Is The Correction Over?

Submitted by Lance Roberts of STA Wealth Management,

A couple of week’s ago I asked the question “How Big Could A Correction Be?”  In that article, I compared several different technical models to establish potential correction levels which derived the following table of probabilities. Of course, as I stated at that time:

“There is no exact answer to the potential magnitude of a correction in the markets. ‘This’ depends on ‘that’ to occur which is why trying predict markets more than a couple of days into the future is nothing more than a ‘wild ass guess’ at best. However, from this analysis, as shown in the table below, we can make some reasonable assumptions about potential outcomes.”

S&P-500-CorrectionTable-080614

As shown in the chart below, the recent correction fulfilled the correction to the 2013 bullish trend and got oversold (yellow highlights) on a very short term basis.

SP500-TechnicalUpdate-081814

With the markets opening higher today, it appears that the short-term correction in the markets may be over as the “buy-the-dip” mentality remains firmly entrenched with market participants.

However, if we step back from the day-to-day volatility by looking at weekly data, a different picture emerges.

SP500-TechnicalUpdate-081814-2

As shown, the market registered a signal in early January to reduce equity exposure in portfolios. Importantly, while this does not mean selling everything and running into cash, it does suggest that the markets are egregiously overbought on a short-term basis and investors should rebalance holdings in portfolios.  This is done by “trimming winners,” reducing holdings back to original portfolio weights, and “selling laggards,” which reduces portfolio drag and provides future portfolio tax efficiencies.

After the initial sell signal in January, the market primarily traded sideways for the next several months, with a good bit of volatility along the way. The reduction in portfolio risk reduced overall portfolio volatility with only a minimal drag on overall performance. However, should if the markets had dropped into a deeper correction, investors would have been well positioned to “buy.” However, in May, the markets broke out of the consolidation range and the “all clear” signal was given to increase equity risk in portfolios. The consolidation process also allowed for a lower risk entry to add back additional equity exposure.

This process is once again likely being repeated. At the end of July, the markets once again suggested the investors should revisit portfolio holdings and adjust risk accordingly. However, as I stated in the newsletter two weeks ago:

“Furthermore, by the time a WEEKLY sell signal is issued the markets are generally OVERSOLD on a short term basis. It is very likely, that a rally will ensue in the markets over the next week back to resistance which could be used to rebalance portfolios and reduce risks more prudently.”

That bounce has now occurred which would suggest that this is a good time to revisit portfolios and make allocation adjustments.

Like gardening, good portfolio management practices consist of processes to “weed and prune.”  If weeds are not pulled and plants go unpruned, eventually the bounty will rot on the vines, and the weeds will choke the plants out of existence.  The same happens in portfolios. Individuals do not “prune” winners, by taking profits and rebalancing, until a significant correction occurs which erases most or all of their gains.  Likewise, “losers” are held in portfolios “hoping they will come back.” Eventually, individuals wind up with a portfolio full of “weeds” with only memories of the gains they once had.

Outlining The Risks

While the markets are currently suggesting that the “dip” is over, there are several immediately prevailing risks that could catch unwitting investors.

1) The contraction in both Japanese and Eurozone economies.

40% of corporate profits come from international trade. The pop in revenue and profits in the second quarter was not surprising given the drawdown in activity during the Q4 and Q1.  However, since the end of the financial crisis the economy has been plagued by sluggish economic growth characterized by rolling recoveries and declines. With retail sales extremely sluggish, imports weak and exports at risk of decline, the impact to both profits and economic data could push markets lower.

2) Mid-term Elections.

The markets like “gridlock” in government as it eliminates the risk of adverse fiscal policies. However, there is a rising probability that conservative Republicans could gain control of the Senate while maintaining majority control of Congress. The impact of such an outcome could be negative for the markets as it increases the probabilities of drastic cuts in government spending, reductions/reform of entitlement programs, and potential repeal, or “fix,” of the Affordable Care Act (ACA).  While moves to a more fiscally responsible government would provide longer term benefits, such actions would likely trigger an economic recession and stock market correction.

3) Hard landing in China.

