+- +-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 43
Latest: Heredia05
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 10418
Total Topics: 244
Most Online Today: 26
Most Online Ever: 52
(November 29, 2017, 04:04:44 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 1
Total: 1

Post reply

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

Attach:
Help (Clear Attachment)
(more attachments)
Allowed file types: doc, gif, jpg, jpeg, mpg, pdf, png, txt, zip, rar, csv, xls, xlsx, docx, xlsm, psd, cpp
Restrictions: 4 per post, maximum total size 1024KB, maximum individual size 512KB
Verification:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: August 13, 2018, 09:25:57 pm »

Economic Update: Hidden Failures of Capitalism

August 13, 2018

This week: Updates on Europe’s higher labor force participation; NY Governor Cuomo’s campaign is faking “small donations;” U.S. restaurants decline as pinched incomes force home delivery of food; how the “market” housing system causes homelessness; and how the U.S. educational system fails to overcome a racial wealth gap; Interview with Dr. Harriet Fraad on the causes and consequences of US declining fertility rate


https://therealnews.com/stories/economic-update-hidden-failures-of-capitalism
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: August 12, 2018, 01:25:20 pm »

Yap Money 👀

Definitely NOT "pocket change"!   

On the small island of Yap in the western Pacific Ocean, large stone discs up to 12 feet (3.6 meters) wide  :o  are the local form of money and tend to be used for large purchases. Other unusual forms of money worldwide include time hours, a legal form of currency that allows tasks such as childcare or auto repairs to be bartered for other services. A modern form of currency known as Bitcoins was developed in the early 2010s as the first completely decentralized form of electronic currency that is accepted by some ecommerce websites.

More about unusual forms of money:

• Historically, the most valuable items for bartering have included shells, tobacco, tea leaves, animal fur and salt.

• In 1991, the town of Ithaca, New York, developed Ithaca Hours, a form of currency in which each piece of currency is worth the average wage of one hour of work.

• Areas that develop their own forms of money commonly cite their main reasons as fostering a sense of community and independence as well as having a poor economy.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-some-unusual-forms-of-money.htm
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: August 11, 2018, 05:08:01 pm »

CleanTechnica
Support CleanTechnica’s work via donations on Patreon or PayPal!

Or just go buy a cool t-shirt, cup, baby outfit, bag, or hoodie.


The Big Short Burn … Er, Explosion Implosion  ;D

August 10th, 2018 by Zachary Shahan

You don’t get much props for predicting something after it happened. This is sort of lame: “I knew that would happen. I didn’t say it, but I knew it.” So, I’m going out on a short limb and am making a prediction here in the open while the market remains irrational.

Well, to be honest, you don’t get much props for predicting something that someone else already predicted either. I’m just going on some simple, direct statements from a person who has shown for years that he’s exceedingly honest and often provides hints of things he knows are coming months in advance. He has also accomplished — several times — things that experts said were “impossible.” The task at hand here is not at all impossible.

That said, the stock market is acting as though Tesla CEO Elon Musk is either an idiot or a liar. In the age of a reality TV president, I guess this is par for the course, but it is shocking me yet again. If you’re just skimming the headlines and major media commentary about Tesla this week, you may well think Musk’s plan to take Tesla private is a dishonest, impractical, highly unlikely scheme. Perhaps you even think Musk is going to jail, just because the SEC is doing one of its basic jobs — very likely nothing more than some simple due diligence. Headline after headline makes it seem like a serious SEC investigation is growing and growing, but then I look into the details and nothing notable has changed. From what I have read, they are checking with Musk to make sure he does indeed have financing secured (as he tweeted) to take Tesla private. Given that he followed that up with the statement that all that was really a question mark at this point was whether shareholders voted for the plan — that doesn’t sound like someone I know to be honest fudging the facts.

So, no, I’m not concerned that Musk was serious. My first assumption isn’t that Musk was manipulating the market and has no one lined up to finance taking Tesla private. I don’t beat animals, dead or alive, but to further emphasize a point that I think doesn’t need to be emphasized: Musk has said for years that Tesla would probably be better as a private company, and he reportedly tried to convince Japan’s SoftBank last year about helping to make this happen. In other words, the man has been working on this for a while. This is not a joke. The chance that he did indeed get enough of a financial commitment to bring this proposal to the Tesla board of directors and the public is close to 100%, in my humble opinion. If you absolutely think that’s not true, you may as well skip the rest of this article.

I’ll get to Tesla short sellers in a moment, but first, let’s have a look at who owns Tesla. Thanks to some research and calculation work from Maarten Vinkhuyzen, this is how Tesla ownership breaks down (known, non-institutional shareholders are in red):

Owner                                           Date                        Shares                Value               Size

Elon Musk                                                                        06/13/2018                     33,737,921      $11,890,930,256       19.87%

PRICE T ROWE ASSOCIATES INC /MD/                                03/31/2018                    15,625,798        $5,507,312,505          9.20%

FMR LLC                                                                        03/31/2018                   14,214,496         $5,009,899,115         8.37%

BAILLIE GIFFORD & CO                                                06/30/2018                   13,171,801        $4,642,401,262          7.76%

TENCENT                                                                                              8,489,684       $2,992,189,214        5.00%

VANGUARD GROUP INC                                               03/31/2018                      7,123,666        $2,510,736,082         4.20%

BLACKROCK INC.                                                       06/30/2018                      6,459,236        $2,276,557,728         3.80%

CAPITAL WORLD INVESTORS                                       03/31/2018                     4,449,216         $ 1,568,126,179         2.62%

JENNISON ASSOCIATES LLC                                       06/30/2018                     4,332,187         $ 1,526,879,308         2.55%

