investmentwatchblog--2020-09-30--The Fed’s Bazooka Is Broken – Will Direct Lending Be Next?

Authored by Michael Lebowitz and Jack Scott via RealInvestmentAdvice.com , One of the Fed ’ s congressionally charted objectives is to promote stable prices for the goods and services we all purchase .
Investors have been lulled to sleep for over 20 years by “ price stability.
” As a result , few investors have an appreciation for how inflation can impact their investments .
Despite stable price for the last two decades , the Fed now wants more inflation .
Given the negative impact inflation has on our wealth , why does the Fed wish to boost inflation ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ generate inflation ?
Before progressing , we explain the hypocrisy between the Fed ’ s 2 % inflation target and true price stability .
For this , we lean on David Rosenberg quoting Alan Greenspan : The capacity for the Fed to generate more inflation can be appreciated in a straightforward statement : ALL MONEY IS LENT INTO EXISTENCE .
Ruminating on that statement helps you understand why inflation is not running rampant despite Fed “ printing presses ” running at full steam .
It also provides a glimpse as to how the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , let ’ s consider how money is created .
“ Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon in the sense that it is and can be produced only by a more rapid increase in the quantity of money than in output.
” Those oft-quoted words by Milton Friedman define the root cause of inflation .
To paraphrase , it means more money chasing fewer goods creates inflation .
Most economists agree with Friedman ’ s theory .
The question , however , is what constitutes money ?
The problem facing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money .
Strike that ; the Fed does not yet create money .
The Fed only provides banking reserves , or “ toner , ” so to speak .
It is up to banks to use the reserves to make loans and create new money .
The following lesson of how money comes into existence is from our article , Why QE Is Not Working .
“ Under the traditional fractional reserve banking system run by the U.S. and most other countries , money is “ created ” via loans .
Here is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is allowed to lend 90 % of their deposits ( keeping 10 % in “ reserves ” ) • Anne borrows $ 900 from the same bank and buys a widget from Tommy • Tommy then deposits $ 900 into his checking account at the same bank • The bank then lends to someone who needs $ 810 and they spend that money , etc… After Tommy ’ s deposit , there is still only $ 1,000 of reserves in the banking system , but the two depositors believe they have a total @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The bank ’ s accountants would confirm that .
To make the bank ’ s accounting balance , Anne owes the bank $ 900 .
The money supply , in this case , is $ 1,900 despite the amount of real money only being $ 1,000 .
That process continually feeds off the original $ 1,000 deposit with more loans and more deposits .
Taken to its logical conclusion , it eventually creates $ 9,000 in “ new ” money through the process from the original $ 1,000 deposit.
” If you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , of money is solely dependent on banks .
At each step in the process , a bank must decide to lend the latest deposit .
With each additional loan , the money supply increases .
If a bank does not lend , the money supply does not grow .
In the same way that banks create money , it can vanish .
Money dies when a debt is paid off or when a default occurs .
The foundation of the modern U.S. economy is debt .
That is not necessarily good or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ couple of essential questions : • Was the debt productive and used to generate future economic activity to service and repay the debt ?
• Was it unproductive and used to purchase something that provides little or no income generation in the future ?
Assessing every single loan outstanding for its productivity and income generation is impossible .
However , there are easy ways to qualify debt in aggregate .
The graphs below show the ratio of Federal Debt to GDP and Corporate Debt to GDP .
If the debt were productive in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ debt .
That is not the case nor the trend for the last 50 years .
Therefore , we can say with some certainty that a majority of debt is unproductive .
It should , therefore , be no surprise that productivity growth rates inversely track the growth of the debt ratios above .
Under our economic construct , unproductive debt needs more debt at lower interest rates to sustain it .
At some point , and we are likely near , or at the point , it needs inflation to reduce its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cheaper interest rates , allows debtors to service and pay down old debt .
Inflation affords debt holders the ability to service and pay back debt with money worth less than when the loan was originated .
Is it any wonder why the Fed has brought rates to zero and continually yearns for more inflation ?
So with an understanding of how banks create money , and the role debt plays in the economy , we come back to the Fed .
The Fed , believing they are responsible for managing economic growth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the debt scheme going .
As we said , a reduction of debt would reduce the money supply and result in deflation and further defaults .
The economic fallout would be terrible .
To ensure debt balances rise , the Fed encourages new debt with low-interest rates .
In 2008 , zero interest rates were not enough to promote debt .
During the 2008 crisis and ever since the Fed has decided to push reserves onto the banking system via quantitative easing ( QE ) .
The “ logic ” is that if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gladly use them to make loans .
Money is born when a bank makes a loan .
If banks are not making loans , money is not being created .
This explains why , despite the Fed ’ s massive efforts , inflation has yet to take hold .
Bank of America recently summed up the Fed ’ s problem well .
The graph below shows that since February , reserves at banks have grown faster than the amount of reserves the Fed is adding to the banking system via QE .
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ create loans , reserve growth would be well below the growth of QE .
The next set of graphs shows that banks have been aggressively tightening lending standards on business and consumer loans .
Also , the Mortgage Bankers Association ’ s ( MBA ) Mortgage Credit Availability Index is at a six-year low .
Worsening matters , debt is being defaulted upon due to the COVID shutdowns , and money is vanishing .
Further , the savings rate is noticeably higher , and citizens are being prudent and paying off debts .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ make trillions of dollars in loans .
However , the banks are on the hook for defaults and solvency issues arising from such loans .
Banking margins are at historically tight levels , interest rates at record lows , and the unemployment rate is up to levels rarely seen .
To make matters worse , the Fed is begging for inflation , which would raise future interest rates to the detriment of bank profits .
Should we expect banks to loan in such an environment ?
Of course not .
What can the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the banks to lend , create money , and generate inflation ?
Ben Bernanke once told us that the Fed could print money and distribute it to the public .
He referred to this as “ helicopter money , ” thus granting him the nickname “ Helicopter Ben ” .
Helicopter money may not be today ’ s order of business , but the Fed has hinted they may choose to become a bank and lend directly to borrowers .
If the banks will not do their job , why not do it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ care about gains and losses , that ’ s our problem .
It is a problem most citizens will not understand until they are using Benjamins in their fireplace .
If the Fed loses money on a bad loan , they can print more money to offset it .
Whether money is lent directly to Joe Schmo on main street , a large corporation , or the government , it would represent a new weapon in the fight for more inflation .
Think of it this way , if the Fed offered you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a zero percent interest rate , would you take it ?
No doubt many would , and as such , the supply of money and inflation would surge .
Dare we say , “ mission accomplished.
” If the Fed manages monetary policy with the same tools of the last decade , inflation is not likely to rise meaningfully .
The Fed understands the trap its monetary policy leaves them in .
To escape , the Fed may consider printing money .
We suspect doing this via direct lending efforts is their way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rebuttal to our synopsis is that it is illegal for the Fed to make direct loans .
That is very true , but neither is the Fed allowed to buy corporate bonds .
They chose not to abide by the Federal Reserve Act and Congress did not stop them .
As long as congressional oversight is weak and the public is blind , the Fed has the tools .
If the Fed wants inflation , they can get it .
As investors , we try to anticipate what the Fed will do .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ implications of those actions .
This year has been one long reminder that tomorrow might not look like yesterday .
Much has changed and is changing .
Our decisions as investors should account for the probability that those who manage monetary policy do so for their constituents , and not being a bank , we are not their constituent .