Nouriel Roubini recently wrote: “The rebalancing of growth away from fixed investment and toward private consumption is occurring too slowly, because every time annual GDP growth slows toward 7%, the authorities panic and double down on another round of credit-fueled capital investment. This then leads to more bad assets and non-performing loans, more excessive investment in real estate, infrastructure, and industrial capacity, and more public and private debt. By next year, there may be no road left down which to kick the can.”

4) Extraction of monetary accommodation by the Federal Reserve

Currently, the markets are still being assisted by the ongoing interventions of the Federal Reserve. As shown in the chart below, via @sobata416,  the advances in the market have been closely correlated with Fed’s liquidity operations. With that support most-likely ending in October, the risk for equities remains to the downside.

SP500-FedBalanceSheet-081814

Furthermore, risks of a market correction begin to increase markedly once the Federal Reserve begins raising interest rates.

5) Deflation isn’t dead

Despite the Federal Reserve’s best intentions to create inflation in the economy, the deflationary pressures on the economy have not yet been vanquished. Wages remain under pressure, employment is muted and primarily a function of population growth, monetary velocity remains extremely tepid and commodity prices have fallen.  The following chart was discussed in detail in “Will The Fed Move Too Soon.”

High-Inflation-Index-080514

“With deflationary pressures from overseas still prevalent, it is very likely that the current uptick in inflation may be fleeting. This potentially could put the Fed at ‘risk’ of moving too soon to extract support from the economy and beginning to increase interest rates in anticipation of stronger growth.”

Something Worth Thinking About

While it is entirely possible that the recent “correction” in the market is over, it is important to remember that what goes “up” must eventually come “down.” Despite the best of intentions by Wall Street and the Federal Reserve to ensure that a correction “never” happens again, the reality is that the laws of physics apply to stock market prices just as much as Newton’s apple.

The question that you have to reconcile with yourself is:

“When the market does eventually break, will you be prepared?”

History clearly shows that few ever are. While the process of “weeding and pruning” may sound a “bearish” in an overwhelmingly “bullish” environment, the greatest investors in history have all had a disciplined risk management process embedded within their long-term investment strategy. While it sounds simple, “buying low and selling high” is extremely hard for most to do.




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1qkmaqI Tyler Durden

Rikers Teen Inmate Dies in Agony After Officials Ignore Torn Artery for Months

RikersFor
months, Andy Henriquez, a 19-year-old inmate at Rikers Island in
New York City, complained about chest pain to prison guards. Other
inmates who could hear the teen’s agonized screams pleaded with
correctional officers to help him. But the shoddy medical care
Henriquez received did nothing to alleviate his symptoms.
Eventually, a doctor wrote him a prescription for hand cream.

Hours later, Henriquez was found dead. An autopsy determined
that Henriquez had gradually succumbed to a torn aorta—something a
hospital could have treated had medical personnel bothered to
conduct cardiac examinations.

That’s according to a lawsuit filed against Corizon, the
healthcare company for Rikers, by Henriquez’s mother, Sandra De La
Cruz. DNAinfo’s Rosa Goldensohn
reports
:

“I felt desperate. I felt despair, not being able to help my
child,” De la Cruz told DNAinfo New York in Spanish from her
lawyer’s office recently.

“They should have let him leave. They should have taken him to
the hospital. If I could have, I would have.”

De la Cruz is one of more than two dozen New Yorkers who have
sued Corizon since 2012, accusing the company of negligence in
medical care at Rikers and other correctional facilities. …

Henriquez’s death came two years after New York’s Commission of Correctionhad already
opened an investigation into other state inmates’ deaths under
Corizon’s watch, city records show.

The outcome of that investigation was unclear and the commission
declined to say whether it had finished or what it had found.

The guards claimed that they did not hear Henriquez begging for
help, but other inmates reported that the COs did indeed hear
Henriquez—they merely chose not to do anything about him. In either
case, the COs acted improperly, since they were supposed to be
checking on Henriquez every 15 minutes. Officers admitted that
these required checks did not take placed, according to
Goldensohn.

Henriquez entered Rikers at the age of 16. He was charged with
being part of a gang that murdered another teenager, though
Henriquez was not actually the one who committed the murder,
according to the police. His case had not yet gone to trial by the
time of his death.

