than not are publicly traded. This is NOT the high yield bond market of the Milken era or even of 2008! The “small”, the “tricky”, the “non-public”, the “pro-forma”, and the “favor” deals typically went into the leveraged loan market. The need to ramp up CLOs (more than anything else) also drove the leveraged loan market. If 10 CLOs were pricing in a month, you could be aggressive in what you brought to market. I haven’t seen the exact percentage lately, but new issues have always made up a decent part of any CLO’s holdings because it is easier and more efficient to use that to ramp up when the market is hot. I’m not overly concerned about the credit markets, but I’d steer towards high yield bonds over leveraged loans.

  • On the private credit side, if you can tap into a fund that doesn’t have much exposure, this could be a home run. As banks are pulling back on lending, private credit should have the ability to demand favorable terms and get them (companies will pay up for credit before they will lock in equity financing at what they deem to be low levels). What concerns me about investing in existing funds is my view that few have marked assets appropriately. Private credit, like private equity, can argue why public market valuations are incorrect. I’ve seen too many cases in my lifetime where mark to market forces further selling and creates irrational prices. But I’m not seeing that now as public markets seem to be rationally priced. This reminds me of bank accrual accounting books where everything was “money good” until it wasn’t. That statement is a bit over the top, but just because something doesn’t necessarily have to get “fully” marked to market doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be. So, I’d find ways to allocate capital to dry powder private credit funds, while wanting to do a lot more due diligence before buying into one that is already substantially ramped up.

Comfortable with IG

We can be patient as widening will occur if equities go lower. I’d be tempted to get long risk by selling credit protection versus buying bonds.

The cost of funds is less important. Leverage will be more stable, even as banks tighten their lending (and margining) standards. The shorts are likely to be in the “beta” products (so LQD and some of the ETFs could be in play as well). Finally, if I’m right on QT, it will hit bonds more than CDS. Issuance remains a wildcard. Finally, as a contrarian I’m desperate to favor Europe over the U.S., but this winter seems too fraught with danger relative to what is being priced in.

Senior tranches of CLOs.

While I’m nervous about leveraged loans themselves (the building blocks of CLOs), I’m not worried about senior tranches. I continue to believe that it is easier to pick a perfect bracket in the NCAA tournament than blow up a AAA tranche (even if you are trying to blow it up). There could be a bit more downside here as early in the moves the senior tranches tend to follow the leveraged loan market more than they should, but I like this. While I think that the Fed will have to scale back on hikes, they won’t cut too soon. I’d steer towards the weakest managers largely because the structure is supportive against bad management, and you pick up incremental yield while reducing the risk of the manager being able to refinance. You will be exposed to more mark to market volatility, so follow this approach cautiously. It you are buying into lower rated tranches or equity, do NOT follow this advice – it is a highly rated tranche strategy only.

The Rest

Equities unfortunately follow the same pattern we’ve seen YTD. Weakness, led by the companies with the least obvious path to positive/strong free cash flow.

Crypto. New lows, if not a crash.

Commodities. Lower and it will not be a good thing for stocks as I’m convinced that the inflation fears are overblown and recession fears are coming next and that will be evidenced by commodities.

FX. Every fiber in me wants to bet against the dollar. I like the Yen as I expect Japan to become more important in Asia as investors and companies get more nervous about Taiwan and the entire region. In Europe, FX seems to be ahead of other markets in terms of pricing in a dysfunctional winter, so it is tempting to be the contrarian here, but so far, all I can do is book some travel to Europe because the only thing better than eating, drinking, and sightseeing in Europe is doing those things with the Euro below parity!

Despite the title, I have no intention of sleeping through September and if the summer is any indication, September could be as volatile as anything we’ve already seen.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 09/06/2022 – 14:09

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/Gz4UBd7 Tyler Durden

The US Economy Is Still Being Artificially Supported By Trillions In COVID Stimulus

The US Economy Is Still Being Artificially Supported By Trillions In COVID Stimulus

Last week Joe Biden announced that $1 billion in federal grants would be generated for manufacturing, clean energy, farming, biotech and other industries in 21 regional partnerships across the US.  The money is part of a $1.9 trillion covid relief package that was instituted way back in March of 2021.  That’s right, if you thought the covid funds were gone for good, you were mistaken.  While certain elements of the original covid stimulus packages have dried up, there are still vast sums of fiat dollars being held in the coffers of various federal and state programs.