Authored by Michael Lebowitz and Jack Scott via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,
One of the Fed’s congressionally charted objectives is to promote stable prices for the goods and services we all purchase. Investors have been lulled to sleep for over 20 years by “price stability.” As a result, few investors have an appreciation for how inflation can impact their investments.
Despite stable price increases
for the last two decades, the Fed now wants more inflation.
Given the negative impact inflation has on our wealth, why does the Fed wish to boost inflation? Maybe more important, how can they generate inflation?
Before progressing, we explain the hypocrisy between the Fed’s 2% inflation target and true price stability. For this, we lean on David Rosenberg quoting Alan Greenspan:
“When asked at the July ’96 FOMC meeting the level of inflation that truly reflects price stability, he said, “I would say the number is zero, if inflation is properly measured.”
What is Money?
The capacity for the Fed to generate more inflation can be appreciated in a straightforward statement:
ALL MONEY IS LENT INTO EXISTENCE.
Ruminating on that statement helps you understand why inflation is not running rampant despite Fed “printing presses” running at full steam. It also provides a glimpse as to how the Fed can change that. But first, let’s consider how money is created.
“Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon in the sense that it is and can be produced only by a more rapid increase in the quantity of money than in output.” Those oft-quoted words by Milton Friedman define the root cause of inflation. To paraphrase, it means more money chasing fewer goods creates inflation.
Most economists agree with Friedman’s theory. The question, however, is what constitutes money? The problem facing the Fed is that they do not create money. Strike that; the Fed does not yet create money.
The Fed only provides banking reserves, or “toner,” so to speak. It is up to banks to use the reserves to make loans and create new money.
Money is Born
The following lesson of how money comes into existence is from our article, Why QE Is Not Working.
“Under the traditional fractional reserve banking system run by the U.S. and most other countries, money is “created” via loans. Here is a simple example:
John deposits a thousand dollars into his bank
The bank is allowed to lend 90% of their deposits (keeping 10% in “reserves”)
Anne borrows $900 from the same bank and buys a widget from Tommy
Tommy then deposits $900 into his checking account at the same bank
The bank then lends to someone who needs $810 and they spend that money, etc…
After Tommy’s deposit, there is still only $1,000 of reserves in the banking system, but the two depositors believe they have a total of $1,900 in their bank accounts. The bank’s accountants would confirm that. To make the bank’s accounting balance, Anne owes the bank $900. The money supply, in this case, is $1,900 despite the amount of real money only being $1,000.
That process continually feeds off the original $1,000 deposit with more loans and more deposits. Taken to its logical conclusion, it eventually creates $9,000 in “new” money through the process from the original $1,000 deposit.”
If you notice, the multiplying, or creation, of money is solely dependent on banks. At each step in the process, a bank must decide to lend the latest deposit. With each additional loan, the money supply increases. If a bank does not lend, the money supply does not grow.
In the same way that banks create money, it can vanish. Money dies when a debt is paid off or when a default occurs.
Unproductive Debt Needs Inflation
The foundation of the modern U.S. economy is debt. That is not necessarily good or bad, but it does raise a couple of essential questions:
Was the debt productive and used to generate future economic activity to service and repay the debt?
Was it unproductive and used to purchase something that provides little or no income generation in the future?
Assessing every single loan outstanding for its productivity and income generation is impossible. However, there are easy ways to qualify debt in aggregate. The graphs below show the ratio of Federal Debt to GDP and Corporate Debt to GDP.
If the debt were productive in aggregate, GDP would rise faster than debt. That is not the case nor the trend for the last 50 years. Therefore, we can say with some certainty that a majority of debt is unproductive.
It should, therefore, be no surprise that productivity growth rates inversely track the growth of the debt ratios above.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
Under our economic construct, unproductive debt needs more debt at lower interest rates to sustain it. At some point, and we are likely near, or at the point, it needs inflation to reduce its burden.
More debt, especially at cheaper interest rates, allows debtors to service and pay down old debt. Inflation affords debt holders the ability to service and pay back debt with money worth less than when the loan was originated. Is it any wonder why the Fed has brought rates to zero and continually yearns for more inflation?
Back To The Fed
So with an understanding of how banks create money, and the role debt plays in the economy, we come back to the Fed.
The Fed, believing they are responsible for managing economic growth, encourages ever-increasing debt levels to keep the debt scheme going. As we said, a reduction of debt would reduce the money supply and result in deflation and further defaults. The economic fallout would be terrible.
To ensure debt balances rise, the Fed encourages new debt with low-interest rates. In 2008, zero interest rates were not enough to promote debt. During the 2008 crisis and ever since the Fed has decided to push reserves onto the banking system via quantitative easing (QE). The “logic” is that if the banks have reserves, they will gladly use them to make loans.
A Bump in the Road
Money is born when a bank makes a loan. If banks are not making loans, money is not being created. This explains why, despite the Fed’s massive efforts, inflation has yet to take hold.
Bank of America recently summed up the Fed’s problem well.
“At the current low rates, even if the Fed were to set all Treasury rates to 0bp, how many new borrowers and spenders would emerge? This is the problem of the zero lower bound that has worried the Fed and other central banks for years.”
The graph below shows that since February, reserves at banks have grown faster than the amount of reserves the Fed is adding to the banking system via QE. If banks were using newly added reserves to create loans, reserve growth would be well below the growth of QE.
The next set of graphs shows that banks have been aggressively tightening lending standards on business and consumer loans. Also, the Mortgage Bankers Association’s (MBA) Mortgage Credit Availability Index is at a six-year low.
Worsening matters, debt is being defaulted upon due to the COVID shutdowns, and money is vanishing. Further, the savings rate is noticeably higher, and citizens are being prudent and paying off debts.
The banks have enough excess reserves to make trillions of dollars in loans. However, the banks are on the hook for defaults and solvency issues arising from such loans. Banking margins are at historically tight levels, interest rates at record lows, and the unemployment rate is up to levels rarely seen. To make matters worse, the Fed is begging for inflation, which would raise future interest rates to the detriment of bank profits. Should we expect banks to loan in such an environment? Of course not.
Bypass the Banks
“…if I was trying to create deflation like I’m in this evil Darth Vader, like ‘Let’s create deflation,’ I would have done exactly what the Fed did from 2012 until a couple of years ago.” – Stan Druckenmiller, CNBC June 2019
What can the Fed do if they cannot persuade the banks to lend, create money, and generate inflation? Ben Bernanke once told us that the Fed could print money and distribute it to the public. He referred to this as “helicopter money,” thus granting him the nickname “Helicopter Ben”.
Helicopter money may not be today’s order of business, but the Fed has hinted they may choose to become a bank and lend directly to borrowers. If the banks will not do their job, why not do it for them?
The Fed does not care about gains and losses, that’s our problem. It is a problem most citizens will not understand until they are using Benjamins in their fireplace. If the Fed loses money on a bad loan, they can print more money to offset it. Whether money is lent directly to Joe Schmo on main street, a large corporation, or the government, it would represent a new weapon in the fight for more inflation.
Think of it this way, if the Fed offered you a $100,000 “loan” at a zero percent interest rate, would you take it? No doubt many would, and as such, the supply of money and inflation would surge. Dare we say, “mission accomplished.”
Summary
If the Fed manages monetary policy with the same tools of the last decade, inflation is not likely to rise meaningfully. The Fed understands the trap its monetary policy leaves them in. To escape, the Fed may consider printing money. We suspect doing this via direct lending efforts is their way out of the trap.
A popular rebuttal to our synopsis is that it is illegal for the Fed to make direct loans. That is very true, but neither is the Fed allowed to buy corporate bonds. They chose not to abide by the Federal Reserve Act and Congress did not stop them.
As long as congressional oversight is weak and the public is blind, the Fed has the tools. If the Fed wants inflation, they can get it.
As investors, we try to anticipate what the Fed will do. Next, we try to assess the implications of those actions. This year has been one long reminder that tomorrow might not look like yesterday. Much has changed and is changing. Our decisions as investors should account for the probability that those who manage monetary policy do so for their constituents, and not being a bank, we are not their constituent.
En garde.


investmentwatchblog--2020-09-30--Charles Nenner – We Are in a Very Dangerous Period. Stock Market Not Going to End Very Well

Renowned geopolitical and financial cycle expert Charles Nenner called this market just 2 % from the top in January .
What does he think now ?
He likes gold and says he “ made more money in gold than in stocks ” in the past few months .
Nenner says , “ We are playing the long term gold market .
We went out at $ 2,100 ( per ounce ) , and the price target was $ 1,850 ( on the downside ) .
We hit $ 1,850 a couple of days ago , so we bought back in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a couple of hundred points , and it ’ s worthwhile .
So , the gold cycle is up for much longer .
$ 2,500 is the first target , and it could be we get higher targets .
I do not believe in the stock market , most of the markets we do nicely in are the gold market , silver market , crude oil market , bond market and the dollar .
It ’ s all very simple and normal , and the stock market is not going to end very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ market now until close to the end of November .
Nenner says the rising market may be signaling a coming Trump win in November .
Nenner is not sure , but what he is very sure about is the stock market is way overvalued just like it was earlier this year .
Nenner explains , “ As you know , the stock market is still very much overvalued .
One of the reasons is the ‘ Buffett Indicator , ’ and that is the value of the stock market compared to the value @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s extreme .
I think it ’ s more extreme than the 2000 bubble .
If you want to buy low and sell high , you have to have indicators of what is low and what is high , and , for me , this is high .
This is based on the fundamentals , but on the cycles , we can try to test the highs one more time .
This is not going to end well because everybody will try to get into the market , and then the whole @ @ @ @ @

Renowned geopolitical and financial cycle expert Charles Nenner called this market just 2% from the top in January. What does he think now? He likes gold and says he “made more money in gold than in stocks” in the past few months. Nenner says, “We are playing the long term gold market. We went out at $2,100 (per ounce), and the price target was $1,850 (on the downside). We hit $1,850 a couple of days ago, so we bought back in. We get in and out for a couple of hundred points, and it’s worthwhile. So, the gold cycle is up for much longer. $2,500 is the first target, and it could be we get higher targets. I do not believe in the stock market, most of the markets we do nicely in are the gold market, silver market, crude oil market, bond market and the dollar. It’s all very simple and normal, and the stock market is not going to end very well.”
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
Nenner is long the stock market now until close to the end of November. Nenner says the rising market may be signaling a coming Trump win in November. Nenner is not sure, but what he is very sure about is the stock market is way overvalued just like it was earlier this year. Nenner explains, “As you know, the stock market is still very much overvalued. One of the reasons is the ‘Buffett Indicator,’ and that is the value of the stock market compared to the value of the entire GDP, and it’s extreme. I think it’s more extreme than the 2000 bubble. If you want to buy low and sell high, you have to have indicators of what is low and what is high, and, for me, this is high. This is based on the fundamentals, but on the cycles, we can try to test the highs one more time. This is not going to end well because everybody will try to get into the market, and then the whole thing is over.”


investmentwatchblog--2020-09-30--We don’t have to kill the king, if we just can ignore the king

“ The right of self-determination in regard to the question of membership in a state thus means : whenever the inhabitants of a particular territory , whether it be a single village , a whole district , or a series of adjacent districts , make it known , by a freely conducted plebiscite , that they no longer wish to remain united to the state to which they belong at the time , but wish either to form an independent state or to attach themselves to some other state , their wishes are to be respected and complied with .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ way of preventing revolutions and civil and international wars.
” ( Liberalism , p. 109 ) Ludwig von Mises It is time for a radical decentralized thought process on an individual level , on how to protect oneself in the future and to create your own reality outside the Matrix with like-minded people .
Stay free – Claudio “ If it were in any way possible to grant this right of self-determination to every individual person , it would have to be done.
” ( Liberalism , pp .
109–10 ) Ludwig von @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on youtube : here is another link to bitchut : www.bitchute.com/video/RAO73k931RDx/

by Claudio Grass
“The right of self-determination in regard to the question of membership in a state thus means: whenever the inhabitants of a particular territory, whether it be a single village, a whole district, or a series of adjacent districts, make it known, by a freely conducted plebiscite, that they no longer wish to remain united to the state to which they belong at the time, but wish either to form an independent state or to attach themselves to some other state, their wishes are to be respected and complied with. This is the only feasible and effective way of preventing revolutions and civil and international wars.” (Liberalism, p. 109) Ludwig von Mises
It is time for a radical decentralized thought process on an individual level, on how to protect oneself in the future and to create your own reality outside the Matrix with like-minded people. Stay free – Claudio
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
“If it were in any way possible to grant this right of self-determination to every individual person, it would have to be done.” (Liberalism, pp. 109–10) Ludwig von Mises
If you have problems to watch on youtube: here is another link to bitchut: www.bitchute.com/video/RAO73k931RDx/


investmentwatchblog--2020-09-30--I’m in the Business of Predicting What Will Make Money