No matter what his crimes were, he deserved better care than
this. Even the useless hand cream was poorly administered; the
doctor wrote the wrong name on the prescription.

Unfortunately, this is not the first time this year that Rikers
made headlines for
killing an inmate
via neglect.

More from Reason TV on the incarceration of young people
below.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/1pAvxpA
via IFTTT

Ferguson, Iraq, and the Legacy of 9/11

Over the past two weeks, two
events have consumed the national news: the authorization of
renewed American strikes in Iraq, and the heavily militarized
police response to protests in Ferguson, Missouri, after a police
officer shot and killed an unarmed teenager.

The two events, a domestic story about municipal law enforcement
in a St. Louis suburb and an international conflict on the other
side of the world, might not seem related. But they both stem at
least in part from America’s response to 9/11, and they parallel
each other in a variety of revealing ways.  

In a brief response last week to the situation in Ferguson,
which has featured nightly showowns between local activists and
cops in armored vehicles, Obama made
no mention
of the militarized police presence. But
over the weekend, 
in a memo
to Congress, he would quietly indicate where he did want to
see weapons of war: 
in Iraq—again, still, and
more—as part of an escalation of the recently authorized strikes
against Islamic State militants.

Obama’s original Iraq operation, announced the prior week in a
primetime speech, had been pitched to the nation on narrow terms,
as support for a humanitarian objective that was necessary to
prevent genocide. There were helpless people trapped on a mountain;
authorization for strikes was necessary to ensure safe delivery of
food, water, and other aid.

But mission creep set in almost immediately. “I don’t think
we’re going to solve this problem in weeks,” Obama said a few days
after the initial announcement. “This is going to be a long term
project.” Administration officials then
said
they were considering sending in ground troops, absurdly
claiming that they would merely be there for protective services,
but not be in a combat role. And starting this week, according to
Obama’s
memo to Congress
, American airpower will be used to support the
Iraqi Security Force to “retake and establish control” over a large
local dam that had been captured by militants.

The humanitarian pretext lasted less than two weeks. Cover for
aid-drops has turned into strikes in support of a regional military
force. The defensive mission now has an offensive objective.

In 2008, President Obama campaigned vehemently against President
George W. Bush’s decision to go to war in the Middle East, and
against his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton’s more hawkish
approach. He would be different. “Since before this war in Iraq
began, I have made different judgments, I have a different vision,
and I will offer a clean break from the failed policies and
politics of the past,” he
said
. “Nowhere is that break more badly needed than in
Iraq.”

Obama was supposed to end the war in Iraq, not continue it. Yet
this was how he had eventually chosen to conduct foreign policy in
the country: by selling a long-term military project as a
limited-scope mission, by claiming that troops in a combat zone
would somehow not be engaged in combat, by starting a war and then
pretending that it is not really a war at all.

That unacknowledged, unended war is the legacy of America’s
expansive, extended response to the attacks of September 11, 2001,
and the global war on terror that followed. So too is
the police response in Ferguson.

As President Bush took the nation to war in Iraq, the nation’s
police departments were preparing for it at home. The arming of
cops that began decades earlier with the drug war was given a
massive federal boost. A federal
program
began transferring large military grade equipment from
the Pentagon to local law enforcement—giving away
almost $450 million
worth of equipment originally intended for
conducting war last year alone. Since 2002, a separate program run
by the Department of Homeland Security has provided $35 billion in
grants to law enforcement around the country, funding the purchase
of tactical gear, storm-trooper-style armor, and mine-resistant
vehicles.

These programs were supposed to be limited in scope, intended to
help local law enforcement fight the extraordinary threats many
believed were looming after 9/11. But there were no restrictions
placed on how the equipment could be used, and so the scope was
rapidly widened.

That’s what led to the sort of martial images we’ve seen this
week in Ferguson, in which clashes between heavily armored cops and
upset protestors look eerily like scenes from a war. Police arrive
in armored vehicles, post snipers on rooftops, and have shot tear
gas and rubber bullets at the crowd. Change a few of the
background details, and some of the scenes could be mistaken for
Iraq.

