iftttwall

Yesterday morning, following news that David Tepper was set to depart his home state of New Jersey for Florida (and being NJ’s richest man, his departure is already being lamented) using the latest Forbes billionaire data, we presented a chart laying out the number of billionaires by state to show which states have the biggest “billionaire flight” buffer.

 

Due to popular demand, we are following this up with a listing of the richest people by state, in map format, courtesy of Salil Mehta.

 

And in list format.

Source

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

It didn’t take long for the impact of the stronger yen, and the weak global economy, to manifest themselves on the company that is Asia largest clothing retailer.

Moments ago, shares of Japan’s clothing empire Fast Retailing, whose most prominent brand is Uniqlo, plunged by 10% sending its stock price to the lowest since June 2013, after the company cut its profit forecast made just four months ago by a third from JPY180 billion to JPY120 billion (well below the JPY169 consensus) a five year low, saying a stronger yen eroded the value of overseas sales and unexpectedly warm winter weather hurt demand for the company’s down coats and thermal underwear. It also announced it would cut its dividend to JPY350/shr vs. JPY370 per the prior guidance.

The sellside, which completely missed the collapse in profits, was quick to come up with a narrative:

• “Lack of any ground breaking new functionality has raised concerns that rivals have caught up with similar products in the summer range”, writes Nomura Securities chief researcher Masafumi Shoda in report
• Earnings show “fresh evidence of the pitfalls involved in selling a limited range of items in mass quantities under a single brand” writes SMBC Nikko Securitites senior analyst Kuni Kanamori in report

Bloomberg adds that billionaire Chairman Tadashi Yanai had bet on expanding the company’s Uniqlo casual clothing brand outside Japan, opening flagship stores in shopping districts from London to Paris, Shanghai, New York and Seoul. The move, prompted by stagnating economic growth in Japan, has made the company more vulnerable to a strengthening Japanese currency.

The yen’s gain, which as reported earlier had wiped out all losses since the expansion of Japan’s QE in October 2014 and is up over 10% in 2016, led to a JPY22.8 yen foreign-exchange loss in the first half, the retailer reported Thursday. Chief Financial Officer Takeshi Okazaki warned that there could be more exchange losses if the yen continues to strengthen.

It wasn’t just the stronger Yen: Fast Retailing also took a 21 billion yen impairment loss related to its J Brand premium denim label in the U.S. and its domestic and overseas stores, but the message to both its and all other investors was clear: either the BOJ steps in with some more easing, or more companies are going to suffer from comparable “shock announcements” in the coming weeks as Japan’s earnings season evolves.

via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1ShGDu6 Tyler Durden

While we all very capable of discerning the 'recovery' facts from the peddled recovery fiction throughout President Obama's reign…

 

…a close up over the last six months suggests things are getting worse in a hurry. As The Economic Collapse blog's Michael Snyder details, while most people seem to think that since the stock market has rebounded significantly in recent weeks that everything must be okay, that is not true at all.

Has the U.S. economy gotten better over the past six months or has it gotten worse?  In this article, you will find solid proof that the U.S. economy has continued to get worse over the past six months.  Unfortunately, most people seem to think that since the stock market has rebounded significantly in recent weeks that everything must be okay, but of course that is not true at all.  If you look at a chart of the Dow, a very ominous head and shoulders pattern is forming, and all of the economic fundamentals are screaming that big trouble is ahead.  When Donald Trump told the Washington Post that we are heading for a “very massive recession“, he wasn’t just making stuff up.  We are already seeing lots of things happen that never take place outside of a recession, and the U.S. economy has already been sliding downhill fairly rapidly over the past several months.

With all that being said, the following are 19 facts that prove things in America are worse than they were six months ago…

#1 U.S. factory orders have now declined on a year over year basis for 16 months in a row.  As Zero Hedge has noted, in the post-World War II era this has never happened outside of a recession…

In 60 years, the US economy has not suffered a 16-month continuous YoY drop in Factory orders without being in recession. Moments ago the Department of Commerce confirmed that this is precisely what the US economy did, when factory orders not only dropped for the 16th consecutive month Y/Y, after declining 1.7% from last month

#2 Factory orders have now reached the lowest level that we have seen since the summer of 2011.

#3 It is being projected that corporate earnings will be down 8.5 percent for the first quarter of 2016 compared to one year ago.  This will be the fourth quarter in a row that we have seen year over year declines, and the last time that happened was during the last recession.