SAUDI ARABIA Wealth Fund                                                                  3,395,874         $ 1,196,875,686         2.00%

BANK OF MONTREAL /CAN/                                               06/30/2018                      3,308,742         $ 1,166,166,118        1.95%

STATE STREET CORP                                                       03/31/2018                     2,488,466         $ 877,059,842        1.47%

BAMCO INC /NY/                                                       03/31/2018                     1,657,488         $ 584,181,646        0.98%

INVESCO LTD.                                                               03/31/2018                    1,427,089          $ 502,977,518            0.84%

MORGAN STANLEY                                                       03/31/2018                   1,395,354             $ 491,792,517        0.82%

SUSQUEHANNA INTERNATIONAL GROUP, LLP               03/31/2018                   1,278,592               $ 450,639,750        0.75%

PRIMECAP MANAGEMENT CO/CA/                               03/31/2018                   1,097,040               $ 386,651,748        0.65%

GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC                                       03/31/2018                   1,055,539               $ 372,024,721        0.62%

GEODE CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LLC                               03/31/2018                   1,032,506               $ 363,906,740        0.61%

BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORP                               06/30/2018                     937,605               $ 330,458,882            0.55%

DEUTSCHE BANK AG\                                                       03/31/2018                     881,309               $ 310,617,357            0.52%

NORTHERN TRUST CORP                                               03/31/2018                     835,851               $ 294,595,685            0.49%

ALLIANZ ASSET MANAGEMENT GMBH                               03/31/2018                     799,486               $ 281,778,841            0.47%

NORGES BANK                                                               12/31/2017                     788,319               $ 277,843,032            0.46%

J&P(CHINA)CAPITAL MANAGEMENT CO.,LTD                       09/30/2017                     781,379               $ 275,397,029            0.46%

JPMORGAN CHASE & CO                                               03/31/2018                     769,800               $ 271,316,010            0.45%

MITSUBISHI UFJ TRUST & BANKING CORP                       03/31/2018                     708,321               $ 249,647,736            0.42%

AMERICAN CENTURY COMPANIES INC                               06/30/2018                     619,585               $ 218,372,733            0.36%

BARCLAYS PLC                                                               03/31/2018                    576,101               $ 203,046,797            0.34%

SUMITOMO MITSUI ASSET MANAGEMENT COMPANY, LTD  06/30/2018                    540,971                $ 190,665,229           0.32%

CREDIT SUISS AG/                                                      03/31/2018                    520,227               $ 183,354,006            0.31%   

LEGAL GENERAL GROU PLC                                              03/31/2018                    516,632               $ 182,086,948            0.30%

ILDER G GNON HOWE & C   LLC                                      06/30/2018                    514,365               $ 181,287,944            0.30%

Now, let me be clear — there’s very little info out there about how these institutional investors view the offer. Even for large shareholders, like Baillie Gifford, that think Tesla is worth far more than $420, it’s unclear if they have limitations that would prevent them from carrying over a large portion of their shares in a private Tesla. Furthermore, some may simply prefer the public accountability and stock market pricing system — even if that means a lot of FUD bringing the brand down.

As it goes, experts in the field who I respect seem to be throwing their hands up and just guesstimating that 50% of those institutional shares would transfer over to private shares. If you add that onto Elon Musk’s 20%, Tencent’s 5%, and the Saudi Arabia Wealth Fund’s 2%, you’re at about 54% of the shares. If you cautiously (I’d say pessimistically) consider that half of the remaining retail investors are interested in going private, that’s 64%.

Now, this is not an evaluation of whether shareholders will vote for Tesla to go private. Again, perhaps many of those institutional investors would rather Tesla stay public. However, if you assume that the shareholders do vote to go private, there’s another very interesting matter to consider here. Actually, this is a matter that could be highly relevant even before the vote.

As it stands, there is an enormous short position on Tesla. Approximately 35 million Tesla shares are “loaned” out to shorts/short sellers. Basically, shorts have “borrowed” the stock from a shareholder and then loaned it out to someone else, with a commitment to buy it back at some undetermined point in the future in order to give it back to its rightful owner. (See our extensive articles on short selling and Tesla shorts on the bottom of this article for more info on this topic.)

A “short squeeze” is sort of, kind of like a “run on the bank” (which you’ve probably learned about from It’s a Wonderful Life). Basically, if a company you’re shorting has strongly positive news, it would be smart of you to immediately buy back the share you borrowed and lent out. The stock price is likely to jump up, and if you wait too long, you’re going to have to buy that share back for much more than you lent it out.

The Tesla [TSLA] stock price jumped up rapidly earlier this week when there was news of the Saudi Arabia wealth fund investment and then more so when Musk tweeted about potentially taking Tesla private at $420/share. But a couple of interesting things happened. First, trading was halted for a couple of hours. This is standard in the situation we were in, but the point is that it gave everyone some time to think about the news and decide what to do. The much more interesting thing is that by and large short sellers by and large didn’t cover — they didn’t start buying back shares they loaned out.

This gets us back to the top of this article. Short sellers 😈 👹 didn’t buy the news. They seemingly didn’t believe that Musk would take Tesla private and that he had financing lined up (they’ve been claiming he lied about that). Some others seemed to think $420 was a ceiling for their losses anyway, but that theory doesn’t appear to be grounded in reality from what I’ve read. We’ll get to that in a second.