The issue of covid stimulus remains a key problem for the US economy for multiple reasons – First and foremost, it was the covid stimulus packages that sent our stagflationary crisis into overdrive.  

In 2020, over $6 trillion of stimulus money was created from thin air by the Federal Reserve and injected directly into the US economy by Donald Trump (and continued by Joe Biden) through covid relief checks, PPP loans and bailouts for numerous corporations.  Again, in 2021, Biden instituted the ‘American Rescue Plan Act’ which added $1.9 trillion to the pile.  That’s at least $8 trillion in helicopter money dropped on top of the US economy. 

The results have been mixed, but are mostly disastrous.

While Biden and the media consistently point out initially high retail sales and low unemployment numbers as a sign that all is well, what they conveniently ignore is the effects of the covid money bonanza.  When you dump $8 trillions into the system in the span of two years (continuing into 2022), what you are doing is creating a massive spike in artificial demand.  People, businesses and government agencies are going to go out immediately and spend that money with wild abandon.  By extension, that spending will create a need for more workers and more jobs.  

However, this momentum is impossible to maintain because as trillions of dollars are created the value of the money diminishes.  Inflation or stagflation is the inevitable result.  Prices skyrocket while wages remain frozen or are unable to keep up.  All those jobs the government conjured from thin air are meaningless because they do nothing to balance out demand.  They are not manufacturing jobs or jobs that drive production; they are bartender jobs, retail jobs, waitress jobs, etc.  Without increased production of goods, inflation continues to rise.  

Inevitably, the gravity of inflation pulls down all other elements of the economy.  Furthermore, the Federal Reserve will also continue to raise interest rates into economic weakness as a means to disrupt inflation (at least that’s what they claim they are doing).  The jobs market will crash right along with everything else as the cost of debt for businesses climbs right along with the cost of materials.  The one thing keeping the system afloat is that precious covid stimulus cash still circulating through the system, but it’s also poisoning the system at the same time.  

Only a small portion of Biden’s American Rescue Plan funds have gone to original funding goals.  Just 12% of the over $100 billion earmarked for elementary and secondary schools has been spent so far, according to federal statistics. And according to Treasury Department figures, as of the end of March 2022 only about $70 billion of the $350 billion allocated for state and local governments had been spent on listed goals.  

Where is the money really going?  It’s hard to say, but there has been some exposure of questionable allocations of the money by state and federal organizations.  For example, the Iowa state government has earmarked millions in taxpayer and covid stimulus cash to pay for a “Field Of Dreams” baseball stadium, named after the Kevin Costner film.  The stadium is expected to create 250 jobs.    

Some of the money has gone into the operations of government owned golf courses (which is apparently a thing). 

Other funding has been allocated directly to creating even more government jobs and also bonuses for government employees.  An independent analysis of 5,000 school districts covering 75% of districts’ American Rescue Plan funds shows that nearly 60% of funds are committed to staffing, academics, and mental and physical health. Only 23% is committed to keeping schools operating safely; the original intent of the bill.  Meanwhile government workers have received almost $1 billion in bonuses taken from covid relief funds.  

Even now, Biden is pushing for more covid cash through emergency measures. The administration officials laid out the new requests, totaling $47.1 billion, on Friday ahead of the long Labor Day weekend.  The largest individual piece of the White House proposal seeks $22.4 billion to cover “ongoing needs” associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.  The White House is pretending as if the country did not move on from the pandemic a long time ago. 

While covid cash did not do much in the way of direct job creation, what is is doing is fueling money velocity, which is not necessarily a good thing.  Without production to match the money supply and consumer demand, the stimulus creates a massive financial bubble and a fragile illusion in the jobs market.  It is only a matter of time before the bubble bursts.  This is why we have a stagflationary crisis today and why there will be a reckoning in unemployment in the near future.  Covid stimulus measures created a fever dream of false prosperity in retail sales and the jobs and soon the country will have to wake up.   

Tyler Durden
Tue, 09/06/2022 – 13:44

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/NB2mTK3 Tyler Durden

New Data Show COVID School Closures Contributed to Largest Learning Loss in Decades


A masked student sits in front of a computer for virtual learning

Last week, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) released new data showing a dramatic decline in test scores among American 9-year-olds since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. The data indicate a devastating learning loss among American schoolchildren, marking the largest decline in reading scores since 1990, and the first ever recorded drop in mathematics scores.