#4 Total business sales have fallen 5 percent since the peak in mid-2014.

#5 S&P 500 earnings have now fallen a total of 18.5 percent from their peak in late 2014.

#6 Corporate debt defaults have soared to the highest level that we have seen since 2009.

#7 The average rating on U.S. corporate debt has fallen to “BB”, which is lower than it has been at any point since the last financial crisis.

#8 The U.S. oil rig count just hit a 41 year low.

#9 51 oil and gas drillers in North America have filed for bankruptcy since the beginning of last year, and according to CNN we could be on the verge of seeing the biggest one yet…

Shale oil driller SandRidge Energy (SD) warned there was “substantial doubt” it would survive the oil downturn. The Oklahoma City company said this week it is exploring a potential Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing.

 

Based on its $3.6 billion of debt, SandRidge would be the biggest North American oil-focused company to go bust during the current downturn, according to a CNNMoney analysis of stats compiled by law firm Haynes and Boone.

#10 According to Challenger, Gray & Christmas, job cut announcements by major firms in the United States were up 32 percent during the first quarter of 2016 compared to the first quarter of 2015.

#11 Consumers in the United States accumulated more new credit card debt during the 4th quarter of 2015 than they did during the entire years of 2009, 2010 and 2011 combined.

#12 Existing home sales in the U.S. were down 7.1 percent during the month of February, and this was the biggest decline that we have witnessed in six years.

#13 Subprime auto loan delinquencies have hit their highest level since the last recession.

#14 The Restaurant Performance Index in the U.S. recently dropped to the lowest level that we have seen since 2008.

#15 Major retailers all over the country are shutting down hundreds of stores as the “retail apocalypse” accelerates.

#16 If you take the number of working age Americans that are officially unemployed (8.1 million) and add that number to the number of working age Americans that are considered to be “not in the labor force” (93.9 million), that gives us a grand total of 102 million working age Americans that do not have a job right now

#17 Since peaking during the 3rd quarter of 2014, U.S. exports of goods and services have been steadily declining.  This is something that we never see outside of a recession…

#18 The cost of everything related to medical care just continues to skyrocket even though our wages are stagnating.  According to the Social Security Administration, 51 percent of all American workers make less than $30,000 a year, and yet the cost of medical care just hit a brand new all-time high…

#19 Our government debt continues to spiral out of control.  At this point it is sitting at a staggering total of $19,218,516,838,306.52, but when Barack Obama first entered the White House it was only 10.6 trillion dollars.  That means that our government has been stealing an average of more than 100 million dollars an hour from future generations of Americans every single hour of every single day since Barack Obama was inaugurated…

How in the world can anyone look at those numbers and suggest that everything is okay?

I simply do not understand how that could be possible.

Part of the problem is that Americans have been trained to be irrationally optimistic.  It is fine to have an optimistic outlook on life, but when it causes you to throw logic and reason out the window that is not good.

For example, you can be “optimistic” about your ability to fly all you want, but if you step off a 10 story building you are going to take a very hard fall to the ground.

Similarly, you can ignore all of the facts and pretend that our economic prosperity is sustainable all you want, but it won’t change the fundamental laws of economics.

Who is to blame for all this disappointment? Simple…

 

Finally, don't forget, "There are no signs of a US recession anytime soon"… apart from these nine charts that is…

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

The latest from Nomura’s Bob “the bear” Janjuah

Power of the Fed’s words waning?

I wanted to update my two earlier notes from this year, published on 7 January (link) and 4 March (link). The two specific drivers for this update are outlined below and are linked to each other and to the two notes referenced above:
 
1 – The rally off of the February lows in risk assets has been marginally stronger than I had earlier anticipated, but in particular has lasted a fortnight longer than I had expected. As per my March note my stop loss for the rally off of the February lows was set at (based on the cash S&P500 index) consecutive weekly closes above 2040. And I expected the next bear leg to begin in early or mid-March. So far my stop loss has NOT been triggered – we have come close, and if we close above 2040 this Friday then my stop loss will be activated, but 2040 has proven to be a great pivot point for the last three weeks. I also note with much interest that outside of the major large cap US indices things already look much more bearish, most notably in Japan and Europe, where in both cases risk markets have been rolling over into bearish price action since early March. Furthermore, core duration markets have traded very well, not just in Europe and Japan, but also in the US. Nonetheless, as my stop loss may soon get triggered I wanted to present this update.