The programs that helped supply cops in Ferguson and elsewhere
with military equipment were intended to help fight terror at the
local level. Instead they have helped create it.

What we’re seeing in Ferguson also represents a kind of quiet
escalation of wars that never seem to be won, and that we do not
like to acknowledge: the war on drugs and the war on terror, which
in Ferguson combined into a frightening show of militarized
force—the ugly result of endless, unwinnable wars turned
inward.

These are just some of the ripple effects and consequences of
our bungled responses to 9/11: weapons of war pointed at citizens
and escalating tensions on our own streets, and an overseas
conflict that even an anti-war president refuses to end.

Obviously there are ways in which the two stories diverge, and
of course, both can be traced back to events prior 9/11. But
combined and juxtaposed, these two seemingly unrelated events offer
a reminder of the way that political choices made years in the past
continue to weigh on the present. And they illustrate, among other
things, how hard it is to reverse complex policies even
when they are widely regarded as failures, how easily initiatives
intended to be narrow in scope and purpose can expand when left
unchecked, and how years of simmering tensions can suddenly boil
over in response to a single unexpected incident, resulting in
unintended and unforseeable consequences.

Which is to say that they offer a sprawling and
practically comprehensive lesson in the perils of government gone
wrong. And they suggest that in so many parts of government, local
and state nd federal, and so many policies, foreign and domestic,
we are still in need of what Obama promised in 2008 but, like so
many government officials, has struggled to deliver: different
judgments, a different vision, and a clean break from the past,
both at home and abroad.  

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/1pAtWjz
via IFTTT

Ferguson Curfew Cancelled As National Guard Arrives; Holder Demands To “Remove The Damn Tanks”

The Missouri Governor Jay Nixon gave “no heads up” to the White House before deploying The National Guard and has now made another abrupt decision as The National Guard closes in on Ferguson:

  • *NIXON’S CALL TO HALT CURFEW TONIGHT MADE IN E-MAILED STATEMENT

We presume when there are military tanks rolling through the streets of a town, there is no need for the actual implementation of a curfew… This once again rubs the administration’s nose in it as AG Holder’s comments from last week hang in the air: “get those damned tanks out of there.”

 

As NBC News reports,

Authorities on Monday lifted the overnight curfew for Ferguson, Missouri, after two nights.

 

The announcement came from Gov. Jay Nixon, who earlier in the day ordered the National Guard to the St. Louis suburb after a week of clashes between police and protesters over the police shooting death of an unarmed black teenager.

 

Nixon said that the National Guard would have a limited mission and that overall command would still be the responsibility of the Highway Patrol, which took over security in Ferguson on Thursday.

 

The National Guard, under the command of Brig. Gen. Gregory Mason, will “provide protection, and ensure the safety of our Unified Command Center, which was the target last night of a coordinated attack,” Nixon said.

 

Nixon said that law enforcement officers were the target of gunfire on Sunday. The violence also included firebombs, looting and “a coordinated attempt to overrun the unified Command Center,” Nixon said.

And as WSJ reports, locals and Feds are not in agreement…

Mr. Holder, the attorney general, rewrote a statement about Ferguson he was planning to issue to emphasize he expected local authorities “to complete a thorough, fair investigation in their own right,” even though the FBI had opened its own case into whether Mr. Brown’s civil rights had been violated, a law-enforcement official said.

The two sides also clashed later in the week over the Ferguson Police Department’s plan to release the surveillance tape of the convenience-store robbery. Lawyers in the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division objected, saying it would anger the community and intensify protests by those who felt it was an attack on Mr. Brown’s reputation rather than an evenhanded disclosure of information, law-enforcement officials said.

The police department decided to release the video Friday, over the continued objections of federal officials. Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson said last week the move came in response to numerous media freedom-of-information requests.

Federal, state, and local authorities also have disagreed publicly over the tactics and equipment deployed to deal with protests.

“Tell them to remove the damn tanks,” Mr. Holder told his deputies on Thursday, according to a law-enforcement official, referring to heavily armored vehicles the local police had used. That day there were discussions among local officials about how to scale back the armed presence, officials said.