Some longs have added onto their holdings as well. (Full disclosure: With my meager opportunity for this, I was one of them.) However, many longs also seem skeptical that the deal is going through. They want more evidence before buying in at $350–370. Given that there have likely been hundreds of mainstream media articles and TV talking heads scaring people about a potential SEC violation and ruminating on the slim possibility (which they consider not so slim) that Elon Musk lied about securing financing and there’s no way that Tesla is going private, I can’t say I’m all that surprised. (Even normally pro-Tesla tech sites like ArsTechnica — an early inspiration for CleanTechnica — have been spreading the fear, uncertainty, and doubt.)

So, now we get to predictions. Here’s the thing I think is going to happen (but am not providing as investment advice!):

I, like Gene Munster, think that shareholders will vote to take Tesla private (or delist it if that’s what we’re actually talking about). Since some major shareholders think Tesla is worth far more than $420/share and since this will be the last chance for many people to buy into Tesla — for a long time at least (since it is going to be much, much harder to buy shares in private Tesla than in public Tesla) — I think the share price will jump. People who don’t plan to hold onto the stock would hold at least until $420 since Tesla would cash out their shares at that price.

Meanwhile, short sellers will finally get the message: Yes, Tesla is going off the market, and they need to buy back the shares they loaned out in order to return them to their rightful owners. Furthermore, they should finally understand that $420 is not a cap on the buyback price for them. If the stock price jumps to $1000 because people value private shares in Tesla that high, then they still need to buy back the shares they don’t really own in order to return them to owners. ;D

Furthermore, if the price gets up that high, the privatization deal may get dropped or have to be revised. $420 is not a ceiling. In fact, it’s more of a floor for short sellers if the deal moves forward. ;D

So, we are back to the point that approximately 35 million TSLA shares are shorted right now. If there’s a sprint for the door, those short sellers will be fighting to buy shares back — and shareholders can wait as long as they like to sell them back.    If they think the share price will go up to $500, they can wait till then. Furthermore, if they value the private shares at $2000 each, they may have no interest in playing games and selling to shorts until the price is $2001. Institutional investors surely understand this. Many of the retail investors understand this. Who the heck is going to sell a short a share for $420? You must be high to think that’s going to happen in a large volume.

The most epic short squeeze in history seems to be a Volkswagen short squeeze that happened in 2008. The short interest in the stock before this happened was approximately 13%. The short squeeze resulted in the stock price increasing multiple times over at its peak (see that link above for details). Approximately 20% of Tesla shares are shorted right now. 👀   

Perhaps the shorts with billions and billions on the line don’t want to believe the possibility of a short squeeze. Perhaps they are so obsessed with the idea that Elon Musk is a liar and a fraud that they can’t believe the simple tweets he sent earlier this week represent exactly what they say. If they are wrong, holy hell in a hot air ballon — this is going to be the most epic short squeeze in history. 🧐



I watched that video after writing this article. Even if you read the full piece above, I recommend watching it. A tip of the hat to JRP3 for sharing it.

Update: This article was updated shortly after publishing to fix a couple of errors.

Related stories:

Our Tesla Bankwuptcy archives 👍👍👍

The Tesla Short Thesis Just Collapsed — CNN, CNBC, Forbes, & Business Insider Are Still Lost In Shortsville
Tesla Model 3 — 7th/8th Best Selling Car In USA — In A Class Of Its Own
Tesla Executes
How I Learned To Stop Worrying About My Tesla Shares & Love The Short Sellers (Part 1)
How I Learned To Stop Worrying About My Tesla Shares & Love The Short Sellers (Part 2)
The Fascinating Tesla Short Story
Stormy Weather In Shortville Will Soon Look Like A Day On The Beach — Epic TSLA Tsunami Coming
Coming Tesla Short Squeeze? Will Stock Go “Supernova” In 3 Weeks? Elon Implies It Will
A Sinister Cellar Of The TSLA Short Story?
Jim Chanos’s Anti-Tesla Short Seller Arguments Debunked (Video)
Is The Possibility Of Perception Perversion The Real Reason Jim Chanos Is Short Tesla?
Elon Musk vs TSLA Shorts Is Personal, Not Business
Tesla [TSLA] Short Sellers Have Lost $1 Billion In 2018


Full disclosure: I am long TSLA. Because, duh.  😀
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: August 11, 2018, 01:26:56 pm »


Quote
Proverbs 1 KJV

31 Therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices.

32 For the turning away of the simple shall slay them, and the prosperity of fools shall destroy them.


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: August 08, 2018, 10:08:51 pm »


Truthdig

AUG 05, 2018

5 Key Financial Misadventures of the Trump 🦀 Era (So Far)

By  Nomi Prins / TomDispatch

Here we are in the middle of the second year of Donald Trump’s presidency and if there’s one thing we know by now, it’s that the leader of the free world can create an instant reality-TV show on geopolitical steroids at will. True, he’s not polished in his demeanor, but he has an unerring way of instilling the most uncertainty in any situation in the least amount of time.

Whether through executive orders, tweets, cable-news interviews, or rallies, he regularly leaves diplomacy in the dust, while allegedly delivering for a faithful base of supporters who voted for him as the ultimate anti-diplomat. And while he’s at it, he continues to take a wrecking ball to the countless political institutions that litter the Acela Corridor. Amid all the tweeted sound and fury, however, the rest of us are going to have to face the consequences of Donald Trump getting his hands on the economy.

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, entropy is “a process of degradation or running down or a trend to disorder.” With that in mind, perhaps the best way to predict President Trump’s next action is just to focus on the path of greatest entropy and take it from there.

Let me do just that, while exploring five key economic sallies of the Trump White House since he took office and the bleakness and chaos that may lie ahead as the damage to the economy and our financial future comes into greater focus.