2 – I set out in January that (globally) risk assets (stocks, credit, commodities and EM) would struggle through H1 2016 and that the only relief would come from the Fed admitting failure and flipping to dove mode again, thus weakening the USD and providing relief to crude, commodity, EM, credit and equity markets. In March I re-emphasised my view that the Fed ‘put’ (i.e., the point at which the Fed admits failure and flips from hawk to dove) would not be seen until mid-2016 and would require the cash S&P500 index to drop into the 1500s. Clearly, I had given the Fed too much credit – it flipped after a drop to 1810 and shifted in March, all much earlier than I had expected.
 
With all this in mind, how am I left?

1 – Clearly, my confidence on my negative views for global growth, on my belief in deflation over inflation and on the deeply negative outlook for earnings are now set even more in stone. The Fed has told me as much. In fact, I suspect that the Fed in private is far more concerned about these factors then it is currently willing to admit.

2 – The Fed’s change in March was all about weakening the USD, which in turn is designed to help the US economy fight off imported deflation, instead of which the Fed hopes to import inflation into its economy (all to try and hit the 5% nominal GDP growth target which I discussed in my March note) and with it the hope that it helps US exporters regain competitiveness. USD weakness also helps crude and commodity exporters, and it helps the EM world, which has suffered from commodity price weakness and tight USD financial conditions at a time when the EM world is drowning in USD debt. China is a huge beneficiary as the Fed’s flip and USD weakness allow China to continue devaluing vs the world ex-the US without having to do anything itself, and it helps (at the margin) the heavily USD-indebted Chinese economy. The big losers are of course Japan and Europe, and this is compounded by the fact that both the ECB and the BOJ are, in my view, already at the limits of what they can do credibly. Just look at price action on the EUR, on European stocks, on core duration in Europe, on the JPY, on the Nikkei and/or on JGBs. The charts speak for themselves and should concern policymakers at both these institutions.

3 – I am also even more convinced now that we are about 10 months through a multi-year bear market that likely won’t bottom until late 2017 or early 2018. This will be a stair-step decline with all the strength to the downside punctuated by occasional (very) violent bear market counter-trend rallies driven by short covering, hope and residual (albeit rapidly decaying) belief in policymakers. I still feel confident that we will see 1500s on the cash S&P500 index in late Q2 or Q3, and some of the things I look at suggest a final bear market bottom for the cash S&P500 index around the same levels as the 2011 lows of sub-1100. However, this is a longer-term idea that will be subject to refinement. The focus must be on the next few days, weeks and months.

4 – In this light the first hurdle or trigger is this Friday’s equity market close in the US. If the cash S&P500 index closes above 2040 then I will be stopped out. In such an outcome the risk then is that we head towards the highs of November 2015 (2116) or even May 2015 (2135). Of course if we fail to close above 2040 this Friday then the view for Q2 2016 outlined in my March note would continue to apply, targeting a fresh leg lower into the 1700s for the cash S&P500 index over the next few weeks, and with a larger move into the 1500s by late Q2 or Q3. Within this I would expect at least one violent countertrend bear market rally, perhaps over late Q2 or early Q3, taking the S&P from the 1700s (if I am right!) up into the 1900s before the leg lower into the 1500s over late Q2 or most likely Q3. I am comfortable that such a period of positive counter-trend price action for risk assets will NOT be based on material and sustained improvements in global growth or earnings, rather the drivers would still be hope and a strong view that the Fed is actually going to ease (i.e., action or promises of action in the dovish direction rather than just words or promises not to hike).

The critical longer-term question to my mind is whether the Fed is going to re-introduce QE and/or cut rates ultimately into negative territory. This takes us into the realm of when and what would the necessary pre-conditions need to be. This in turn takes us into the realm of credibility. My view – and it is only my view, as nobody can know the answers to these three questions for sure, is still that the Fed does not actually do anything more than jaw-bone until or unless the S&P500 cash index is into the 1500s and the outlook for growth, employment and inflation get significantly worse – perhaps with the unemployment rate inching higher not lower. Timing wise late Q2 or Q3 is still my target, though the closer we get to the US presidential election the more the Fed will be hampered. In terms of credibility, while I think the ECB and the BOJ are scrapping the barrel, the Fed still has the ability to influence things, at least for now.