I was involved in a political discussion recently after the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg .
The other person , a liberal , said that Republicans should refrain from confirming a Supreme Court justice until after the inauguration .
He asked me , “ What do you think they should do ?
” I said , “ I ’ m not in the business of predicting what should happen , I ’ m in the business of predicting what will happen.
” I write investment newsletters—I am not in the business of determining right or wrong .
I am in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money .
Oftentimes , I predict things that I personally disagree with .
Most of the time , actually .
Ninety-nine percent of people conflate what they think should happen with what they think will happen .
For example , there are people who believe that Donald Trump will win in a landslide .
These people really like Trump .
Who knows—that may , in fact , happen .
But it ’ s yet another example of confusing will and should .
That example is an interesting one because there is zero evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ win in a landslide .
Biden is ahead in the polls .
Now , there is evidence that Trump voters are systematically undercounted—it happened the last time around—but it doesn ’ t get you to “ landslide.
” I figure it ’ s about a coin toss , which is actually the worst-case scenario—the scenario that I am positioned for in my portfolio .
Speaking of other improbable events , let ’ s talk about energy stocks .
Energy stocks aren ’ t doing so well , which is a classic understatement .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ own very dire predictions for energy demand .
The company is rapidly diversifying into alternative sources of energy , as are a lot of other oil majors .
We ’ ve had newspapers and magazines predicting the death of fossil fuels .
And now we have this : an S & P 500 ex-fossil fuels ETF .
Interesting time for that product , no ?
When energy stocks are on the lows ?
Also , the CBOE just listed options on something called the CBOE S & P 500 ESG Index .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have zero evidence that energy stocks will go up .
There is all the evidence in the world that they will go down .
And yet I believe that energy will be the best-performing sector of the next 5–10 years .
Again , I am in the business of predicting what will happen , not what should happen .
It ’ s a simple matter of supply and demand .
Once we get to the other side of COVID , demand—which had dropped by 20 % —will pick up dramatically .
And supply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pivots away from fossil fuels .
Who knows—if Joe Biden gets elected , he might ban fracking .
But if you dislike fossil fuels because of climate change , you probably think they ’ ll continue to go down and eventually disappear .
But then you would be predicting what should happen , rather than what will happen .
Predicting that energy will rally is a bit like predicting Trump will win in a landslide .
There is no evidence for it , but it is the outcome that would surprise everyone the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
My favorite vignette in Nassim Taleb ’ s book , The Black Swan , comes from some consulting work he did for a casino .
The casino spent vast sums of money on surveillance trying to catch cheaters .
But the PNL swings from a few whales vastly outweighed whatever green chips the card counters were making off with .
All the big risks to the firm came from outside its sophisticated models .
• The casino lost $ 100 million due to a tiger mauling—remember Siegfried and Roy ?
• A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the intention of blowing it up .
• A cage employee with the responsibility of mailing in 1099-G forms to the IRS inexplicably hid them under his desk , and the casino almost lost its license .
• The casino owner ’ s daughter was kidnapped and a ransom had to be paid , which was done out of the casino ’ s own cash position .
2020 has seen one of the greatest stock market crashes of all time , and perhaps the greatest recovery .
None of this , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ equity strategist ’ s end-of-year prediction .
Investors should focus on what will happen , rather than what should happen .
And they should pay attention to when the market compensates them with odds for statistically improbable events .
If Trump wins in a landslide , I hope nobody is surprised by it , whether you wanted it to happen or not .
Jared Dillian is an investment strategist at Mauldin Economics , a former head of ETF trading at Lehman Brothers , and the author of The Awesome Portfolio .
Subscribe to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Man , and listen to his daily radio program , “ The Jared Dillian Show.
” You can follow Jared on Twitter @ dailydirtnap .

by Jared Dillian
I was involved in a political discussion recently after the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
The other person, a liberal, said that Republicans should refrain from confirming a Supreme Court justice until after the inauguration.
He asked me, “What do you think they should do?”
I said, “I’m not in the business of predicting what should happen, I’m in the business of predicting what will happen.”
I write investment newsletters—I am not in the business of determining right or wrong. I am in the business of determining what will make money.
Oftentimes, I predict things that I personally disagree with. Most of the time, actually.
Improbable Events
Ninety-nine percent of people conflate what they think should happen with what they think will happen. For example, there are people who believe that Donald Trump will win in a landslide. These people really like Trump.
Who knows—that may, in fact, happen. But it’s yet another example of confusing will and should.
That example is an interesting one because there is zero evidence to support the claim that Trump will win in a landslide. Biden is ahead in the polls.
Now, there is evidence that Trump voters are systematically undercounted—it happened the last time around—but it doesn’t get you to “landslide.”
I figure it’s about a coin toss, which is actually the worst-case scenario—the scenario that I am positioned for in my portfolio.
Speaking of other improbable events, let’s talk about energy stocks.
The Best-Performing Sector
Energy stocks aren’t doing so well, which is a classic understatement.
British Petroleum recently came out with its own very dire predictions for energy demand. The company is rapidly diversifying into alternative sources of energy, as are a lot of other oil majors.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
We’ve had newspapers and magazines predicting the death of fossil fuels. And now we have this: an S&P 500 ex-fossil fuels ETF. Interesting time for that product, no? When energy stocks are on the lows?
Also, the CBOE just listed options on something called the CBOE S&P 500 ESG Index. The hits just keep on coming.
I have zero evidence that energy stocks will go up. There is all the evidence in the world that they will go down.
And yet I believe that energy will be the best-performing sector of the next 5–10 years.
Again, I am in the business of predicting what will happen, not what should happen. It’s a simple matter of supply and demand.
Once we get to the other side of COVID, demand—which had dropped by 20%—will pick up dramatically. And supply will be constrained as the entire sector pivots away from fossil fuels. Who knows—if Joe Biden gets elected, he might ban fracking.
But if you dislike fossil fuels because of climate change, you probably think they’ll continue to go down and eventually disappear. But then you would be predicting what should happen, rather than what will happen.
Predicting that energy will rally is a bit like predicting Trump will win in a landslide. There is no evidence for it, but it is the outcome that would surprise everyone the most, which is usually what happens.
The Black Swan
My favorite vignette in Nassim Taleb’s book, The Black Swan, comes from some consulting work he did for a casino.
The casino spent vast sums of money on surveillance trying to catch cheaters. But the PNL swings from a few whales vastly outweighed whatever green chips the card counters were making off with.
All the big risks to the firm came from outside its sophisticated models.
The casino lost $100 million due to a tiger mauling—remember Siegfried and Roy?
A disgruntled contractor placed explosives around the casino with the intention of blowing it up.
A cage employee with the responsibility of mailing in 1099-G forms to the IRS inexplicably hid them under his desk, and the casino almost lost its license.
The casino owner’s daughter was kidnapped and a ransom had to be paid, which was done out of the casino’s own cash position.
2020 has seen one of the greatest stock market crashes of all time, and perhaps the greatest recovery. None of this, including a killer virus, was in any equity strategist’s end-of-year prediction.
Investors should focus on what will happen, rather than what should happen. And they should pay attention to when the market compensates them with odds for statistically improbable events.
If Trump wins in a landslide, I hope nobody is surprised by it, whether you wanted it to happen or not.
Jared Dillian is an investment strategist at Mauldin Economics, a former head of ETF trading at Lehman Brothers, and the author of The Awesome Portfolio. Subscribe to his weekly investment newsletter, The 10th Man, and listen to his daily radio program, “The Jared Dillian Show.” You can follow Jared on Twitter @dailydirtnap.


investmentwatchblog--2020-10-02--Rising Homicides This Year May Be Yet Another Side Effect of Covid Lockdowns