Full article:

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/five-financial-uncertainties-of-2018-so-far/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: August 03, 2018, 02:00:55 pm »

Agelbert NOTE: Mike Mish Shedlock is correct that Trump is dead wrong to start a trade war. That said, the hit that US LNG exporters 🦕🦖 (Cheniere, Tellurian Inc. and other LNG developers) are taking by China jacking up tariffs on LNG is a good thing overall.    WHY? ??? Because it makes Renewable Energy products (which have ALWAYS been distributed, local and non-exportable for profit over people and planet) become much cheaper in comparison with polluting hydrocarbon energy products;D 

China Fires Back with Tariffs on LNG, Wheat, Whine: US LNG Exporters Dive

August 3, 2018

SNIPPET:

Quote
Mike Mish Shedlock: Some of my readers praise Trump for these actions on the basis he needs to "fight fire with fire". Such thoughts are complete silliness.

As I have stated dozens of times, if China is supplying the US with cheap steal, cheap solar panels, cheap whatever, we should be grateful.

Once again, this is indisputable: Standards of living rise when more goods are available at a cheaper price.

Full article:

https://moneymaven.io/mishtalk/economics/china-fires-back-with-tariffs-on-lng-wheat-whine-us-lng-exporters-dive-yCMCEUCnlE2OjE2JwBsTQA/

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: August 02, 2018, 04:43:44 pm »

 


Quote


Sliced into ribbons Thu, 08/02/2018 - 14:28 Permalink

America is going to be Trump's 5th bankruptcy.

 👍 37  🕵️
 👎 18  🙉 🙊

Yep.


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: August 02, 2018, 02:37:58 pm »



CMA CGM’s 22,000 TEU Ships to Feature ‘Bulbless’ Bow Made for Slow-Steaming

August 1, 2018 by The Loadstar

By Mike Wackett (The Loadstar) – A steel cutting ceremony took place in China last week on the hulls of the first two ships of CMA CGM’s order for nine 22,500 teu LNG-powered ULCVs, featuring a potentially game-changing bow design.

Alongside similar ULCVs being constructed for MSC in South Korea, these behemoths will be the largest containerships afloat, and the first to extend to 24 containers 👀 across the weather deck.



The French carrier’s new flagships will also be the first constructed with a “bulbless” bow, as the container line commits its future to slow-steaming.

An elegant protruding bulb shape at the bow has been a feature of containerships for decades, but the new tugboat-like design could become the new normal on liner trades where lower unit costs have won out over fast transit times.

The bulbous bow works by creating an artificial wave, modifying the water flow around the hull, which reduces drag and increases speed and fuel efficiency. Studies have put the fuel efficiency gain at up to 15% at near full speed.

However, consultant Alphaliner notes, the advantages of a bulbous bow containership – more complex and therefore more expensive – have waned with the advent of slow-steaming in the past decade, causing the fuel efficiency percentage gain to drop significantly.

Moreover, vessels that sail at less than full draught – with backloads of empty containers, for example – also see the advantages of a bulbous bow eroded.

This has prompted the retrofitting of replacement bows, designed specifically to be more efficient at slower speeds, to a number of container vessels over the past few years.

Alphaliner also notes that, at the time of CMA CGM’s $1.2bn order in September, the images released of the ULCVs were of a conventional bulbous bow design. New images, provided at Hudong Zhonghua Shipyard cutting ceremony, show a vertical stem design.

Notwithstanding the unit cost advantage of deploying LNG-powered vessels, CMA CGM is clearly seeking every opportunity to ensure its new ships will be the most cost-efficient in the industry.

Since September, the price of IFO 380 heavy fuel oil has risen from some $320 per tonne to $440, and with predictions of further spikes to come, the rise in the cost of bunkers is currently the biggest risk to sustained profitability in the industry. German rating agency Scope said this week it expects a rise of about 25% in bunker prices this year, compared with 2017, “squeezing the thin profit margins” of carriers.

“Increased crude oil and bunker prices and flat shipping rates will continue to put severe pressure on the operating profitability of older, less-efficient vessels,” said the Scope report.

Moreover, with the IMO’s 0.5% sulphur cap regulations coming into force on 1 January 2020, ocean carriers must endeavour to future-proof their fleets from the impact of a further potential 50% jump in fuel costs.

The Loadstar is fast becoming known at the highest levels of logistics and supply chain management as one of the best sources of influential analysis and commentary.

http://gcaptain.com/cma-cgms-22000-teu-ships-to-feature-bulbless-bow-made-for-slow-steaming/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: August 01, 2018, 12:52:33 pm »

US Manufacturing PMI Slumps To Weakest In 2018 As Prices Surge, Orders Tumble

by Tyler Durden

Wed, 08/01/2018 - 10:07

After China's Manufacturing PMI tumbled to 8mo lows overnight (joining Japan in its demise to 13mo lows), US Manufacturing PMI for July has not been weaker since Dec 2017.



Markit's Manufacturing PMI signals stagflation with output prices at their highest since June 2011, production slide, and supplier delivery times fall to a record low.

And after decoupling from reality in the last two months, ISM Manufacturing tumbled back to 'hard data' at 58.1 (dramatically below expectations)...


ISM's survey suggests prices paid and new orders dropped in July...


ISM New Orders at their weakest since May 2017...


All ISM respondents can talk about is tariffs...