These results come from a special administration of the National Assessment of Educational Progress long-term trend (LTT) assessments, which measured reading and mathematics outcomes among 9-year-olds. Since its inception, the LTT has tracked a steady rise in educational performance among 9-year-olds. However, from 2020 to 2022, the LTT revealed a steep drop in 9-year-old students’ performance. Reading scores dropped by five points over the two-year period, while mathematics scores dropped by seven points. In all, the decline in test scores represents the reversal of around two decades of improvement in math and reading scores.

“These results are sobering,” Peggy G. Carr, commissioner of the National Center for Education Statistics, told The Washington Post. “It’s clear that covid-19 shocked American education and stunted the academic growth of this age group.”

The decline was even more pronounced among already struggling students. For example, math scores declined by only three points among the 90th percentile of performers. Among the 10th percentile, the drop was four times higher, at 12 points. In total, the bottom quartile of test-takers saw their math scores drop by 11 points from 2020 to 2022. Among students eligible for the National School Lunch Program, reading scores declined at twice the rate of noneligible students.

As these new data show, nearly two years of pandemic schooling has been a complete disaster for American schoolchildren. However, it didn’t have to be this way.

While outlets like The New York Times blamed “the pandemic” for this devastating learning loss, “the pandemic” didn’t force schools to close. Rather, the efforts of progressive politicians and teachers unions kept American children out of schools for a year or more, long after evidence suggested COVID-19 posed little danger to children.

District of Columbia Public Schools, for example, faced periodic COVID-19 closures as late as December 2021, nearly two years after the start of the pandemic. Now, Mayor Muriel Bowser is enforcing a “no shots, no school” program, requiring all students over the age of 12 to be vaccinated against COVID-19 to attend any of the city’s private or public schools. The program stands to exclude from education the 47 percent of black D.C. 12- to 15-year-olds who are currently unvaccinated. It will go into effect in January 2023.

While some teachers union members shirked the idea of learning loss and refused to return to classrooms in defiance of their own school districts, others engaged in needless fearmongering in order to justify continued school closures. “They are compromising the one enduring public health missive that we’ve gotten from the beginning of this pandemic in order to squeeze more kids into schools,” American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten told The Washington Post after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shifted the recommended social distance between K-12 students form six feet to three. “I think that is problematic until we have real evidence in these harder-to-open places about what the effect is.”

However, it simply isn’t true that complicated reopening procedures were required to keep American schoolchildren safe during the pandemic. Nor were lengthy closures. Thankfully, COVID-19 generally spares the young. Sweden kept primary schools open for the entire pandemic, yet according to the Swedish Public Health Agency, COVID-19 cases among Swedish children were no higher than those in neighboring Finland, where schools temporarily closed. According to a 2022 study published in the International Journal of Educational Research, Swedish elementary schoolers suffered no learning losses during the course of the pandemic.

“This was a man-made disaster, not an inevitable consequence of COVID,” Michael Hartney, an adjunct fellow at the Manhattan Institute, said in a statement to The Hechinger Report. “Those who have been fighting to reopen schools since Fall 2020 knew that school was essential, that children faced the lowest risk of severe illness, and that children faced the most severe consequences of the prolonged shutdown. The children who have thrived are those who had the opportunity to attend school in person.”

The devastating learning loss suffered by American children over the past two years was not inevitable. It was the result of choices made by COVID-panicked teachers unions and progressive politicians who failed to carefully consider the educational damage at stake.

The post New Data Show COVID School Closures Contributed to Largest Learning Loss in Decades appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/Zi8wpq4
via IFTTT

Why The Russian Oil Price Cap Won’t Work

Why The Russian Oil Price Cap Won’t Work

Authored by Irina Slav via OilPrice.com,

  • Reducing the availability of insurance services is seen by Western leaders as a way of reducing Russian crude exports.

  • Russia stated last week that it would not sell oil to countries with a price cap in place.

  • The ‘price cap coalition’ is simply not broad enough to make the cap work.

The chances of a G7 price cap on Russian oil being remotely effective are perhaps best summed up by a recent tweet from a Bloomberg energy and commodities columnist:  

“My friends and I have agreed to impose a price cap on our local pub’s beer. Mind we actually do not plan to drink any beer there. The pub’s owner says he won’t sell beer to anyone observing the cap, so other patrons, who drink a lot there, say they aren’t joining the cap. Success.”