During Tuesday ’ s presidential debate , former vice-president Biden attempted to paint Donald Trump as the bad-on-crime candidate when he claimed that crime had gone done down during the Obama administration , but increased during Trump ’ s term .
Whether or not this is a plausible claim depends on how one looks at the data .
And given that law enforcement and criminal prosecutions for street crime are generally a state and local matter , it ’ s unclear why any president ought to be awarded blame or plaudits for short term trends that occur during his administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ look like homicides—which tend to be a good indicator of crime trends over all—are indeed rising this year .
While many factors are likely at play , we may be seeing yet another side effect of the stay-at-home orders and resulting social fragmentation that have come to be part of the landscape of 2020 .
As workplaces were closed down , joblessness rose , and community organizations were shuttered , city and state governments may have been paving the way for more social conflict and crime .
In assessing the larger context , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s new report released by the FBI on 2019 ’ s crime and homicides , and we have partial data from 2020 as well .
While There is no doubt that 2019 ’ s homicides were up slightly from where they were six years earlier .
Back in 2014 , homicides in the United States hit a 51-year low , falling to 4.4 victims per 100,000 residents .
That is , homicides that year fell to the lowest rate seen since the post-war days when homicides were exceptionally low , and at some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eighteenth century .
Since then , homicide rates have risen , but have remained well below the high rates the nation experienced from the 1970s into the 1990s .
Nationwide , from 2018 to 2019 , the homicide rate remained unchanged at 5.0 victims per 100,000 population .
( That ’ s only about half the size of the homicide rates we saw during the late seventies and early nineties when homicides hovered around 10 per 100,000 . )
But homicides have certainly not been evenly distributed .
Total homicides in recent years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a relatively small number of big cities like Baltimore , Memphis , and Chicago .
Nonetheless , homicide rates did increase from 2018 to 2019 in 24 states .
Statewide homicide rates were unchanged in 7 states , and rates fell in 19 states .
As we ’ ve seen in similar analyses in the past , New England , the Pacific Northwest , and northern parts of the Midwest tend to report the lowest homicide rates .
In 2019 , the lowest homicide rates were found in Maine , Vermont , South @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rates were found in Louisiana , Mississippi , and Alaska .
What Is the Trend in 2020 ?
When we begin to look at what data we have for 2020 , it looks like the trend is upward .
According to the Wall Street Journal the nation ’ s largest cities are seeing a lot more homicide in 2020 than in recent years : A sharp rise in homicides this year is hitting large U.S. cities across the country , signaling a new public-safety risk unleashed during the coronavirus pandemic , and amid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tactics .
A Wall Street Journal analysis of crime statistics among the nation ’ s 50 largest cities found that reported homicides were up 24 % so far this year , to 3,612 .
Shootings and gun violence also rose , even though many other violent crimes such as robbery fell .
Some cities with long-running crime problems saw their numbers rise , including Philadelphia , Detroit and Memphis , Tenn. Chicago , the worst-hit , has tallied more than one of every eight homicides .
Less-violent places have been struck as well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Phoenix .
In all , 36 of the 50 cities studied saw homicide rise at double-digit rates , representing all regions of the country .
Among these cities , perhaps the most discussed is Chicago which has indeed shown a sizable increase in 2020 over the previous year .
According to The Atlantic , a look at recent homicide data “ shows this year ’ s rate ( the red line ) rising above the five-year baseline ( the gray line and shading ) at several points throughout the year.
” The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up in all other cities .
But the general trend in cities is clear .
But what is the cause ?
When it comes to homicide trends , it ’ s nearly impossible to prove any one thing is responsible .
Criminologists and historians have been debating what drives homicide trends for more than a century .
But given that 2019 was so relatively uneventful in terms of homicide growth , it does appear unlikely that government-imposed stay-at-home orders , business closures , and church closures have played no role at all in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are at work as well .
The unemployment resulting from business closures—not wholly attributable to forced lockdowns—is likely a factor .
It is also likely that the civil unrest connected to anti-police protests and riots have played a part .
As suggested in the research of criminologist Randolph Roth , homicides tend to increase as perceptions of the state ’ s legitimacy go into decline.1 However , as the Wall Street Journal notes : Institutions that keep city communities safe have been destabilized by lockdown and protests against police .
Lockdowns and recession @ @ @ @ @ @ @ streets have been emptied of eyes and ears on their communities .
Some attribute the rise to an increase in gang violence .
Homicides … are up because violent criminals have been emboldened by the sidelining of police , courts , schools , churches and an array of other social institutions by the reckoning with police and the pandemic , say analysts and law-enforcement officials in several cities .
Schools let out young adults in March because of the pandemic and after-school activities largely stopped .
Churches and other social institutions were restrained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Gangs are built around structure and lack thereof , ” said Jeff La Blue , a spokesman for the Fresno police department .
“ With schools being closed and a lot of different businesses being closed , the people that normally would have been involved in positive structures in their lives aren ’ t there.
” The Atlantic also suggests a role for the pandemic response among other proposed causes such as rising gun sales , rising unemployment , and a rise in “ lack of trust in police.
” When it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conflict , the problem lies in the fact that governments have forced the closure of the very institutions which do much to defuse violence within communities .
Indeed , the connection between these social institutions and violence has been suggested for decades by sociologists .
Known as “ third places , ” these institutions play a key told in encouraging peaceful human interactions .
As noted by researchers at the Brookings Institutions : Without these institutions , people living on the edges of criminality are more likely to feel alienated and lacking in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the worst of the lockdowns , city residents faced closed schools , closed churches , and closed businesses .
As the Journal notes , under these conditions , violent gangs may offer a much-needed refuge from government-imposed isolation .
Even with stay-at-home orders lifted , governments continue to impose restrictions on social institutions like churches and other meeting places and threaten them with police harassment in case of non-compliance .
Yet , these third places can not simply be shut down—or their services drastically reduced—without creating the potential for greater conflict and antisocial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ try to pin rising homicides in 2020 on any single cause , but we should not be shocked that a rising homicide rate is accompanying the so-called “ new normal.
” After all , the government-imposed shutdowns have done far more than shut down community organizations .
They have thrown millions of Americans out of work—with more than ten million former workers currently collecting unemployment benefits—and have set the stage for a rising tide of evictions and bankruptcies .
History has shown that economic malaise does not necessarily come with rising crime .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1.In his book American Homicide ( Belknap Harvard , 2009 ) , Roth concludes when residents feel that the legal system will do little or nothing to provide justice , residents are more likely to take matters into their own hands .
Gang warfare and violent retribution results .
Ryan McMaken ( @ ryanmcmaken ) is a senior editor at the Mises Institute .
Ryan has degrees in economics and political science from the University of Colorado and was a housing economist for the State of Colorado .
He is the author of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nation-State in the Western Genre .

by Ryan McMaken of Mises Institute
During Tuesday’s presidential debate, former vice-president Biden attempted to paint Donald Trump as the bad-on-crime candidate when he claimed that crime had gone done down during the Obama administration, but increased during Trump’s term.
Whether or not this is a plausible claim depends on how one looks at the data. And given that law enforcement and criminal prosecutions for street crime are generally a state and local matter, it’s unclear why any president ought to be awarded blame or plaudits for short term trends that occur during his administration.
Overall, however, it does look like homicides—which tend to be a good indicator of crime trends over all—are indeed rising this year. While many factors are likely at play, we may be seeing yet another side effect of the stay-at-home orders and resulting social fragmentation that have come to be part of the landscape of 2020. As workplaces were closed down, joblessness rose, and community organizations were shuttered, city and state governments may have been paving the way for more social conflict and crime.
Homicide in 2019
In assessing the larger context, we can turn to this week’s new report released by the FBI on 2019’s crime and homicides, and we have partial data from 2020 as well. While
There is no doubt that 2019’s homicides were up slightly from where they were six years earlier. Back in 2014, homicides in the United States hit a 51-year low, falling to 4.4 victims per 100,000 residents. That is, homicides that year fell to the lowest rate seen since the post-war days when homicides were exceptionally low, and at some of the lowest rates seen since the eighteenth century.
Since then, homicide rates have risen, but have remained well below the high rates the nation experienced from the 1970s into the 1990s.
Nationwide, from 2018 to 2019, the homicide rate remained unchanged at 5.0 victims per 100,000 population. (That’s only about half the size of the homicide rates we saw during the late seventies and early nineties when homicides hovered around 10 per 100,000.)
But homicides have certainly not been evenly distributed. Total homicides in recent years were largely driven by high levels in a relatively small number of big cities like Baltimore, Memphis, and Chicago.
Nonetheless, homicide rates did increase from 2018 to 2019 in 24 states. Statewide homicide rates were unchanged in 7 states, and rates fell in 19 states.
As we’ve seen in similar analyses in the past, New England, the Pacific Northwest, and northern parts of the Midwest tend to report the lowest homicide rates. In 2019, the lowest homicide rates were found in Maine, Vermont, South Dakota, and Iowa. The highest rates were found in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alaska.
What Is the Trend in 2020?
When we begin to look at what data we have for 2020, it looks like the trend is upward. According to the Wall Street Journal the nation’s largest cities are seeing a lot more homicide in 2020 than in recent years:
A sharp rise in homicides this year is hitting large U.S. cities across the country, signaling a new public-safety risk unleashed during the coronavirus pandemic , and amid recession and a national backlash against police tactics. A Wall Street Journal analysis of crime statistics among the nation’s 50 largest cities found that reported homicides were up 24% so far this year, to 3,612. Shootings and gun violence also rose, even though many other violent crimes such as robbery fell. Some cities with long-running crime problems saw their numbers rise, including Philadelphia, Detroit and Memphis, Tenn. Chicago, the worst-hit, has tallied more than one of every eight homicides. Less-violent places have been struck as well, such as Omaha, Neb., and Phoenix. In all, 36 of the 50 cities studied saw homicide rise at double-digit rates, representing all regions of the country.
Among these cities, perhaps the most discussed is Chicago which has indeed shown a sizable increase in 2020 over the previous year. According to The Atlantic, a look at recent homicide data “shows this year’s rate (the red line) rising above the five-year baseline (the gray line and shading) at several points throughout the year.”
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
The trend in Chicago doesn’t show up in all other cities. But the general trend in cities is clear.
But what is the cause? When it comes to homicide trends, it’s nearly impossible to prove any one thing is responsible. Criminologists and historians have been debating what drives homicide trends for more than a century.
But given that 2019 was so relatively uneventful in terms of homicide growth, it does appear unlikely that government-imposed stay-at-home orders, business closures, and church closures have played no role at all in rising homicides. Naturally, other factors are at work as well. The unemployment resulting from business closures—not wholly attributable to forced lockdowns—is likely a factor. It is also likely that the civil unrest connected to anti-police protests and riots have played a part. As suggested in the research of criminologist Randolph Roth, homicides tend to increase as perceptions of the state’s legitimacy go into decline.1
However, as the Wall Street Journal notes:
Institutions that keep city communities safe have been destabilized by lockdown and protests against police. Lockdowns and recession also mean tensions are running high and streets have been emptied of eyes and ears on their communities. Some attribute the rise to an increase in gang violence. Homicides … are up because violent criminals have been emboldened by the sidelining of police, courts, schools, churches and an array of other social institutions by the reckoning with police and the pandemic, say analysts and law-enforcement officials in several cities. Schools let out young adults in March because of the pandemic and after-school activities largely stopped. Churches and other social institutions were restrained for the sake of social distancing. “Gangs are built around structure and lack thereof,” said Jeff La Blue, a spokesman for the Fresno police department. “With schools being closed and a lot of different businesses being closed, the people that normally would have been involved in positive structures in their lives aren’t there.”
The Atlantic also suggests a role for the pandemic response among other proposed causes such as rising gun sales, rising unemployment, and a rise in “lack of trust in police.”
A Side Effect of Lockdowns?
When it comes to lockdowns as a source of conflict, the problem lies in the fact that governments have forced the closure of the very institutions which do much to defuse violence within communities. Indeed, the connection between these social institutions and violence has been suggested for decades by sociologists.
Known as “third places,” these institutions play a key told in encouraging peaceful human interactions. As noted by researchers at the Brookings Institutions:
Third places have a number of important community-building attributes. Depending on their location, social classes and backgrounds can be “leveled-out” in ways that are unfortunately rare these days, with people feeling they are treated as social equals. Informal conversation is the main activity and most important linking function. One commentator refers to third places as the “living room” of society.
Without these institutions, people living on the edges of criminality are more likely to feel alienated and lacking in community support of any kind. During the worst of the lockdowns, city residents faced closed schools, closed churches, and closed businesses. As the Journal notes, under these conditions, violent gangs may offer a much-needed refuge from government-imposed isolation. Even with stay-at-home orders lifted, governments continue to impose restrictions on social institutions like churches and other meeting places and threaten them with police harassment in case of non-compliance. Yet, these third places cannot simply be shut down—or their services drastically reduced—without creating the potential for greater conflict and antisocial behavior.
It is likely folly to try to pin rising homicides in 2020 on any single cause, but we should not be shocked that a rising homicide rate is accompanying the so-called “new normal.” After all, the government-imposed shutdowns have done far more than shut down community organizations. They have thrown millions of Americans out of work—with more than ten million former workers currently collecting unemployment benefits—and have set the stage for a rising tide of evictions and bankruptcies. History has shown that economic malaise does not necessarily come with rising crime. But unemployment rarely helps matters.
1.In his book American Homicide (Belknap Harvard, 2009), Roth concludes when residents feel that the legal system will do little or nothing to provide justice, residents are more likely to take matters into their own hands. Gang warfare and violent retribution results.
Author:
Contact Ryan McMaken
Ryan McMaken (@ryanmcmaken) is a senior editor at the Mises Institute. Ryan has degrees in economics and political science from the University of Colorado and was a housing economist for the State of Colorado. He is the author of Commie Cowboys: The Bourgeoisie and the Nation-State in the Western Genre.