“Global demand is still strong . Working on contingency plans for the Chinese tariffs. We will probably onshore most of that material. Labor availability is becoming an issue.” (Computer & Electronic Products)

“As a result of new tariffs on materials to/from China, we are taking measures to move impacted materials ahead of effective dates, which in some cases is resulting in holding higher inventories.” (Chemical Products)

“Reviewing the business case for importing manufactured parts from China, as new tariffs will lead to increased costs that we will pass along to our domestic customers.” (Transportation Equipment)

“The steel tariffs are a concern to us. We have already seen steel prices increase due to the threat of the tariffs and are seeing kickback from our customers due to the higher prices. We are concerned that the end customer will go to off shore to purchase the finished product.” (Fabricated Metal Products)

“Tariffs are [resulting in] customs inspection-time increases on imported raw materials from China. Logistics seems to be improving, but we are seeing a [continuing] tight chemical bulk tanker market.” (Plastics & Rubber Products) 

"Our customer demand is high, but supply of aluminum is tight. Also, tariffs are negatively affecting our bottom line, as we are unable to pass increases to all of our customers. Plus, we are seeing increases in our construction costs because of the steel price increases. Labor market is extremely tight for professional personnel, plant technicians and support associates.” (Primary Metals) 

"The so-called trade war is now taking its toll on business activity, resulting in substantial reductions to new export orders. China has all but stopped taking orders, causing inventories to build up in the U.S. Domestic business is steady. However, it is too small to carry the load that export markets have retreated from. As a result, we will be meeting as a corporation next week to recast our second-half sales and revenue projections.” (Wood Products)

Chris Williamson, Chief Business Economist at IHS Markit said:

“The US manufacturing sector continued to expand in July , but shows increasing signs of struggling against headwinds of supply shortages, rising prices and deteriorating exports.


"The latest survey showed output rising at a rate roughly equivalent to an annualised 1% pace of expansion, which is the weakest since late last year. While a weakening of new export orders for a second successive month suggested foreign demand has waned compared to earlier in the year, the slowdown can be also in part attributed to increased difficulties in sourcing sufficient quantities of inputs. Suppliers’ delivery delays were more widespread than at any time in the survey’s history. With producers often scrambling to buy enough raw materials, suppliers enjoyed greater pricing power. Not surprisingly, with tariffs also kicking in, cost pressures spiked higher again.


"Some relief for manufacturers came from strong domestic demand, which meant firms were increasingly able to pass higher costs on to customers. Average prices charged for goods consequently rose at the steepest rate for seven years, which is likely to feed through to higher consumer prices in coming months."

Does that sound like a sustainable 4% economy? 

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-01/us-manufacturing-pmi-slumps-weakest-2018-prices-surge-orders-tumble


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 29, 2018, 06:19:53 pm »


Global Capitalism : Immigration & Trade War [July 2018]

51,517 views


Democracy At Work

Published on Jul 11, 2018

Immigration and Trade War: The Economics of Desperation
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 24, 2018, 12:46:58 pm »







Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 16, 2018, 07:52:53 pm »

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 16, 2018, 06:06:47 pm »

Warning: The Everything Bubble is in SERIOUS Trouble

by Phoenix Capital Research

Mon, 07/16/2018 - 08:56

As we noted on Friday, the official inflation metric in the US, called the Consumer Price Index (or CPI) is designed to HIDE inflation, not measure it.

Case in point, over the last two months, the CPI has relied on the collapse in prices of various non-essential items (airline tickets, hotel rooms, etc.) to “cover up” the increase in energy, housing, and the other items we all need.

And yet, even despite this “massaging” of the data, the CPI has hit 2.9%.

Put another way, inflation is running so hot right now that even with various gimmicks in place, the CPI is STILL closing in on 3%.

Why is this a big deal? ???

Because TREASURY bond yields trade based on inflation. If inflation is soaring higher, bond yields will also rise to accommodate this.

If bond yields RISE, bond prices DROP.

And if bond prices DROP enough, the Debt Bubble bursts.

With that in mind, consider that yields on Treasuries have broken their long-term 20-year trendline.

This is a MAJOR problem. The entire debt bubble requires interest rates to remain LOW in order for it to be maintained.

Inflation is screwing this up for the Fed... which now faces a NASTY choice… continue to support stocks or defend bonds… and unfortunately for stock investors, it’s going to have to choose bonds.

Put another way, I believe there is a significant chance the Fed will let the stock market collapse in order to drive capital BACK into the bond market to force bond yields down.

Yes, the Fed has screwed up with monetary policy. And it is doing so intentionally to try to sustain the Debt Bubble. Currently the downside target for the collapse is in the 2,300-2,450 range.

The time to prepare for this is NOW before the carnage hits.

On that note, we are already preparing our clients with a 21-page investment report that shows them FOUR investment strategies that will protect their capital when and if a stock market crash hits.

It's called The Stock Market Crash Survival Guide...and it is available exclusivelyto our clients.

To pick up one of the 100 copies...use the link below.

https://www.phoenixcapitalmarketing.com/stockmarketcrash.html

Best Regards

Graham Summers

Chief Market Strategist

Phoenix Capital Research


https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-07-16/warning-everything-bubble-serious-trouble
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 12, 2018, 08:42:26 pm »

Agelbert NOTE: This is more evidence that world economy is in a boost phase. There will be NO collapse from lack of hydrocarbons. The collapse of human civilization will be ushered in by Catastrophic Climate Change. Anyone that tells you that "peak oil" will cause a collapse is either a fool or wants to bullshit you into paying more for the hydrocarbon poisons destroying our biosphere.

We need hydrocarbons like a dog needs ticks.

Extreme Engineering Panama Canal - Megastructures (2018 Documentary)

366,143 views


Mega Construction Projects

Published on May 11, 2018

The Panama Canal is an artificial 77 km (48 mi) waterway in Panama that connects the Atlantic Ocean with the Pacific Ocean. The canal cuts across the Isthmus of Panama and is a conduit for maritime trade. Canal locks are at each end to lift ships up to Gatun Lake an artificial lake created to reduce the amount of excavation work required for the canal 26 m (85 ft) above sea level and then lower the ships at the other end. The original locks are 34 m (110 ft) wide. A third wider lane of locks was constructed between September 2007 and May 2016. The expanded canal began commercial operation on June 26 2016. The new locks allow transit of larger post-Panamax ships capable of handling more cargo.