First floated by U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, the idea of capping Russian crude oil exports had a dual aim: keeping Russian oil flowing abroad, which would set a ceiling on prices, and at the same time reducing Russia’s oil revenues, which make up a sizeable portion of GDP and, according to G7, are what Russia is using to finance the war in Ukraine.

The price cap idea was taken up by the G7 leaders at their meeting in June where the seven vowed to find a way to enforce it. 

From the beginning, the most plausible way to apply price pressure on Russia was by reducing the availability of insurance for its oil tankers unless it agreed to sell its oil at a certain price.

In addition to the fact that 90% of the insurance market is in the hands of Western companies, the fact that Western companies are also some of the biggest players in the maritime shipping business was also going to be crucial for the price cap if the G7 wanted it to have any chance of success.

“Today we confirm our joint political intention to finalise and implement a comprehensive prohibition of services which enable maritime transportation of Russian-origin crude oil and petroleum products globally,” the G7 finance ministers said in a statement, as quoted by Reuters.

These services will be made available to Russian oil companies only if they agree to sell their oil at a price “determined by the broad coalition of countries adhering to and implementing the price cap.” And this is where the problems begin.

The first problem is that Russia, contrary to what the G7 were apparently expecting, did not take this latest attempt to “defund” it lying down. Russia said plainly—twice last week—that it would not sell oil to countries with a price cap in place.

“In my opinion, this is utterly absurd. And this is an interference in the market mechanisms of such an important industry as oil,” said Deputy PM Alexander Novak, who represented Russia at OPEC+.

“Companies that impose a price cap will not be among the recipients of Russian oil,” a Kremlin spokesman said on Friday, adding “We simply will not cooperate with them on non-market principles.” 

The proponents of the price cap argue that Russia will have no choice but to comply with the price caps because of that 90% of the insurance market and because of the “broad coalition”.

The truth is that the coalition is simply not broad enough to make the cap work. The coalition, despite the G7’s best efforts, does not include either China or India—Russia’s two biggest oil clients. The coalition itself is not a big importer, and two of its members—the United States and the UK—banned oil imports from Russia early on.

A third one, Japan, would be quite hard pressed to enforce the price cap, too, given its dependence on any and all sorts of energy imports. It was not a surprise, therefore, that while Japan’s finance minister Shinuchi Suzuki celebrated the G7 decision, on Friday, media noted, citing a Finance Ministry official, that oil from Sakhalin-2, the Russian project, which is exported to Japan, will be excluded from the price cap.

The proponents’ argument is that Russia cannot afford to stop selling oil to the G7 price cap enforcers. A skeptic might point out that Russia has already raked in much higher than normal revenues from its oil and gas exports because of the havoc wreaked on markets by Western sanctions. It could then afford to sit back and watch prices top $100 and more once again. Especially, with OPEC+ today deciding to cut production by 100,000 bpd for October in response to the price slide.

But here’s the thing. Russia was reportedly not on board with a production cut. According to unnamed sources who spoke to the Wall Street Journal, Moscow sees the decision to cut output as a sign for buyers that there is plenty of oil to go around, which could “reduce its leverage with oil-consuming nations that are still buying its petroleum but at big discounts”.

The G7 price cap is entering into effect on December 5 for crude oil and on February 5, pending the finalization of the price caps “based on a range of technical inputs”. 

Tyler Durden
Tue, 09/06/2022 – 13:25

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/bO1S0mU Tyler Durden

US Intelligence Says Russia Has Turned To North Korea For Arms Resupply

US Intelligence Says Russia Has Turned To North Korea For Arms Resupply

A newly declassified intelligence report is alleging that Russia is buying millions of artillery shells and rockets from North Korea, in what US officials say is the latest sign of desperation amid depleting Russian munitions after six months of war in Ukraine.

“The United States provided few details from the declassified intelligence about the exact weaponry, timing or size of the shipment, and there is no way yet to independently verify the sale,” according to The New York Times, which was the first to reveal the declassified US intelligence. “A U.S. official said that, beyond short-range rockets and artillery shells, Russia was expected to try to purchase additional North Korean equipment going forward.”

Image: AP

A month ago, Western media reports were widely circulating which said North Korea offered Russia up to 100,000 of its own troops to fight in Ukraine, however, the story was dubious and lacked evidence, with no statements from DPRK state media itself to back the claim.