What this also all means is that while I may suffer a stop out soon, and stop losses exist to be respected, I also do not think that this current rally leg has much left in it – the power of Fed speak without Fed action is already waning I think. Consecutive weekly closes above 2116 (possibly) and/or 2135 (definitely) would force me to reconsider my views for the rest of Q2 and Q3. Until or unless these levels are crossed I would urge investors to be extremely cautious about getting too long risk and getting overly complacent.

The underlying global growth and earnings outlooks are poor and deflation is still running rampant, albeit right now perhaps more so (at least in terms of perception) in Europe and Japan than in the USD-bloc (which includes almost all EM economies, as well as the usual economies such as Canada and Australia). As everyone wants a weaker currency, I do not expect the period of USD weakness we have seen since early March, and which has been the real catalyst for the latest ramp-up in risk assets and hope, to last unabated for much longer without much more explicit easing/explicit promises of easing by the Fed which, as I have said above, is unlikely until things get much worse. More likely are fresh attempts by the ECB and/or the BOJ to ease to drive down the EUR and JPY before the Fed can actually do anything explicit. In my view, this, of course, will put Chinese devals back on the table. The global FX war continues, which on any meaningful timeframe is ultimately a destructive outcome for the global economy. It seems sad that central bankers are so focused on transitory and largely illusory wins, which have served the global economy so badly over the last decade.
 

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

Submitted by Thorstein Polleit via The Mises Institute,

Some politicians want to ban cash, arguing that cash is helping criminals. The first steps in that direction are the withdrawal of big denomination notes and the limits imposed on cash payments.

Proponents of a ban on cash claim that this will help fight criminal transactions — involved in money laundering, terrorism, and tax evasion. These promises of salvation are used to get the general public to agree to a society without cash. But there is no convincing proof for the claim that the world without cash will be a better one. Even if undesirable behavior is indeed financed by cash, you still need to answer the question: will the undesirable behavior disappear without cash? Or will those who commit the undesirable acts take to new ways and means to reach their goal?

Take the example of the 500 euro note. If we do away with it, won't those who wish to use cash pay with five 100 euro notes instead? Or ten 50 euro notes? And what about the costs imposed on the large majority of respectable people, if you put a ban on their cash? Using the same logic, should we ban alcohol, because some can't handle it properly?

It’s Really about Central Banks

The plan to restrict the use of cash, or to abolish it step by step, has nothing to do with the fight against crime. The real reason is that states (and their central banks) want to introduce negative interest rates.

Although central banks have long pursued inflationary policies that devalue the debt owed by governments, negative interest rates offer a new and powerful tool to do this. But, to make negative interest rates work well, you have to get rid of physical cash.

Otherwise, if you apply negative rates on bank deposits, customers in the short or long run will try to avoid the costs that negative rates impose on their bank deposits. So, depositors will, in many cases, hoard cash. To block this last escape route, proponents of the ban on cash want to do away with it.

The Natural Rate of Interest

Incidentally, some reputable economists are supporting the plan, claiming that the “natural rate” has become a negative rate. Because of that, central banks were forced to push interest rates below zero, being the only way to foster growth and employment. The assertion that the balanced interest rate has become negative doesn't stand up to a critical examination though.

It is inherently impossible that the balanced interest rate is negative. Market rates, which entail the balanced rate, can fall below zero, but not the balanced rate itself. The policy of negative rates is no cure for the economy but causes massive economic problems.

Competition and Property Rights

Banning cash is infringing on the freedom of citizens on a massive scale. In withdrawing cash, the citizen is bereft of choice for his payments. After all, the state has the monopoly on the production of money. There is no competition on cash. Thus, nobody but the state can satisfy the demand for money by citizens.

If the state bans cash, all transactions must be executed electronically. For the state to see who buys what when and who travels when where is then only a small step away. The citizen thus becomes completely transparent and his financial privacy is being lost. Even the prospect that a citizen can be spied upon at any time is an infringement on his right of freedom.

Cash helps to protect the citizen from an unfettered intrusiveness by the state. If the state increases taxes too much, citizens at least have the option to avoid the tribulation by paying in cash. The knowledge that citizens can do so, makes states hold back a little.