Daily ships the size of a city block transport goods through the Panama Canal to make the 50-mile shortcut between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Officials have asked a team of European and American engineers to compete for a winning lock design.

Engineering projects around the globe keep getting bigger and more ambitious.  there are structures being designed and built that will dwarf anything that has come before.

Plans are on the drawing board for projects so huge – not only in scale but in their implications for society – they’re almost beyond imagination. This documentary  that eyes the largest construction projects ever imagined – 'Extreme Engineering'.






 
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 11, 2018, 09:06:21 pm »



Hundreds of Norway’s Offshore Workers Go On Strike

July 10, 2018 by Reuters

SNIPPET:

Teekay’s Petrojarl Knarr FPSO at the Knarr field in the Norwegian North Sea. File Photo: BG Group

By Gwladys Fouche and Lefteris Karagiannopoulos OSLO, July 10 (Reuters) – Hundreds of workers on Norwegian offshore oil and gas rigs went on strike on Tuesday after rejecting a proposed wage deal, leading to the shutdown of one Shell-operated field and helping send Brent crude prices higher.

One union said hundreds more workers would join the strike on Sunday if an agreement over union demands for a wage increase and pension rights was not reached.

Royal Dutch Shell said that due to the strike it was temporarily closing production at its Knarr field, which has a daily output of 23,900 barrels of mostly oil, but also natural gas liquids and natural gas.

Shutting the field, whose owners are Idemitsu, Wintershall and DEA, could take up to 36 hours, it said.

Norway is Western Europe’s biggest oil producer. The disruption added to a rise in global oil supply outages and helped push Brent crude up 1.2 percent to $79.03 per barrel.

The output of Norway’s biggest oil producer Equinor , formerly known as Statoil, was not affected so far, the company said, even though it was shutting drilling operations at its Snorre B platform.

Shortly after a midnight deadline passed, a state-appointed mediator said talks between two trade unions, Safe and YS, and the Shipowners’ Association, representing the rig employers, had failed to reach a deal.

“The parties were so far apart from each other there was no point presenting a proposal that could be recommended to both sides,” mediator Carl Petter Martinsen said in a statement.

WAGES, PENSION RIGHTS

Full article:

http://gcaptain.com/hundreds-norway-offshore-workers-go-on-strike/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 11, 2018, 12:49:45 pm »


Can the United States Survive a Bear Market?     

Posted on July 10, 2018 by Fantasy Free Economics

If the stock market falls, it will take the rest of the economy with it.


Without rising asset prices, there would be no economic recovery. The model used for causing economic activity is the “If we build it they will come.” model. The idea is that if the wealthiest of the world’s citizen are enriched when the value of all they own rises independently of earnings and everything else, the recovery will extend all the way to the bottom of the food chain. Does the logic of this sound solid? If it does, I will remind you that the logic behind a chain letter sounds appealing. If you only give the idea a superficial look a chain letter sounds great.  Lets not be too hard on chain letters. Profits have been made, by those who initiate chain letters. Profits are being made by the originators of the “build it and they will come,” economic model.

Economic models are interesting animals. An economist can develop one based on any kind of logic. The model is never tested empirically. The whole population jumps on it as if it was manna sent from heaven. If engineers build a plane that has never been on a test flight, would the airlines buy it and put passengers on it? Probably they would pass on the opportunity. The pretense of knowledge pays more than does actual knowledge.

Where does government economic policy come from? It is mandated in the Full Employment Act of 1878. O.K., but how is the plan of intervention decided upon? Any economic intervention is going to be based on the needs of the world’s most politically powerful citizens. Who might that be in todays world? Those are the folks who already have most of the worlds wealth and resources. Does it not make sense, that our plan for economic prosperity would be the one which would enrich them the most?

Build it and they will come? Did they come? No they have not. So, all of the worlds resources are now focused on preventing any type of bear market in stocks. A bear market will take the economy with it because their is no genuine economic growth caused by anything other than high asset prices.

http://quillian.net/blog/can-the-united-states-survive-a-bear-market/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 11, 2018, 12:14:58 pm »

Trump's 🦀 Bite 🦍 May Be Worse Than His Bark: Stockman Slams "Absurd, Dangerous, Stupid" Policies

Wed, 07/11/2018 - 10:45

Via Global Macro Monitor,

Excellent CNBC interview with David Stockman, President Reagan’s head of OMB, who speaks his mind and never holds back.    Some dismiss him as a perma-bear and doomsayer.

We certainly don’t, just has been a bit early, like every analyst and economist worth their salt.   His analysis and model are sound.

By the way, if you ever meet someone who claims they always top tick or buy every bottom,  and have perfect timing, run as fast as you can.

Moreover, the former “beltway boy wonder” doesn’t have to make his money trading and can maintain his conviction without going bankrupt or losing his career.   He will eventually be right.   It’s all timing, my friends.

Listening to him today, we respect him even more for his intellectual honesty.   We have always perceived Mr. Stockman as a supporter of the president, but we could be wrong.

He never allows his politics to warp his analysis.  Rare and refreshing.

Taken To Woodshed

He was famously “taken to the woodshed” by President Reagan for his statements in a 1981 Atlantic Monthly article, that
Quote
“supply-side economics — the backbone of the Reagan economic revolution 😈 👹 – was a ‘Trojan horse’ 🐎 that would ultimately benefit  💵 🎩 🍌 the rich.

He laid it all out there today and held nothing back.  