What has been confirmed since then, is a major deal by Moscow for the purchase of hundreds of Iranian-manufactured drones for use on the battlefield in Ukraine. There have since been reports that the drones have serious problems, and may not be functioning properly, making them less of a threat for Ukraine’s defense systems to contend with.

Commenting on the new US intelligence alleging the North Korea weapons link, one anonymous US official told The Associated Press that it shows “the Russian military continues to suffer from severe supply shortages in Ukraine, due in part to export controls and sanctions.”

What is clear is that North Korea has taken steps to demonstrate its approval of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, in July becoming the second outside country after Syria to recognize the independence of the breakaway Donetsk and Luhansk republics.

There could be new sanctions repercussions for Pyongyang if it is caught exporting military equipment to Russia. “The North’s arms export to Russia would be a violation of U.N. resolutions that ban the country from exporting to or importing weapons from other countries,” the AP writes.

“Its possible dispatch of laborers to the Russian-held territories in Ukraine would also breach a U.N. resolution that required all member states to repatriate all North Korean workers from their soil by 2019,” AP continues.

But it remains, as AP also observes, “There have been suspicions that China and Russia haven’t fully enforced U.N. sanctions on North Korea, complicating a U.S.-led attempt to deprive North Korea of its nuclear weapons.”

Tyler Durden
Tue, 09/06/2022 – 13:05

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/nB7lNz3 Tyler Durden

Why Some Cities May No Longer Be Viable

Why Some Cities May No Longer Be Viable

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

Any city whose lifeblood ultimately depends on hyper-globalization and hyper-financialization will no longer be viable.

The human migration from the countryside to cities has been an enduring feature of civilization. Cities concentrate wealth, productivity and power, and so they’re magnets to talent and capital, offering newcomers the greatest opportunities.

Cities are efficient, packing population, productivity and wealth creation into small areas. Slums and sweatshops are immensely profitable, and cramming people into centers of manufacturing is far more efficient than scattering people and production across a landscape.

Cities generally arose on coastal harbors, navigable rivers or the confluence of overland trade routes, as these hubs enabled profitable trade and transport of goods protected by defensible barriers.

In sum, cities offered unmatchable advantages over more widely distributed settlements, trade and production. Given their typically strategic location and regional dominance, they tend to become political, military and cultural centers as well as economic / financial heavyweights.

But the nature of cities has changed, and so has their viability as magnets for talent and capital. I recently discussed these shifts with longtime correspondent T.D., who succinctly summarized the economic foundations of New York City–a set of dynamics that applies in one way or another to virtually all major cities globally: cities are transport / value-added hubs.

“With the creation of the Erie Canal, New York became a major port and city, a place where cheap immigrant labor and the precursors to all sorts of products could be immediately brought together in a value-added manner for finishing into a manufactured product which was then cost effectively shipped onward.”

These longstanding economic foundations began shifting in the 1970s. Slums and manufacturing were deemed undesirable for environmental and aesthetic reasons, and globalization began chipping away at manufacturing within costly urban zones as production was shipped to lower-cost regions.

The other core dynamic of the past 40 years, financialization, replaced value-added trade and goods with value-added financial instruments and services. As globalization and financialization transitioned to hyper-globalization and hyper-financialization, cities became magnets for real estate speculation, global capital seeking a safe place to park money, healthcare and higher education. status-enhancing conspicuous consumption and entertainment, i.e. the good life of diverse cultural attractions, neighborhoods, venues, cafes, bars and nightlife, all of which are the foundation of global tourism, now the primary industry in many cities.

The shift to finance funded both the speculation and the consumption. Cities morphed from centers of value-added manufacturing and trade to financial transactions and the origination of financial instruments, developments which enabled and expanded a series of ever-larger speculative bubbles.

Cities have always been more expensive than the countryside, but hyper-financialization has boosted urban costs to the point that only the top 10% or 20% can own their own home and afford all the good things the city has to offer without family wealth or speculative gains banked by playing hyper-financialization games.

One driver of higher costs is cities are magnets for graft, corruption, insider deals and quasi-monopolies, as the aggregation of money and power make the rewards of insider self-service irresistible. All of these forms of skimming add cost without adding any value to residents or enterprises.

Even worse, they erode competence and accountability, as the essence of insider self-service is the elimination of accountability so low-level corruption and incompetence cannot be reined in. Insiders have a free hand to exploit their access to the enormous flows of money and power that sluice through every major city.