States will give up any restraint once cash has been banned. The justified concern isn't at all rendered obsolete by the cases of Sweden and Denmark, where the cashless society is said to function to its perfection. The citizens of those countries can still use foreign cash if they want.

The plan to ban cash – step by step – is a sign of the fundamental ailment of our time: the state is destroying more and more of the freedom of citizens and businesses, once it has turned into a territorial monopolist and highest judge of all conflicts.

The fight to keep cash may bring something good though: it will shed light on the need to take the power away from the state as we know it, by applying the same principles of law on its actions as on those of each and every citizen. That way, the state’s monopoly on producing cash would come to an end and the citizen wouldn't need to worry that he may be deprived of his cash against his will.

via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/23grXXw Tyler Durden

In what appears to be a table-turning act of micro-aggression (or just aggression), Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz's planned visit to a school in the Bronx was canceled after students threatened a walkout if the Texas senator came. As The Hill reports, students at the school wrote a letter to the principal, explaining "the presence of Ted Cruz and the ideas he stands for are offensive," calling Cruz "misogynistic, homophobic and racist." Definitely not someone they want in their 'safe space'.

Cruz was scheduled to speak at Bronx Lighthouse College Preparatory Academy, but as The Hill details, students at the school wrote a letter to the principal asking that she not allow Cruz to come.

"We told her if he came here, we would schedule a walkout," said Destiny Domeneck, 16.

 

"Most of us are immigrants or come from immigrant backgrounds. Ted Cruz goes against everything our school stands for."

 

The letter explained that a group of students would leave during the fourth period as "an act of civil disobedience in regards to the arrival of Ted Cruz to BLCPA." It said that the act would be the students' opportunity to "stand up for our community and future."

 

“We have all considered the consequences of our actions and are willing to accept them,” the letter said.

 

“The presence of Ted Cruz and the ideas he stands for are offensive.”

 

The letter also called Cruz "misogynistic, homophobic and racist."

 

"He has used vulgar language, gestures, and profanity directed at a scholar and staff members, along with harassing and posing threats to staff and scholars according to the Disciplinary Referral slip," the letter said.

 

"This is not to be taken kiddingly or as a joke. We are students who feel the need and right to not be passive to such disrespect."

Did the students get Cruz confused with Trump? This narrative is definitely not the one the establishment would like everyone to follow – Cruz is the hero remember, saving the status quo from the terribleness of The Donald.

In response to the letter, surprise, surprise, the CEO of Lighthouse Academies agreed to cancel the visit, once again acquiescing to the demands of a righteous few…

“I’d like to commend you and the other students for your commitment to your beliefs and values," Lighthouse principal Alix Duggins wrote in a response. "I believe that I would not have been able to get the visit cancelled without your actions."

Cruz is campaigning in New York ahead of the April 19 primary. He was in the Bronx campaigning on Wednesday.

The NY Daily News made it clear how they feel..

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

Authored by Pedro Nicolaci Da Costa, originally posted at ForeignPolicy.com,

It’s not like we didn’t know what was going on. But the “Panama Papers,” the largest-ever document leak and one that implicates political leaders and business executives around the world, confirms it – cementing a widespread distrust of public and private institutions in the global economy.

It remains to be seen whether the scale of the revelations, whose full scope is only slowly starting to emerge, will be a catalyst for positive change or just more fodder for curmudgeonly conspiracy theorists. But one thing is clear: The debate over global economic policy is going to be deeply affected for a while to come.

The epic document dump, which includes 11.5 million files from the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca, implicates a string of world leaders, their families, and close associates in an intricate web of shell companies constructed for the sole purpose of hiding money from tax authorities.

Following the Great Recession and world financial meltdown, policymakers have fallen broadly into two camps: those who see a significant role for official intervention through fiscal and monetary stimulus policies, and those who see government as the problem and push for structural changes to push it out of the way.

Both Europe and the United States imposed considerable austerity on government finances despite prevailing modern economic thinking suggesting governments should spend more, not less, in times of economic weakness.

This budget-cutting approach to exiting the economic crisis, predicated on the dubious notion that fiscal prudence will boost confidence and hence growth, was sold to the public as a shared sacrifice across society.

But as the Panama Papers appear to show, the very wealthy play by an entirely different set of rules than the average person when it comes to paying taxes.