investmentwatchblog--2020-10-02--Retail Investors Are Trading 23% of Total Equity Volumes Now and Robinhood Is the Biggest Influencer

The volume of trade coming from retail investors is constantly growing and sets new records every month of 2020 , @ @ @ @ @ Information .
Thus , only within 6 months , the army of retail investors has @ @ @ @ @ 23 % of total equity volumes .
It is worth to mention that Robinhood , @ @ @ @ @ of reckless behavior on the market by analysts , is the leading player in the @ @ @ @ @ first place in terms of the trading volume .
Some experts believe that the growth @ @ @ @ @ investors may negatively affect the stability of the market .
The fact is that during @ @ @ @ @ market experienced a significant influx of retail investors into options trading .
They were using @ @ @ @ @ market performance , but the growth of options activity leads to a significant increase in @ @ @ @ @ in turn , shakes the market , deprives it of stability , and threatens to @ @ @ @ @ .

by Usman Salis
Image Source: themarketear.com
Retail Army Seizes Control of the Stock Market
The volume of trade coming from retail investors is constantly growing and sets new records every month of 2020, according to The Market Ear Information. We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
Thus, only within 6 months, the army of retail investors has gone from 13% to 23% of total equity volumes. It is worth to mention that Robinhood, whose users are often accused of reckless behavior on the market by analysts, is the leading player in the market, consistently holding the first place in terms of the trading volume.
Retail Investors Are Increasing Market Volatility
Some experts believe that the growth in the number of retail investors may negatively affect the stability of the market. The fact is that during the summer rally, the market experienced a significant influx of retail investors into options trading.
They were using leverage to supercharge their stock market performance, but the growth of options activity leads to a significant increase in market volatility. Volatility, in turn, shakes the market, deprives it of stability, and threatens to turn into a trend change.


investmentwatchblog--2020-10-02--The Federal Reserve’s Balance Sheet Has Grown 7-fold Since the 2008 crisis.

At the moment , there is a lot of liquidity in the financial markets and all due to the fact that the Federal Reserve has inflated the balance sheet 7 times .
What is the Reason for the Bloated Balance Sheet ?
During a pandemic crisis in March , the US Central Bank had no reluctance on the economy , and investors were pleased to see the Fed and its Leader , Jay Powell .
Yet this week his failure to promise more concrete steps irritated them .
The stock sold well on Wednesday and Thursday at the Mr. Powell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fed promised that , once inflation had hit its 2 % goal – potentially for years – it would not increase interest rates , there was no new clarification as to when it would adjust its fiscal policy to produce inflation and promote economic growth by the US .
The bond-buying scheme of the Fed currently entails the procurement of 80 trillion dollars in treasury bonds and 40 billion dollars in mortgage-backed securities per month .
Since a new monetary system was agreed last month in which inflation would surpass its 2 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the policy have been raised .
While the Fed has revised its procurement aim — from solely a business concern to one related to economic growth assistance — Mr. Powell has not suggested a forthcoming change to either the size or the magnitude of the programme .

by Peter Smith
At the moment, there is a lot of liquidity in the financial markets and all due to the fact that the Federal Reserve has inflated the balance sheet 7 times.
During a pandemic crisis in March, the US Central Bank had no reluctance on the economy, and investors were pleased to see the Fed and its Leader, Jay Powell. Yet this week his failure to promise more concrete steps irritated them.
The stock sold well on Wednesday and Thursday at the Mr. Powell’s Press Conference. While the Fed promised that, once inflation had hit its 2% goal – potentially for years – it would not increase interest rates, there was no new clarification as to when it would adjust its fiscal policy to produce inflation and promote economic growth by the US.
The Current FED’s program
The bond-buying scheme of the Fed currently entails the procurement of 80 trillion dollars in treasury bonds and 40 billion dollars in mortgage-backed securities per month. Since a new monetary system was agreed last month in which inflation would surpass its 2% goal, hopes for a greater reform of the policy have been raised.


investmentwatchblog--2020-10-02--New York Catholic Diocese files for bankruptcy other citys also are filling as well…

3 Bankruptcies 3.1 Portland 3.2 Tucson 3.3 Spokane 3.4 Davenport 3.5 San Diego 3.6 Fairbanks 3.7 Oregon Province of the @ @ @ @ @ of Christian Brothers ( North America ) 3.10 Milwaukee 3.11 Stockton 3.12 Ecclesiastical Province of @ @ @ @ @ Archdiocese of Agaña 3.14 Diocese of Rochester 3.15 Diocese of Harrisburg 3.16 Diocese of Buffalo @ @ @ @ @

New York Catholic diocese files for bankruptcy protection amid clergy abuse lawsuits
3 Bankruptcies
3.1 Portland
3.2 Tucson
3.3 Spokane
3.4 Davenport
3.5 San Diego
3.6 Fairbanks
3.7 Oregon Province of the Jesuits
3.8 Wilmington
3.9 Congregation of Christian Brothers (North America)
3.10 Milwaukee
3.11 Stockton
3.12 Ecclesiastical Province of Saint Paul and Minneapolis
3.13 Archdiocese of Agaña
3.14 Diocese of Rochester
3.15 Diocese of Harrisburg
3.16 Diocese of Buffalo
3.17 Archdiocese of New Orleans
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
h/t Goneviral


investmentwatchblog--2020-10-02--At 46%, Trump’s Pre-Debate Job Approval Highest Since May, 56% expect Trump will win the election; 4

At 46%, Trump’s Pre-Debate Job Approval Highest Since May, 56% expect Trump will win the election; 40% think Biden will

WASHINGTON , D.C. — In Gallup polling conducted over the two weeks leading up to the first presidential debate , President Donald Trump ’ s job approval rating is 46 % , its highest point since May .
Although still short of the majority approval that incumbent presidents typically need in order to be confident of reelection , more Americans say they expect he , rather than Joe Biden , will win the election .
Trump ’ s Pre-Debate Approval Rating Remains Below His Personal Best Trump started the year with the highest approval rating of his presidency ( 49 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ charges , but it subsequently descended to the 38 % to 42 % range during the summer as the coronavirus pandemic , the resulting economic downturn , and racial injustice issues afflicted the nation .
Although the increase of four percentage points in Trump ’ s latest rating is not statistically significant , the poll ’ s internals suggest a rise in his support the second half of the Sept. 14-28 field period coincident with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ’ s death and lying in state , as well as Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nomination to the Supreme Court .
This suggests that some viewed his handling of the situation positively .