As T.D. explained, large-scale industry is the only force with sufficient heft to demand competence and accountability of city governments. The current batch of what passes for “industry”–tourism, hospitals, universities, museums, etc.–can’t threaten to leave, as their own existence depends on the city. None wield sufficient political power to clamp down on corruption and incompetence.

As the energy, water, waste and transport infrastructure decays to the point of breakdown, industry would have stepped in and demanded managerial competence to get it fixed because industry needed those systems to survive. The complaints of highly segmented service industries don’t seem to wield the same power or urgency.

As for finance, it’s already global, and it right-sizes its footprint to match the flows of capital sluicing through the city as well as its costs and amenities. If any of these factors goes the wrong way, finance will abandon the city in a New York Minute.

In effect, globalization and financialization have hollowed out the traditional economic foundations of cities in favor of services and entertainment which are dependent on the speculative gains of financialization. Should the flood of wealth being generated by ceaseless hyper-financialization reach its zenith and crash, cities will lose their source of wealth and income even as their managerial competence has been eroded by the very success of financialization in generating staggering flows of money.

Given an ever-expanding flood of money, competence and accountability can both be dispensed with. If the flow of money keeps expanding, simulacra of accountability and competence will do just fine.

But when the flood of money dries up, and the city needs administrative competence and accountability to adapt, these have decayed to the point nobody in power has any experience of anything but an ever-expanding flood of money.

In other words, the “efficiencies” of the city now depend on the permanent expansion of hyper-globalization and hyper-financialization, both of which are increasingly vulnerable to decay, downsizing or collapse.

Any city whose lifeblood ultimately depends on hyper-globalization and hyper-financialization will no longer be viable. Non-viability of the globalized, financialized urban model is currently considered “impossible.” Let’s check in around 2030 and make an accounting of the second-order effects of the demise of globalization and financialization. One such effect might be a reversal of the human migration as people leave no-longer-viable urban zones en masse.

*  *  *

My new book is now available at a 10% discount this month: When You Can’t Go On: Burnout, Reckoning and Renewal. If you found value in this content, please join me in seeking solutions by becoming a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 09/06/2022 – 12:45

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

Russia Reacts To Liz Truss Becoming Prime Minister: ‘Aggressive, Unfriendly & Uncompromising’

Russia Reacts To Liz Truss Becoming Prime Minister: ‘Aggressive, Unfriendly & Uncompromising’

With Liz Truss officially becoming British Prime Minister on Tuesday morning, and having flown to Scotland to meet the Queen for the final formal step in her ascension to the office (after Boris Johnson was forced to step down, himself first tendering his resignation to the monarch), Russia has reacted to what it sees as a dangerous hawk taking over leadership in the UK.

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Tuesday went after her uncompromising nature, as he explained it, and said she’s unlikely to help Britain on an international stage. Lavrov said of the new PM that she tried to “defend Britain’s interests without taking into account the positions of others in any way and without any attempt to compromise.”

He added: “I do not think that this will help Britain to maintain or strengthen its position in the international arena, which has clearly been shaken after it left the European Union.”

Truss in Moscow while previously serving as Foreign Minister, via The Telegraph.

And Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov expressed hope that UK-Russia relations won’t spiral further due to Truss entering office. “I think that in the situation in which Russia-UK relations are now in, we can hope for one thing only – that it won’t get worse. Although it’s hard to imagine how much worse it could get,” the Kremlin spokesman told a Russian TV channel.

He said that the current situation “may be judged by the statements that she made when she was Foreign Secretary and a contender for the position of party leader.” He then offered the following significant critique: 

“She didn’t say anything good about us. Moreover, I can say with regret that her statements were quite aggressive, unfriendly and unconstructive.”

He concluded that “it’s safe to assume that nothing much will change in the foreseeable future,” adding, “As for a potential deterioration of the situation, that can’t be ruled out. Right now, we can’t rule anything out, again, given the unpredictability of our opponents.”

Further, according to Reuters, other Russian politicians as well as media pundits didn’t hold back their scorn for the new British PM

Within hours of her victory in a contest to lead the ruling Conservative party, Truss was subjected to unflattering comparisons with her role model Margaret Thatcher, and warnings that she would struggle to cope with a looming energy crisis.

Nationalist lawmaker Leonid Slutsky said she would probably have to tell Britons to “turn out the lights” as energy bills soar.

“It is not Russia and its president who are to blame here, but the thoughtless sanctions policy of Downing Street,” he wrote on Telegram.