That means any discussions about the direction of various government budgets are now going to play second fiddle to a more urgent debate about rampant tax evasion by the upper echelons of society. It also heightens concerns about inequality that have driven the post-crisis debate. How are governments supposed to fund themselves if those who can most afford to pay taxes are most able to avoid them and do so with impunity? And how are voters supposed to expect their taxes to be well-spent if many of their political and business leaders are themselves wealthy tax evaders? After all, tax avoidance and evasion by Greece’s elites played a significant role in making the country the indebted basket case it has become.

In one country, Iceland, the political consequences have been immediate. Thousands took to the streets Monday demanding the prime minister’s resignation for his alleged involvement in a money-hiding scheme. By Tuesday, he was out of a job.

Elsewhere, the impact is likely to trickle more slowly. Still, the mere existence of myriad parallel investigations from the U.S. Justice Department to the Australian authorities casts a new pall of uncertainty over a wobbly global economy that has already been mired in slow, subpar growth for several years.

Brazil offers an interesting and fresh case study. The recent corruption scandal that began with oil giant Petrobras and then spread to many key leaders in the government (now including a looming impeachment proceeding against President Dilma Rousseff) has prompted some observers to revert to the view of Latin America as the ultimate institutional basket case. But as Monica de Bolle, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, argues, the developments in Brazil, and the active role of the judiciary in securing high-profile prosecutions against corrupt actors, are actually a sign that institutions built since the country’s exit from dictatorship in the 1980s are actually standing up pretty well to what is otherwise a systemic political crisis.

Ironically, it is that sense of justice and fairness that is sorely lacking in rich nations still smarting from the pessimism that has enveloped the global economic outlook since the 2008 financial meltdown. Many of the key players in the crisis, including the CEOs of the major Wall Street firms that pushed the financial system to the brink, were bailed out. Several remain in their jobs today, making millions of dollars a year — as if nothing had happened.

The sense of social imbalance is reinforced by the perception that a revolving door between government and the private sector, particularly in banking, ensures the rules are rigged in favor of corporations to the detriment of individuals and taxpayers. The role of global banks has been a prominent feature of early reporting on the Panama files, reinforcing the impression of the entire sector as one big, risky rip-off machine, preying on consumers and governments to maximize profit. The scandal is only the latest in a series of almost countless ones, most of which were settled with fines and no admission of guilt. There is hardly a global financial market that has not been systematically manipulated by major Wall Street firms: interest rates, foreign exchange, metals, electricity — the list goes on.

One ideal scenario is that the revelations become so damaging to financial stability that it forces a massive rethink of global tax havens, which, by some estimates, top $20 trillion, an amount larger than the entire annual output of the U.S. economy.

In the short run, however, the Panama Papers are likely to add to a generalized anxiety about the future in financial markets. With heightened uncertainty comes greater volatility, which will make it hard for policymakers, including U.S. Federal Reserve officials worried about the global outlook, to figure out what to do next. Longer term, the truth will ultimately have a cleansing, cathartic effect. But in the meantime, expect more bumps on the road to a more stable global economic environment.

via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/22gnePG Tyler Durden

While the “war against ISIS” has been quietly pulled from the front pages in recent months (even as both Russia and the US continue to pile forces into Syria), having served its political purpose, it continues on the ground. As evidence we have the following newly-released videos show Russian Mil Mi-28NE Night Hunter helicopters hunting Islamic State vehicles in Syria.

 

Russian helicopters, warplanes strike ISIS during Palmyra liberation https://t.co/H2hWGrQRUz http://pic.twitter.com/9pOpIKSsGG

— RT (@RT_com) March 31, 2016

 

According to RT, the Mi-28NE reportedly use Ataka (NATO designation AT-9 Spiral-2) anti-tank guided missiles with shaped charge warheads, designed to eliminate armored vehicles; the pickups and trucks of the Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) terrorists are pierced through. A number of people can be seen running away from the vehicles in the midst of an attack.

As seen on video, pilots do not target fleeing terrorists.

The targets are engaged from various distances, sometimes well over 5km away, with speeds of the aircraft exceeding 200kph.

On some videos it is clearly visible that terrorists are firing at the helicopters with automatic weapons, though incapable of damaging the armored ‘flying tanks’, which can withstand hits from 12.7mm bullets.