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In Gallup polling conducted over the two weeks leading up to the first presidential debate, President Donald Trump’s job approval rating is 46%, its highest point since May. Although still short of the majority approval that incumbent presidents typically need in order to be confident of reelection, more Americans say they expect he, rather than Joe Biden, will win the election.
Trump’s Pre-Debate Approval Rating Remains Below His Personal Best
Trump started the year with the highest approval rating of his presidency (49%) amid his acquittal on impeachment charges, but it subsequently descended to the 38% to 42% range during the summer as the coronavirus pandemic, the resulting economic downturn, and racial injustice issues afflicted the nation.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
Although the increase of four percentage points in Trump’s latest rating is not statistically significant, the poll’s internals suggest a rise in his support the second half of the Sept. 14-28 field period coincident with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death and lying in state, as well as Trump’s announcing that he would quickly make a nomination to the Supreme Court. This suggests that some viewed his handling of the situation positively.
news.gallup.com/poll/321347/trump-pre-debate-job-approval-highest-may.aspx


investmentwatchblog--2020-10-02--United States Obtains Final Judgement and Permanent Injunction Against Edward Snowden

United States Obtains Final Judgement and Permanent Injunction Against Edward Snowden On Sept. 29 , 2020 , the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia entered a final judgment and permanent injunction against Edward Snowden , a former employee of the Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA ) and contractor for the National Security Agency ( NSA ) .
In September 2019 , the United States filed a lawsuit against Snowden , who published a book entitled Permanent Record in violation of the non-disclosure agreements he signed with both CIA and NSA .
The lawsuit alleged that Snowden published @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agencies for pre-publication review , in violation of his express obligations under the agreements he signed .
Additionally , the lawsuit alleges that Snowden has given public speeches on intelligence-related matters , also in violation of his non-disclosure agreements .
The United States ’ lawsuit did not seek to stop or restrict the publication or distribution of Permanent Record .
Rather , under well-established Supreme Court precedent , Snepp v. United States , the government sought to recover all proceeds earned by Snowden because of his failure to submit his publication for pre-publication @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and fiduciary obligations .
In December 2019 , the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , found in favor of the United States in the suit against Snowden on the issue of liability and held that Snowden breached his contractual and fiduciary obligations to the CIA and NSA by publishing Permanent Record and giving prepared remarks within the scope of his pre-publication review obligations , but reserved judgment on the scope of these violations or the remedies due to the government .
On Tuesday , the court entered judgment in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ amount exceeding $ 5.2 million and imposed a constructive trust for the benefit of the United States over those sums and any further monies , royalties , or other financial advantages derived by Snowden from Permanent Record and 56 specific speeches .
“ Edward Snowden violated his legal obligations to the United States , and therefore , his unlawful financial gains must be relinquished to the government , ” said Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen .
“ As this case demonstrates , the Department of Justice will not overlook the wrongful actions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trust reposed in them and to personally profit from their access to classified national security information.
” “ Intelligence information should protect our nation , not provide personal profit , ” said G. Zachary Terwilliger , U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia .
“ This judgment will ensure that Edward Snowden receives no monetary benefits from breaching the trust placed in him.
” “ We will pursue those who take advantage of sensitive positions in government to profit from the classified information learned during their government service , ” said Jeffrey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Civil Division .
This lawsuit is separate from the criminal charges brought against Snowden for his alleged disclosures of classified information .
This lawsuit is a civil action , and based solely on Snowden ’ s failure to comply with the clear pre-publication review obligations included in his signed non-disclosure agreements .
This matter is being handled by the U.S. Attorney ’ s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia and the Department of Justice ’ s Civil Division .

United States Obtains Final Judgement and Permanent Injunction Against Edward Snowden
On Sept. 29, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia entered a final judgment and permanent injunction against Edward Snowden, a former employee of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and contractor for the National Security Agency (NSA).
In September 2019, the United States filed a lawsuit against Snowden, who published a book entitled Permanent Record in violation of the non-disclosure agreements he signed with both CIA and NSA. The lawsuit alleged that Snowden published his book without submitting it to the agencies for pre-publication review, in violation of his express obligations under the agreements he signed. Additionally, the lawsuit alleges that Snowden has given public speeches on intelligence-related matters, also in violation of his non-disclosure agreements.
The United States’ lawsuit did not seek to stop or restrict the publication or distribution of Permanent Record. Rather, under well-established Supreme Court precedent, Snepp v. United States, the government sought to recover all proceeds earned by Snowden because of his failure to submit his publication for pre-publication review in violation of his alleged contractual and fiduciary obligations.
In December 2019, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, found in favor of the United States in the suit against Snowden on the issue of liability and held that Snowden breached his contractual and fiduciary obligations to the CIA and NSA by publishing Permanent Record and giving prepared remarks within the scope of his pre-publication review obligations, but reserved judgment on the scope of these violations or the remedies due to the government. On Tuesday, the court entered judgment in the government’s favor in an amount exceeding $5.2 million and imposed a constructive trust for the benefit of the United States over those sums and any further monies, royalties, or other financial advantages derived by Snowden from Permanent Record and 56 specific speeches.
“Edward Snowden violated his legal obligations to the United States, and therefore, his unlawful financial gains must be relinquished to the government,” said Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen. “As this case demonstrates, the Department of Justice will not overlook the wrongful actions of those who seek to betray the trust reposed in them and to personally profit from their access to classified national security information.”
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
“Intelligence information should protect our nation, not provide personal profit,” said G. Zachary Terwilliger, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. “This judgment will ensure that Edward Snowden receives no monetary benefits from breaching the trust placed in him.”
“We will pursue those who take advantage of sensitive positions in government to profit from the classified information learned during their government service,” said Jeffrey Bossert Clark, Acting Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Division.
This lawsuit is separate from the criminal charges brought against Snowden for his alleged disclosures of classified information. This lawsuit is a civil action, and based solely on Snowden’s failure to comply with the clear pre-publication review obligations included in his signed non-disclosure agreements.
This matter is being handled by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia and the Department of Justice’s Civil Division.
www.justice.gov/opa/pr/united-states-obtains-final-judgment-and-permanent-injunction-against-edward-snowden


Tax & Deductions

QUESTION : What do you have to say about Trump ’ s taxes ?
ANSWER : Let me explain something .
Let ’ s take one of the richest men in the world — Bill Gates .
He achieved that station by co-founding and then leading Microsoft .
Most of his wealth came not from his salary , but from the Microsoft stock that he owns , which was equal to about 10 % of the company ’ s outstanding shares .
Wealth gained from stock price appreciation is NOT taxable until you sell the shares .
By holding most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s founding , Mr. Gates DELAYED paying any tax on those capital gains .
Then by donating the shares to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation , that wealth was NEVER taxed !
Why do you think all these people create foundations from the Clintons , Gates , to John McCain .
You get to play with the money tax-free while you are espousing economic equality .
There should be NO income taxes .
It should be a consumption tax ( retail sales tax ) .
Donating money to a foundation that you @ @ @ @ @ @

by Martin Armstrong
QUESTION: What do you have to say about Trump’s taxes?
GS
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
ANSWER: Let me explain something. Let’s take one of the richest men in the world — Bill Gates. He achieved that station by co-founding and then leading Microsoft. Most of his wealth came not from his salary, but from the Microsoft stock that he owns, which was equal to about 10% of the company’s outstanding shares. Wealth gained from stock price appreciation is NOT taxable until you sell the shares. By holding most of his shares since the company’s founding, Mr. Gates DELAYED paying any tax on those capital gains. Then by donating the shares to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, that wealth was NEVER taxed!
Why do you think all these people create foundations from the Clintons, Gates, to John McCain. You get to play with the money tax-free while you are espousing economic equality. There should be NO income taxes. It should be a consumption tax (retail sales tax). Donating money to a foundation that you control should be illegal, but


investmentwatchblog--2020-10-02--The perversion of Inflation Targeting is accelerating

Today my topic is a subject which may seem like shuffling deck chairs on The Titanic but in fact turns out to be very important .
This is because it affects workers , consumers and savers ever more because of the way that both wage growth and interest-rates head ever lower .
For the latter we often see negative interest-rates and for the former the old text book concept of “ sticky wages ” has been in play but pretty much one way as rises are out of fashion but falls do happen .
Indeed we have seen more than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the airline industry leading the way for obvious reasons .
So we can afford inflation if I may put it like that much less than previously as it more quickly affects living-standards .
Central bankers have become wedded to the idea of inflation targeting but have not spotted that there is a world of difference between applying it when you are trying to reduce inflation and trying to raise it .
In the former you are looking to raise living-standards via real wages and in the latter you end up trying to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
In spite of over a decade of evidence to the contrary they hang onto theories like this .
It can be any shape you like according to them which means it is useless .
Accordingly it follows that they have been unable to steer inflation towards its target and for reasons I shall explain later they may well have been heading in the wrong direction .
But let us move on with the Phillips curve being described by Lewis Carroll .
The next issue is that they have got away with defining @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Back to Christine Lagarde of the ECB .
This misrepresentation was exposed back around 2016 when measured inflation fell to approximately 0 % but there were price shifts because the inflation fall was driven by a large fall in the price of crude oil .
We saw it in another form as goods inflation fell to zero and sometimes negative where services inflation continued and in the case of my country was little affected .
So the bedrock of the 2 % inflation target crumbled away .
But they can not stop clinging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ give you an example where this failed utterly in my home country the UK .
Back in 2013 the then new Bank of England Governor Mark Carney established his Forward Guidance based on a 7 % Unemployment Rate .
Within six months that was crumbling and we went in terms of a “ full employment ” estimate 6 % ,5.5 % ,5 % , 4.5 % and lastly 4.25 % .
I would argue it was worse than useless as it was both actively misleading and an attempt to claim he was on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any real intention of doing so .
How much difference does it make ?
Central bankers live in a world like this .
One of the reasons is that the economy did not improve that much .
The previous peak for Euro area GDP was 2.47 trillion Euros at the start of 2008 which rose to 2.68 trillion at the end of 2019 on 2010 prices .
The increase of around 8.5 % is not a lot and compares badly with the previous period .
Next comes the fact that central bankers inflate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chicago University .
From Bloomberg .
They have discovered a point I have been making for some years now .
An issue here is the way that official inflation indices have been designed to avoid measuring inflation .
I noted this yesterday with reference to the Christine Lagarde speech .
This continues a theme highlighted by Phillip Lane back in February .
Just for clarity they completely ignore owner-occupied housing which Mr , Lane admitted was up to 33 % of people ’ s spending in a different speech .
In other matters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would get you laughed out of town but as most are unaware it just means they do not believe the inflation numbers .
I wonder why they might think that ?
From UBS .
So the ECB has topped the charts and has four of the top seven .
Makes them sound like The Beatles doesn ’ t it ?
The situation here is an example of institutional failure .
Central banks had a brief period of relative independence because politicians failed to get a grip on high inflation and so they sub-contracted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would work or whether they wanted simply to shift the blame off themselves is a moot point ?
Either way it had its successes as inflation did fall as highlighted by the description of that phase as the NICE decade by the former Bank of England Governor Baron King of Lothbury .
The problems in the meantime are as follows • Inflation is now below target partly due to the miss measurement of it .
We are also in “ I can not eat an I-Pad ” territory .
• They believe that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something which was picked at random .
• They believe that they can influence it much more than the evidence suggests .
• Most breathtakingly of all they believe that raising the inflation target will make people better off via the wages fairy ( where wages growth will rise even faster ) .
Or you can take the view that this is all about keeping debt costs low for government ’ s and all of the above is simply a front .
Let me now address further the issue of how things have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the psychological impact of so-called emergency measures persisting and all the policy moves .
Next has come the Zombification of many times of business as models which should have failed get bailed out .
Also the use of negative interest-rates cripples much of the pensions and longer-term savings and insurance industry .
On the this road the 2 % inflation which they can not achieve and anyway would make you poorer seems likely to become 3 % which is even worse… .