*  *  *
We are sure this will all end well…




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/YpXarD Tyler Durden

Government sniper shoots 18 year old boy

Peter Fechter Michael Brown Government sniper shoots 18 year old boy

August 18, 2014
Spoleto, Italy

The sniper took a breath in as he put the fleeing form of Peter Fechter into the crosshairs of his rifle.

As he exhaled, he squeezed the trigger, landing his bullet squarely in the young boy’s back.

Watching Peter’s body fall, he mentally congratulated himself on what he’d just done to protect his nation.

It was just after 2pm, August 17, 1962 when Peter’s body hit the ground at the foot of the Berlin Wall.

There he lay in broad daylight for a full 50 minutes, screaming for help, before he was finally carted away.

What had Peter Fechter done to threaten the nation and deserve this public execution?

Nothing at all.

The boy was just an 18-year-old bricklayer, who wanted a chance at freedom, when he became the first person to die trying to escape over the Wall.

52 years later, the same things are still happening, and not in totalitarian East Germany, but right in the United States itself.

This time, the 18-year-old victim’s name was Michael Brown, an unarmed hospital worker, who was gunned down by police on the streets of Ferguson, Missouri.

After both young casualties, people were incited to protest in anger against the brutality of the state, and in both cases, the people had tear gas rained down upon them.

Who could possibly still believe that the police are there to protect and serve the people?

No matter the justifications they came up with, it’s was suddenly clear that the Wall was built to keep people in, not to keep others out.

Just the same, the police today are not there to keep you safe from criminals, but to keep the biggest criminals—the politicians—safe from you.

Though on the surface the current protests in Ferguson are about race, they reveal a much deeper truth about the situation. As they protest, the people are following their instincts, and their instincts are telling them not to trust the state.

We’re seeing people’s trust in the state beginning to crumble, not just with police, but with one government agency after another. More and more people are waking up to the fact that none of these institutions are really there to protect them.

The NSA says it’s there to keep you safe from terrorists, but in reality they’re spying on you to protect their power over the populace.

The Fed says it’s there to make the economy more stable, but they intentionally fuel economic volatility in ways that benefit their friends.

The FDA says it’s there to protect people from unsafe foods, but their regulations and endorsements of certain ingredients actually make your food more dangerous.

There’s an invisible wall going up around us, everywhere in Western civilization. People are starting to realize it and that’s why there’s so much anger. But rather than getting angry or emotional, it’s time to get ready.

Rational people have a plan B.

Because if you wait too long, you’ll wake up one day and see that the Wall has been built, and suddenly stands far greater than your ability to escape it unscathed.

from SOVEREIGN MAN http://ift.tt/1uOghJr
via IFTTT

Why Do 36 Percent of Americans Have No Retirement Savings?

Here’s a story that should scare the
bejeezus
out of us all
:

A third of people (36%) in the U.S. have nothing saved for
retirement, a new survey shows.

In fact, 14% of people ages 65 and older have no retirement
savings; 26% of those 50 to 64; 33%, 30 to 49; and 69%,18 to 29,
according to the survey of 1,003 adults, conducted for
Bankrate.com, a personal finance website.

Why aren’t people saving for retirement? A Christian Science
Monitor
story reports

If fewer Americans are planning financially for their long-term
futures, it may be because things are getting more expensive in the
near term. In another study released Monday, The US
Department of Agriculture
 found that the cost of raising a
child born in 2013 to the age of 18 has reached  $245,000. For
a high-income family in the urban Northeast, the USDA found, that
number could reach $455,000. To boot, those figures don’t include
college tuition, an expense that continues to balloon. Brian Plain,
a financial planner from Oak Park, Ill. said those rising costs and
more families living paycheck-to-paycheck that make it harder for
families to save for retirement.

Young people discount future needs (at least I did) and
everybody feels squeezed all the time. I get why people don’t find
time or energy to save for way down the road. That
said, it’s not clear that “fewer” Americans are saving
for retirement than in the past (at least no evidence is presented
in the story above). 