Massive trade war won't solve deficits, says former Reagan WH budget director from CNBC.

Money quotes from today’s interview *

Imbalances are not the result of bad trade deals

We have had 43 straight years of large and growing current account deficits, that is a monetary issue

A trade war is not going to solve it…let interest rates find their right level

The fact is, we are heading into a massive trade war in the world

Trump doesn’t know what he’s doing at all. He is making it up. He is a hopeless protectionist with a 17th-century view of the world

We have an absurd policy — dangerous, stupid. The worst that I’ve seen since my whole career started in 1970 under [President Richard] Nixon, and he did some crazy things

The market marches to new highs until it doesn’t

In 1990…the average tariff in China was about 30 percent, the average tariff in China today is 3 ½ percent. It is not an issue

What they [Trump administration] are objecting to is China’s policy of “no ticky, no washy.” In other words, if you want to come to China and do business, you have to be in a joint venture and share your technology

If somebody wants to go to China so they can come on CNBC and brag they are in a growth market then they ought to put up with the local regulations

Don’t start a trade war and throw the soybean farmer under the bus because of some big business lobby in Washington is whining about China’s terms of business

*the interview was concluded before the announcement of a 10 percent on an additional $200 billion of Chinese imports was published by the USTR after the market close. 


Tough words.

No Reagan Moment On Free Trade

Sorry,  Mohamed,  we love you but there will be no “Reagan Moment” for International Trade.  We hope we are wrong, and we could be, but we don’t think so.       

Trump is no Reagan, the ultimate free-trader.   Larry Kudlow and Stephen Moore now talking tariffs?    This is not an administration looking to further trade, in our opinion, but one only to protect and coddle its political base.

Trump’s triggers his base with words such as “free trade,” among others,  and blames much of their problems on the “bad trade deals” of previous administrations.   It works for him.  Why fix it?

But those who, like me, thought Trump’s bark would be worse than his bite on trade are having second thoughts about where all of this might lead.  – Dani Rodrik

President Xi Won’t Back Down

Moreover,  how in the world can President Xi, after consolidating power for life as the country’s ultimate strongman now back down and look weak to the Chinese people?   China has secured the high ground of multilateralism.  Even if it’s bullshit or not.   Furthermore,  the U.S. appears to be growing exponentially more isolated.

Nonlinear Dynamics

As we posted on Friday,  we are now in a nonlinear trajectory.  Things can unravel fast, or be put right quickly.   Maybe the Senate?   Nobody knows where this will end up.

We have all learned over the past 18 months that the president is capable of doing a 180,even in mid-sentence, and convince himself he held the position all along.  That unpredictability makes it a risky trade.


Markets In The Land Of Pharaoh



It does feel the markets are in Egypt, however.  The land of de Nile.

The post-war international order is more at risk of unraveling – and we are not saying its demise is imminent – than is currently priced.

Stay tuned.

*  https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-07-11/trumps-bite-may-be-worse-his-bark-stockman-slams-absurd-dangerous-stupid-policies

Agelbert NOTE: Stockman interview video at article link.
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 01, 2018, 05:45:49 pm »

Economic Update: Contradictions Coming Home

July 1, 2018

Updates on the exploding suicide rate in the US, irrational home-building reflects and worsens inequality, VA nurses sue because of overwork required but not paid for, Uihlein family gives extreme right wing candidates (including Roy Moore), mocking claims that this is a one-person-one-vote democracy, Interview with Eli Campbell on the exploding student debt issue and the campaign to boycott its repayment

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 29, 2018, 04:34:18 pm »


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 29, 2018, 01:58:02 pm »

🦖🦀🐉 versus 🦕🦍

Fossil Fuelers BATTLE for world hydrocarbon profits in BOOMING world economy 💵 🎩 🏴‍☠️


Trump 🦖🦀🐉 Firmly In the Twilight Zone: Threatens Nord Stream 2🦕🦍 With Sanctions


June 29, 2017

by Mike Mish Shedlock

Trump's 🦀 vise on the EU started with steel, progressed to cars, then to Iran, and now to a gas pipeline vital to the EU.

The story of the day, not discussed in mainstream media, involves Nord Stream 2, a gas pipeline between Russia and the EU. The feature image is from Gazprom🦕🦍.

Gazprom says "The new pipeline, similar to the one in operation, will establish a direct link between Gazprom and the European consumers. It will also ensure a highly reliable supply of Russian gas to Europe."

Some suggest the EU is unwise to depend on Russia. That is nonsense. Why?

Free trade stops wars!

Regardless, it is the EU's decision to make, not Trump's 🦀, and the deal is already underway.

Gazprom, Partners Invest €4.8 Billion Nord Stream 2 Construction

TASS, the Russian news agency reports Gazprom, Partners Invest €4.8 Billion Nord Stream 2 Construction.

Believe that? Why not? There is no dispute from the EU.

My point is the investment.

Russia’s gas producer Gazprom 🦕 and its Nord Stream 2 partners 🦍 💵 🎩 have invested a total of 4.8 bln euro in the project on natural gas pipeline construction as of the end of June, Chief Financial Officer of Nord Stream 2 AG, the operator of the pipeline construction, Paul Corcoran told journalists on Thursday.

Quote
"We have received 96% of the pipes, we have concrete coated 55% of those pipes and we mobilized vessels for the pipelines. So we are quite well prepared on track and on time for the project," CFO added.

The Nord Stream 2 pipeline is expected to come into service at the end of 2019.