Other comments echoed in Russian media included politicians suggesting her intellect doesn’t live up to that of her predecessors:

Konstantin Kosachev, a member of the upper house of parliament, said Truss was trying to take on Thatcher’s “Iron Lady” mantle but it was “not yet noticeable that the new prime minister has enough iron arguments for the population”.

The popular tabloid paper Komsomolskaya Pravda reminded its readers of a gaffe Truss made on a trip to Moscow in February as foreign minister. It said that, compared to her, outgoing prime minister Boris Johnson “looks like a real giant of thought”.

Meanwhile, pundits in the West are highlighting some of her recent alarming comments in a townhall event, where she said as prime minister she would be ‘ready’ to launch a nuclear war if need be…

Many observers took note of the ease and complete lack of hesitation when asked about taking Britain into a WW3 nuclear scenario – to which then Foreign Minister Truss responded that she’s “ready to do it.”

Tyler Durden
Tue, 09/06/2022 – 12:26

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

Gov. Gavin Newsom Signs Fast Food Bill Decried As “California Food Tax”

Gov. Gavin Newsom Signs Fast Food Bill Decried As “California Food Tax”

Authored by Caden Pearsen via The Epoch Times,

California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Monday announced that he signed legislation targeting some fast food franchises to lift minimum wages to $22 per hour and change working conditions. Opponents have described the bill as “hypocritical” and “ill-considered.”

The bill will create a 10-member Fast Food Council appointed by Newsom, a Democrat, and other state lawmakers.

“California is committed to ensuring that the men and women who have helped build our world-class economy are able to share in the state’s prosperity,” Newsom said in a statement.

“Today’s action gives hardworking fast-food workers a stronger voice and seat at the table to set fair wages and critical health and safety standards across the industry. I’m proud to sign this legislation on Labor Day when we pay tribute to the workers who keep our state running as we build a stronger, more inclusive economy for all Californians.”

The council members who are bureaucrats, fast food restaurant employees, franchisees, and franchisors will be appointed by the governor. The state assembly speaker and Senate Rules Committee speaker will each appoint one member as an advocate for fast food restaurant employees, according to the legislation.

The California Restaurant Association (CRA) argued that the bill unfairly targets some franchises to the detriment of others and the community.

“By signing AB 257 into law, Governor Newsom has not leveled the playing field but instead targeted one slice of California’s small businesses and consumers who rely on counter service restaurants to feed their families,” a statement from the organization reads.

“As individual employers and neighborhood restaurants across the state, we will use every tool at our disposal to protect our consumers, workers, and other job providers from the pain and havoc that will result from enacting this bill.”

CRA also decried the signing of the bill while inflation in the United States is at record high levels, saying that consumers and small business owners will pay a 20 percent increase “to fund the outsourcing of the legislature’s duties to union-led bureaucracy.”

“By arbitrarily singling out a sliver of the restaurant industry, California’s approach imposes higher costs on one type of restaurant while sparing others, putting some workers at a disadvantage and picking clear ‘winners’ and ‘losers.’

“Governor Newsom ignored the arbitrary and haphazard nature of this bill and signed into law a reckless precedent which will have far-reaching harmful impacts beyond the state’s borders,” the organization said.

McDonald’s USA President Joe Erlinger, a California native, said that the state government has been driving businesses out of California with its policies. 

Erlinger said he supports wage increases and noted that McDonald’s operates well in jurisdictions with high minimum wage regulations in the United States and around the world.

But he said that the approach California has taken “targets some workplaces and not others.”

It imposes higher costs on one type of restaurant, while sparing another. That’s true even if those two restaurants have the same revenues and the same number of employees,” he said in an open letter

“If you are a small business owner running two restaurants that are part of a national chain, like McDonald’s, you can be targeted by the bill,” he added.

“But if you own 20 restaurants that are not part of a large chain, the bill does not apply to you. For unexplainable reasons, brands with fewer than 100 locations are excluded. Even more mystifying, the legislation excludes certain restaurants that bake bread. I can only conclude this is the outcome of backroom politicking.”

Erlinger said the bill is “lopsided, hypocritical and ill-considered” and noted that economists have warned that it will “drive up the cost of eating at a quick service restaurant in California by 20 percent at a time when Americans already face soaring costs in supermarkets and at gas pumps.”

Read more here…

Tyler Durden
Tue, 09/06/2022 – 12:05

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/tZ7u6fP Tyler Durden