And since the “war against ISIS” is gradually fading now that the world’s attention has finally been drawn to its Turkish sources of funding, we look forward to the next, just as exciting videos: ECB helicopters launching stack of €100 bills (because the €500 should be made illegal soon) at European citizens.

via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/22gncYc Tyler Durden

According to Reuters, the European Union is considering whether or not to require US and Canadian citizens to obtain a visa before traveling to the bloc. Currently, the US enjoys a visa waiver program with the majority of the European Union that is reciprocated on both sides of the Atlantic. Of course, the introduction of the more restrictive process of obtaining a formal travel Visa would hinder tourism for the European Union, something the local economy desperately needs to remain intact.

This may be driven by the fact that the United States hasn’t yet lifted visa requirements for some EU member countries such as Romania, Bulgaria, and Poland. But more likely, this is just a bit of gamesmanship on the part of the EU. The US and European Union are in ongoing negotiation regarding the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, and there appear to be some sticking points that the two sides can’t quite come to an agreement on – namely labor, environmental, and regulatory standards.

As Reuters adds, “trade negotiations between Brussels and Washington are at a crucial point since both sides believe their transatlantic agreement, known as TTIP, stands a better chance of passing before President Barack Obama leaves the White House in January.”

The latest US Statement on the TTIP negotiations in Brussels sheds some light on why the EU may be stepping up their rhetoric:

This round comes just three weeks after the signing of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.  We look forward to concluding a similarly high standard agreement with the European Union.

 

Two of the texts that we put forward this round were on labor and the environment.  These proposals underscore our commitment to promote our high labor and environmental objectives in T-TIP.  

 

Just as in our previous trade agreements, we propose making adherence to labor and environmental standards enforceable in T-TIP, which we believe strengthens those protections. 

 

We believe that T-TIP also has the potential to increase transatlantic cooperation in addressing labor and environmental challenges more generally, to the benefit of all of our citizens and people around the world. 

 

We made significant advances in the regulatory area during the round.  Our goal in T-TIP – which makes it one of the most ambitious trade agreement in history – is to bridge, where possible, regulatory divergences and promote greater regulatory compatibility – all without lowering the environmental, health and safety protections that our citizens have come to expect.

 

At our meetings this week we advanced our discussions of regulatory cooperation and good regulatory practices with the aim of strengthening transparent rule-making on both sides of the Atlantic. 

 

Public comment and input reinforce the democratic legitimacy of our regulatory systems without diminishing parliamentary control over those processes.

To be sure, this is merely more political posturing: when the dust settles the European Union won’t be “aggressive” enough to actually follow through on a visa threat; after all such a move would force the US to reciprocate which may impact sales of ultra luxury US real estate to billionaires who are eager to flee the worst European refugee crisis since the second World War.

via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/22gncHA Tyler Durden

he Government Accountability Office (GAO) is the non-partisan auditor and investigator for Congress.

The GAO says that the U.S. government’s records are so poorly kept that it can’t really audit them.  Specifically, the GAO provided a report to Congress yesterday stating:

The federal government was unable to demonstrate the reliability of significant portions of its accrual-based financial statements as of and for the fiscal years ended September 30, 2015, and 2014, principally resulting from limitations related to certain material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting and other limitations affecting the reliability of these financial statements. For example, about 34 percent of the federal government’s reported total assets as of September 30, 2015, and approximately 19 percent of the federal government’s reported net cost for fiscal year 2015, relate to three CFO Act agencies—the Department of Defense (DOD), the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture—that received disclaimers of opinion on their fiscal year 2015 financial statements. As a result, we were prevented from providing an opinion on the accrual-based financial statements.

 

The federal government did not maintain adequate systems or have sufficient appropriate evidence to support certain material information reported in its accrual-based financial statements. The underlying material weaknesses in internal control, which have existed for years, contributed to our disclaimer of opinion on the accrual-based financial statements as of and for the fiscal years ended September 30, 2015, and 2014.  Specifically, these weaknesses concerned the federal government’s inability to

 

***

 

·         adequately account for and reconcile intragovernmental activity and balances between federal entities;

 

·         reasonably assure that the government wide financial statements are (1) consistent with the underlying audited entities’ financial statements, (2) properly balanced, and (3) in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (U.S. GAAP); and

 

·         reasonably assure that the information in the (1) Reconciliations of Net Operating Cost and Unified Budget Deficit and (2) Statements of Changes in Cash Balance from Unified Budget and Other Activities is complete and consistent with the underlying information in the audited entities’ financial statements and other financial data.