But there seems to be no question that very few people are
saving beyond paying Social Security taxes. Those taxes add up, of
course, and really squeeze people’s incomes from the first dollar
of earnings. Since 1990, the combined employer and employee taxes
for Social Security come to
12.4 percent
of every dollar earned up through about $117,000
(
only
about 5 percent
of individuals make more than that in a
year).

So off the top, folks are forced to kick 12 cents of every
dollar into a system that since 2010 has been paying out
essentially negative returns to new retirees:


Read more about that sort of
unsung warfare here
.

I think any explanation of why people don’t save for retirement
has to account for the massive chunk of off-the-top change taken by
Social Security taxes, which not only squeezes income in there and
now, but provides a vague, hazy retirement benefit in the future.
Never
mind
that the Supreme Court has ruled that nobody nowhere has a
right to such a thing and that Social Security has been paying out
more than it brings in now for a few years and that its trust funds
will be totally depleted by the early 2030s (if not sooner).

As Veronique de Rugy and I argued in the August-September
2012 issue of Reason
, old-age entitlements are no
longer viable from a basic accounting standpoint and they make less
and less sense in a world in which elderly people have more
economic clout than younger, relatively poorer people. They won’t
survive another 20 or 30 years in anything like their current form,
nor should they.

One question I have, though, is whether the lack of savings by
Americans makes it easier or harder to reform (read: abolish and
replace with a safety net based on need, not age) Social Security.
The sooner we have that conversation, the better.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/1tfIo1a
via IFTTT

Pulitzer Prize Winning Journalist on Obama: “The Greatest Enemy of Press Freedom in a Generation”

Screen Shot 2014-08-18 at 11.31.29 AMJames Risen is not just a phenomenal reporter, he is also an extremely courageous and honorable American patriot. His case is a very disturbing one, and it has justifiably received a great deal of national attention. In a nutshell, the Obama Administration is threatening the pulitzer prize winning journalist with prison unless he reveals the source behind one of his stories. This is something no journalist worth his salt would ever do, but the fact our own government would resort to threats of incarceration in order to instill fear in the press to prevent it from doing its job is quite telling and extremely dangerous.

Mr. Risen understands this danger more than just about anyone else, which is why he has previously stated he is prepared to go to jail in order to defend the First Amendment from Obama, who he calls the greatest enemy to press freedom in a generation.”


Protect your wealth – Buy Gold and Silver Bullion with Goldbroker.com


continue reading

from Liberty Blitzkrieg http://ift.tt/1tfI56u
via IFTTT

Pope Francis Gets Involved In Geopolitics, “Endorses Use Of Force” Against ISIS Jihadists

Pope Francis, who until now has had an aura of pacifism “above all else”, if now and then bashing the occasional banker for creating record wealth disparity around the globe, just shattered his reputation of a man of peace at all costs, and moments ago endorsed the use of force in Iraq to stop Islamic militants from attacking religious minorities. He added that ays the international community — and not just one country — should decide how to intervene. He did not clarify just which superpower the last statement was a direct jab against.

From AP:

Francis also said he and his advisers are considering whether he might go to northern Iraq to show solidarity with persecuted Christians, but are holding off on a decision for now.

Something tells us his advisors will not greenlight such a trip.

And now we await the Islamic State’s response, which having already extended the flag of Jihad against the US, will now instruct all “faithful” to endorse the use of suicide bombers against Catholics around the globe. Because escalations never happen on their own.

One thing is certain: it isn’t over until the crusaders arrive.




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1pFriJC Tyler Durden

Mapping The Militarization Of America’s Police Force Since 2006

A few months ago we warned about the SWATification of America, mapping the surplus military gear by state. Having  already documented America's conversation to a turnkey totalitarian banana republic (confirmed over a year later by Edward Snowden), we note the following six charts from The NY Times that show the spread of military-style equipment – including aircraft, vehicles, body armor, grenade launchers and assault rifles – since the creation of the free Defense Department program in the 1990s.

 

The Summary:

 

The Details…

 

Click here for full interactive NY Times charts

*  *  *

Which begs the question: just who is America's police force – and by extension the Obama administration, which is behind this quiet militarization of local police forces with weapons that would normally be seen in a warzone – preparing for war against?




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1pAbIi6 Tyler Durden