by Shaun Richards
Today my topic is a subject which may seem like shuffling deck chairs on The Titanic but in fact turns out to be very important. This is because it affects workers, consumers and savers ever more because of the way that both wage growth and interest-rates head ever lower. For the latter we often see negative interest-rates and for the former the old text book concept of “sticky wages” has been in play but pretty much one way as rises are out of fashion but falls do happen. Indeed we have seen more than a few cases of wage cuts recently with the airline industry leading the way for obvious reasons. So we can afford inflation if I may put it like that much less than previously as it more quickly affects living-standards.
The Fantasy World
Central bankers have become wedded to the idea of inflation targeting but have not spotted that there is a world of difference between applying it when you are trying to reduce inflation and trying to raise it. In the former you are looking to raise living-standards via real wages and in the latter you end up trying to reduce them. Hoe does this happen? In spite of over a decade of evidence to the contrary they hang onto theories like this.
If the anchor for inflation is the inflation aim, the Phillips curve – the link between the real economy and inflation – plays a central role in allowing central banks to steer inflation towards that aim. But in the low inflation environment, prices appear to have become less responsive to the real economy. ECB research suggests that the empirical Phillips curve remains intact, but it may be rather flat. ( ECB President Christine Lagarde yesterday )
It can be any shape you like according to them which means it is useless. Accordingly it follows that they have been unable to steer inflation towards its target and for reasons I shall explain later they may well have been heading in the wrong direction. But let us move on with the Phillips curve being described by Lewis Carroll.
“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’ ’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’
The next issue is that they have got away with defining price stability as something else entirely. Back to Christine Lagarde of the ECB.
Since 2003, the ECB has used a double-key formulation to set our objective, defining price stability as a year-on-year increase in inflation of “below 2%”, while aiming for inflation of “below, but close to, 2%”.
This misrepresentation was exposed back around 2016 when measured inflation fell to approximately 0% but there were price shifts because the inflation fall was driven by a large fall in the price of crude oil. We saw it in another form as goods inflation fell to zero and sometimes negative where services inflation continued and in the case of my country was little affected. So the bedrock of the 2% inflation target crumbled away.
But they cannot stop clinging to the Phillips Curve.
The intuition behind the first factor is that the Phillips curve is alive and well, but the euro area faced a series of large shocks that made it harder to measure economic activity relative to potential. ( Lagarde)
Let me give you an example where this failed utterly in my home country the UK. Back in 2013 the then new Bank of England Governor Mark Carney established his Forward Guidance based on a 7% Unemployment Rate. Within six months that was crumbling and we went in terms of a “full employment” estimate 6%,5.5%,5%, 4.5% and lastly 4.25%. I would argue it was worse than useless as it was both actively misleading and an attempt to claim he was on the verge of raising interest-rates without having any real intention of doing so.
How much difference does it make?
Central bankers live in a world like this.
Broadly speaking, three factors might explain why inflation responded so weakly to improvements in the economy in the run-up to the pandemic.
One of the reasons is that the economy did not improve that much. The previous peak for Euro area GDP was 2.47 trillion Euros at the start of 2008 which rose to 2.68 trillion at the end of 2019 on 2010 prices. The increase of around 8.5% is not a lot and compares badly with the previous period.
Next comes the fact that central bankers inflate their own efforts and policies according to Chicago University. From Bloomberg.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
However, they also find that, on average, papers written entirely by central bankers found an impact on growth at the peak of QE that was more than 0.7 percentage points higher than the effect estimated in papers written entirely by academics. (This is a sizable difference considering the effect found on average across all studies was 1.57% at the peak.) In the case of inflation, the difference in the effect of QE at its peak between the two sets of papers was more than 1.2 percentage points. Central bankers also tended to use more positive language in summarizing their results in abstracts.
They have discovered a point I have been making for some years now.
They suggest that career concerns may have played a role and provide some evidence that central bank researchers who found the largest impact of QE had a better chance of receiving a promotion.
Measuring Inflation
An issue here is the way that official inflation indices have been designed to avoid measuring inflation. I noted this yesterday with reference to the Christine Lagarde speech.
We need to keep track of broad concepts of inflation that capture the costs people face in their everyday lives and reflect their perceptions, including measures of owner-occupied housing.
This continues a theme highlighted by Phillip Lane back in February.
I think we at the ECB would agree that there should be more weight on housing – but there is a difficulty and this has been looked at several times before.
Just for clarity they completely ignore owner-occupied housing which Mr,Lane admitted was up to 33% of people’s spending in a different speech. In other matters ignoring such a large and significant area would get you laughed out of town but as most are unaware it just means they do not believe the inflation numbers.
a lot of households think it is higher. ( Phillip Lane)
I wonder why they might think that? From UBS.
Use our interactive Global Real Estate Bubble Index to track and compare the risk of bubbles in 25 cities around the world over the last three years. Munich and Frankfurt top our list in 2020. Risk is also elevated in Toronto, Hong Kong, Paris, and Amsterdam. Zurich is a new addition to the bubble risk zone.
So the ECB has topped the charts and has four of the top seven. Makes them sound like The Beatles doesn’t it?
Comment
The situation here is an example of institutional failure. Central banks had a brief period of relative independence because politicians failed to get a grip on high inflation and so they sub-contracted the job. Whether they thought it would work or whether they wanted simply to shift the blame off themselves is a moot point? Either way it had its successes as inflation did fall as highlighted by the description of that phase as the NICE decade by the former Bank of England Governor Baron King of Lothbury.
The problems in the meantime are as follows
Inflation is now below target partly due to the miss measurement of it. We are also in “I cannot eat an I-Pad” territory. They believe that 2% inflation is causal rather than something which was picked at random. They believe that they can influence it much more than the evidence suggests. Most breathtakingly of all they believe that raising the inflation target will make people better off via the wages fairy ( where wages growth will rise even faster).
Or you can take the view that this is all about keeping debt costs low for government’s and all of the above is simply a front.
Let me now address further the issue of how things have been made worse. Firstly there is the psychological impact of so-called emergency measures persisting and all the policy moves. Next has come the Zombification of many times of business as models which should have failed get bailed out. Also the use of negative interest-rates cripples much of the pensions and longer-term savings and insurance industry.
On the this road the 2% inflation which they cannot achieve and anyway would make you poorer seems likely to become 3% which is even worse….


investmentwatchblog--2020-10-02--China: Chilling new “Zero Out” campaign.

Beijing Launches New Campaign Against Falun Gong The Chinese communist government has launched a new campaign against the followers of Falun Gong , aiming to crush the faith .
Called “ Zero-Out , ” it has been launched by the 610 Office and the Political and Legal Affairs Committee , two entities that are specifically tasked with persecuting Falun Gong followers .
Zero-Out Campaign The zero-out campaign aims to reduce the number of Falun Gong practitioners to zero .
During the past two decades , the CCP has blacklisted almost every Falun Gong practitioner in China .
Back in 2004 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Beijing had placed a special code in the IC chips of the cards belonging to Falun Gong practitioners .
So when these people use the ID cards for any purpose , say applying for a passport , they will be flagged .
In some areas , the police carry devices that alert them if the ID card is within 30 meters .
Even if a person had renounced Falun Gong due to the persecution , their names will still be on the blacklist .
The Zero-Out campaign will refresh the blacklist .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ government lists , collecting their personal information , and asking them to sign prepared statements to renounce Falun Gong… if the practitioners signed the renunciation statements , the officers would remove their names from the blacklist and wouldn ’ t harass them in the future… Many practitioners had their homes ransacked , and some had their cellphones taken .
Several of their family members were also targeted and ordered to persuade their loved ones to give up their faith , ” according to the Minghui website .
The Chinese communist government is calculating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ find the idea of being treated like a regular citizen attractive , and thus be willing to renounce their faith .
In one incident , police deceived a Falun Gong practitioner to open the door of his home by posing as census workers .
The person was taken to a hospital , later escaped , and has apparently been hiding from authorities .
The “ Zero-Out ” Campaign in Mudanjiang City , Heilongjiang Province ( Minghui.org ) Since April 2020 , the Political and Legal Affairs Committee ( PLAC ) in Mudanjiang City @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a new “ zero-out ” campaign ordered by the central PLAC office in Beijing , in attempts to force all Falun Gong practitioners to renounce their faith .
In the persecution of Falun Gong started by the Chinese Communist Party in July 1999 , the PLAC , an extrajudicial agency overseeing state security and judiciary branches , has played a central role in making and executing persecution policies .
In the new “ zero-out ” campaign , launched on the 21st anniversary of the persecution Falun Gong , local community workers and police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ practitioners on the government ’ s blacklist .
They collected the practitioners ’ information and attempted to force them to sign prepared statements to renounce Falun Gong .
Some practitioners ’ family members were also harassed and threatened .
The “ Zero-Out ” Campaign in Mudanjiang City , Heilongjiang Province ( Minghui.org ) Since April 2020 , the Political and Legal Affairs Committee ( PLAC ) in Mudanjiang City , Heilongjiang Province has been carrying out a new “ zero-out ” campaign ordered by the central PLAC office in Beijing , in attempts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ renounce their faith .
In the persecution of Falun Gong started by the Chinese Communist Party in July 1999 , the PLAC , an extrajudicial agency overseeing state security and judiciary branches , has played a central role in making and executing persecution policies .
In the new “ zero-out ” campaign , launched on the 21st anniversary of the persecution Falun Gong , local community workers and police officers were mobilized to visit Falun Gong practitioners on the government ’ s blacklist .
They collected the practitioners ’ information and attempted to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ renounce Falun Gong .
Some practitioners ’ family members were also harassed and threatened .