 

These material weaknesses continued to (1) hamper the federal government’s ability to reliably report a significant portion of its assets, liabilities, costs, and other related information; (2) affect the federal government’s ability to reliably measure the full cost as well as the financial and nonfinancial performance of certain programs and activities;(3) impair the federal government’s ability to adequately safeguard significant assets and properly record various transactions; and (4) hinder the federal government from having reliable financial information to operate in an efficient and effective manner.

Moreover, the Pentagon hasn’t even attempted to comply with government audits …  and “$8.5 trillion in taxpayer money doled out by Congress to the Pentagon [between] 1996 [and 2013] has never been accounted for.”  The military wastes and “loses” trillions of dollars.

In addition:

• Nobel prize-winning economist Joe Stiglitz says the World Bank would view any country which had a banking structure like the Fed as being corrupt and untrustworthy. The former vice president at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas said said he worried that the failure of the government to provide more information about its rescue spending could signal corruption. “Nontransparency in government programs is always associated with corruption in other countries, so I don’t see why it wouldn’t be here,” he said

• We’ve known for a long time that the Bureau of Labor Statistics fudges the numbers to make unemployment look lower than it is really is. BLS itself has admitted that its “adjustments” skew unemployment data during recessions. Indeed, the former head of the BLS recently said BLS statistics are B.S. … and that unemployment is much higher than the government is letting on

• The Bureau of Economic Analysis is revising 84 years of economic history … which will make the economy magically look better

• The U.S. (and British) governments encouraged interest rate manipulation. And central banks have been directly manipulating interest rates for hundreds of years

• The government has long ignored energy and food prices when reporting on inflation

• Paulson and Bernanke falsely stated that the big banks receiving Tarp money were healthy when they were not. The Treasury Secretary also falsely told Congress that the bailouts would be used to dispose of toxic assets … but then used the money for something else entirely

• The Commodity Futures Trading Commission has conspired with big banks to manipulate commodities prices for decades

• The government-sponsored rating agencies committed massive fraud (and see this)

• The Treasury department allowed banks to “cook their books”

• Regulators knew of and allowed the use of debt-hiding accounting tricks by the big banks

• The SEC has been shredding Wall Street documents for decades to help the big banks cover up their fraud

• The Secretary of Treasury (Tim Geithner) was complicit in Lehman’s accounting fraud, (and see this)

• The government knew about mortgage fraud a long time ago. For example, the FBI warned of an “epidemic” of mortgage fraud in 2004. However, the FBI, DOJ and other government agencies then stood down and did nothing. See this and this. For example, the Federal Reserve turned its cheek and allowed massive fraud, and the SEC has repeatedly ignored accounting fraud (a whistleblower also “gift-wrapped and delivered” the Madoff scandal to the SEC, but they refused to take action). Indeed, Alan Greenspan took the position that fraud could never happen

• The regulators pretend that they are being tough on the big banks. But – instead of doing the right thing – they’ve done everything they can to help COVER UP THEIR SINS

• The non-partisan Government Accountability Office calls the Fed corrupt and riddled with conflicts of interest

• Congress recently told the courts that Congress can’t be investigated for insider trading

The head of the GAO also said, “We’re going to owe more than our entire economy is producing and by definition this is not sustainable.”

The Hill reported in November:

The former U.S. comptroller general says the real U.S. debt is closer to about $65 trillion than the oft-cited figure of $18 trillion.

 

Dave Walker, who headed the Government Accountability Office (GAO) under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, said when you add up all of the nation’s unfunded liabilities, the national debt is more than three times the number generally advertised.

 

***

 

“If you end up adding to that $18.5 trillion the unfunded civilian and military pensions and retiree healthcare, the additional underfunding for Social Security, the additional underfunding for Medicare, various commitments and contingencies that the federal government has, the real number is about $65 trillion rather than $18 trillion, and it’s growing automatically absent reforms ….”

But former Senior Economist for the President’s Council of Economic Advisers and current Boston University economics professor Laurence Kotlikoff says that – when unfunded liabilities are taken into account – the fiscal gap for the U.S. is actually 3 times higher … $205 trillion as of 2013 (and getting worse all the time).

We believe that an accurate would show that the government already owes more than the entire economy is producing …

via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1RT78GZ George Washington