Beijing Launches New Campaign Against Falun Gong
The Chinese communist government has launched a new campaign against the followers of Falun Gong, aiming to crush the faith. Called “Zero-Out,” it has been launched by the 610 Office and the Political and Legal Affairs Committee, two entities that are specifically tasked with persecuting Falun Gong followers.
Zero-Out Campaign
The zero-out campaign aims to reduce the number of Falun Gong practitioners to zero. During the past two decades, the CCP has blacklisted almost every Falun Gong practitioner in China. Back in 2004 when the government-issued ID cards to citizens, Beijing had placed a special code in the IC chips of the cards belonging to Falun Gong practitioners. So when these people use the ID cards for any purpose, say applying for a passport, they will be flagged. In some areas, the police carry devices that alert them if the ID card is within 30 meters. Even if a person had renounced Falun Gong due to the persecution, their names will still be on the blacklist.
The Zero-Out campaign will refresh the blacklist. “The police are harassing practitioners on government lists, collecting their personal information, and asking them to sign prepared statements to renounce Falun Gong… if the practitioners signed the renunciation statements, the officers would remove their names from the blacklist and wouldn’t harass them in the future… Many practitioners had their homes ransacked, and some had their cellphones taken. Several of their family members were also targeted and ordered to persuade their loved ones to give up their faith,” according to the Minghui website.
The Chinese communist government is calculating that many registered Falun Gong practitioners might find the idea of being treated like a regular citizen attractive, and thus be willing to renounce their faith. In one incident, police deceived a Falun Gong practitioner to open the door of his home by posing as census workers. The person was taken to a hospital, later escaped, and has apparently been hiding from authorities.
faluninfo.net/beijing-launches-new-campaign-against-falun-gong/?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=7ba50e7537-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_10_01_04_16&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_480b7a73c3-7ba50e7537-355475438
The “Zero-Out” Campaign in Mudanjiang City, Heilongjiang Province
(Minghui.org) Since April 2020, the Political and Legal Affairs Committee (PLAC) in Mudanjiang City, Heilongjiang Province has been carrying out a new “zero-out” campaign ordered by the central PLAC office in Beijing, in attempts to force all Falun Gong practitioners to renounce their faith.
In the persecution of Falun Gong started by the Chinese Communist Party in July 1999, the PLAC, an extrajudicial agency overseeing state security and judiciary branches, has played a central role in making and executing persecution policies.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
In the new “zero-out” campaign, launched on the 21st anniversary of the persecution Falun Gong, local community workers and police officers were mobilized to visit Falun Gong practitioners on the government’s blacklist. They collected the practitioners’ information and attempted to force them to sign prepared statements to renounce Falun Gong. Some practitioners’ family members were also harassed and threatened.
en.minghui.org/html/articles/2020/8/13/186326.html
The “Zero-Out” Campaign in Mudanjiang City, Heilongjiang Province
(Minghui.org) Since April 2020, the Political and Legal Affairs Committee (PLAC) in Mudanjiang City, Heilongjiang Province has been carrying out a new “zero-out” campaign ordered by the central PLAC office in Beijing, in attempts to force all Falun Gong practitioners to renounce their faith.
In the persecution of Falun Gong started by the Chinese Communist Party in July 1999, the PLAC, an extrajudicial agency overseeing state security and judiciary branches, has played a central role in making and executing persecution policies.
In the new “zero-out” campaign, launched on the 21st anniversary of the persecution Falun Gong, local community workers and police officers were mobilized to visit Falun Gong practitioners on the government’s blacklist. They collected the practitioners’ information and attempted to force them to sign prepared statements to renounce Falun Gong. Some practitioners’ family members were also harassed and threatened.
en.minghui.org/html/articles/2020/8/13/186326.html
h/t Lily


investmentwatchblog--2020-10-02--Escalation: Video of rockets inbound towards Yerevan (Capital of Armenia)

Confirmation from Armenian MoD: S-300 systems just engaged and shot down 2 missiles near Yerevan. #Azerbaijan #Armenia #Artsakh
[Knish] — Aurora Intel (@AuroraIntel) October 1, 2020
Hostile UAV infiltrates deep into Armenia, before being downed by air defense near Yerevan | ARMENPRESS Armenian News Agency t.co/1gDbARSVAu — EndGameWW3 (@EndGameWW3) October 1, 2020
h/t Tekton
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!


investmentwatchblog--2020-10-02--Biden Refuses To Answer SC Packing Question AGAIN TODAY

Packing the court is an extremist idea that would end the USA — no more checks and balances Leftists would @ @ @ @ @ They would n't have to win arguments or elections or work with the other side

Packing the court is an extremist idea that would end the USA — no more checks and balances
Leftists would undemocratically force through their agenda
They wouldn't have to win arguments or elections or work with the other side
It'd be permanent one-party left-wing rule pic.twitter.com/yO7Nm0Nslh
— Elizabeth Harrington (@LizRNC) October 1, 2020


investmentwatchblog--2020-10-02--Oops no vaccine: Coronavirus antibodies start to fade three months after symptoms begin, study of su

Oops no vaccine: Coronavirus antibodies start to fade three months after symptoms begin, study of survivors’ plasma finds

• Researchers from Canada followed 15 recovered coronavirus patients who donated convalescent plasma • Convalescent plasma therapy is when the liquid portion of blood is taken from a recovered COVID-19 patients • It is transferred into sick patients in hopes they will develop the antibodies needed to fight off the infection • All of the donors showed decreases in antibodies after three months , and levels for half the detectable antibodies fell again 21 days later • This means the earlier that recovered COVID-19 patients donate plasma to those who are ill , the better Coronavirus antibodies in blood plasma @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a new study suggests .
Researchers followed a small group of recovered COVID-19 patients who donated their blood and found all of them showed decreases in antibodies after three months .
What ’ s more , just three weeks later , levels for half of the detectable antibodies fell again .
The team , from Héma-Québec , a blood donation center in Québec , Canada , says the findings suggest the earlier plasma is collected after someone recovers from COVID-19 , the better .
Additionally , they add that studies using antibodies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recovered from the virus may be undercounting the true figure .

Researchers from Canada followed 15 recovered coronavirus patients who donated convalescent plasma
Convalescent plasma therapy is when the liquid portion of blood is taken from a recovered COVID-19 patients
It is transferred into sick patients in hopes they will develop the antibodies needed to fight off the infection
All of the donors showed decreases in antibodies after three months, and levels for half the detectable antibodies fell again 21 days later
This means the earlier that recovered COVID-19 patients donate plasma to those who are ill, the better
Coronavirus antibodies in blood plasma donations fade rapidly after symptoms first appear, a new study suggests.
Researchers followed a small group of recovered COVID-19 patients who donated their blood and found all of them showed decreases in antibodies after three months.
What’s more, just three weeks later, levels for half of the detectable antibodies fell again.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
The team, from Héma-Québec, a blood donation center in Québec, Canada, says the findings suggest the earlier plasma is collected after someone recovers from COVID-19, the better.
Additionally, they add that studies using antibodies tests to determine how many people have recovered from the virus may be undercounting the true figure.
www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-8794959/Coronavirus-antibodies-blood-plasma-donations-start-fade-three-months-symptoms-start.html


investmentwatchblog--2020-10-02--NC opens phase 3 at 7% capacity tomorrow – how many PHASES will there be?

What will 7 % do ?
According to this you can only have 100 people within 10,000 SF .
Limits @ @ @ @ @ 50 outdoor .
All bars still outdoor starting in the fall weather .

WHY BOTHER?
What will 7% do?
According to this you can only have 100 people within 10,000 SF.
Limits – 25 people indoor and 50 outdoor.
All bars still outdoor starting in the fall weather.
Good luck on recovery.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
myfox8.com/news/north-carolina-to-move-into-phase-3-on-friday/
www.scribd.com/document/478174802/North-Carolina-to-enter-Phase-3#from_embed
HB


investmentwatchblog--2020-10-02--Houses Selling — Really Fast

Houses Selling — Really Fast

In my area they are selling in a few days .
Prices going up many thousands in a 30 day @ @ @ @ @ cities they say on the news .

In my area they are selling in a few days. Prices going up many thousands in a 30 day period.
People leaving the cities they say on the news.
AN