Stop It All Says Trump🦀🦖🐉

Eurointelligence reports Trump 🦀now gunning for Nord Stream 2

As if the tariffs on steel and aluminium - and soon cars - were not enough, the US administration🦀🦖🐉  is now preparing sanctions against five European companies involved in the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project. Those sanctions previously had the status of a rumour. But FAZ reports this morning that it received confirmation from a senior US official, at the World Gas Conference in Washington, that the administration is formally considering an application to impose such sanctions. There are two German companies involved, Wintershall und Uniper, as well as OMV from Austria, Engie from France and Royal Dutch Shell. Together they fund 50% of the project. Gazprom funds the other 50%.

FAZ notes that Uniper, one of the German companies, would be particularly hard-hit. The company is a big player in the US coal trade. The company's CEO is quoted as saying that he continues to believe in the necessity of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline to secure gas supplies for the EU. It remains to be seen whether the companies will back off from the project once the sanctions are actually imposed.

Twilight Zone

Trump's 🦀 Iran sanctions are absurd. His Nord Stream 2 demands are so far beyond absurd as to be in the Twilight Zone.

Does Trump 🦀 have a yes or no vote on any and every trade agreement in the world?

It appears so.

The EU and all the countries that border the pipeline agreed to this deal. They invested heavily in it. Construction is underway.

What's Next?

This is so damn absurd, it's logical to conclude there is no way the EU will back down.


However, logic and reality can be quite different things. Trump 🦀 is proof enough.

Either way, the problem is "what's next?"

History suggests that when trade stops, war soon follows.

https://www.themaven.net/mishtalk/economics/trump-firmly-in-the-twilight-zone-threatens-nord-stream-2-with-sanctions-8couEtZfM0SUSGhhgQhJTQ/

Agelbert LAMENT: The BOOMING global economy is too busy making money from the sale of hydrocarbons to CARE about increasingly deadly Global Warming.  :(

The Expanded Panama Canal Just Turned Two: Here Are Some Facts, Figures and Highlights the First Few Years of Operation


June 27, 2018 by gCaptain

Photo: Panama Canal Authority

The Panama Canal on Tuesday marked the two-year anniversary of the inauguration of Expanded Panama Canal, the largest enhancement project in the waterway’s 103-year history.

To date, the Canal has transited 3,745 Neopanamax vessels, exceeding the performance exceptions of Expanded Canal’s Neopanamax Locks.

“Two years ago, we pledged to usher in a new era for world commerce,” said Panama Canal Administrator Jorge L. Quijano. “Today, as we reflect upon our countless achievements and ever-expanding impact, we proudly reaffirm this commitment to the global maritime community.”

Over the past two years, the Panama Canal has recorded a number of notable milestones thanks to expansion project. In May, the canal set a new monthly tonnage record of 38.1 million tons (PC/UMS), the third such time the waterway has set a monthly tonnage record in the past two years.

May also saw the transit of the Panama Canal’s largest cruise ship to date, the Norwegian Bliss, at more than 168,000 gross tons and carrying nearly 5,000 passengers.

The transit of the largest capacity container vessel to-date, the CMA CGM Theodore Roosevelt, with a Total TEU Allowance (TTA) of 14,863.

The Panama Canal Authority, which is responsible for managing the canal, says increased experience with the Neopanamax Locks and continued investment into its operations have allowed the waterway to provide additional capacity, flexibility and efficiency to shippers.

Recent offerings include two additional reservation slots for the Neopanamax Locks, bringing the total number of slots from six (at the time of the inauguration) to eight.

Starting this month, the Panama Canal Authority also increased the maximum allowable beam for vessels transiting the Neopanamax Locks to accommodate larger vessels and greater tonnage.

While the container segment makes up the more than half of transits through the Expanded Panama Canal, the impact of the Neopanamax Locks has been seen across all segments.

Perhaps the greatest impact has been seen in LNG, an entirely new segment for the waterway, which has emerged as the waterway’s fastest growing. In just the past two years, the segment has seen a total of 358 LNG 🦖 transits through the Neopanamax locks.

Some other notable LNG highlights include the transit of three LNG vessels in one day in April 2018 as well as the transit of the “first of many” LNG cargoes from the Dominion Cove Point terminal in Maryland to Japan, taking place that same month.

Moving forward, the Canal’s LNG traffic is expected to grow by 50 percent by the end of FY 2018 compared to FY 2017, increasing from 163 to approximately 244 transits.

The Panama Canal is currently offering one of the eight Neopanamax reservation slots per day to LNG shippers, but the Canal Authority says it has transited to LNG vessels in one day on 14 separate occasions
.

The Expanded Canal is redrawing global trade routes, in the LNG industry and across segments, as shippers have more opportunity to take advantage of the economies of scale provided with the Neopanamax Locks,” said Deputy Administrator Manuel E. Benitez. “Thanks to the careful planning and strategic optimization of our operations, we’re confident the Expanded Canal will facilitate further growth in international trade and have a far-reaching impact in communities around the world.”

http://gcaptain.com/the-expanded-panama-canal-just-turned-two-here-are-some-facts-figures-and-highlights-from-its-first-few-years-in-operation/

Yeah, lots of growth will result in a far reaching IMPACT, 🔥🌪☠️ for sure (see "Natural" Gas BRIDGE FUEL to the FUTURE BELOW).




Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 28, 2018, 09:59:59 pm »

Agelbert LAMENT: The BOOMING global economy is too busy making money from the sale of hydrocarbons to CARE about increasingly deadly Global Warming.  :(

The Expanded Panama Canal Just Turned Two: Here Are Some Facts, Figures and Highlights the First Few Years of Operation


June 27, 2018 by gCaptain

Photo: Panama Canal Authority

The Panama Canal on Tuesday marked the two-year anniversary of the inauguration of Expanded Panama Canal, the largest enhancement project in the waterway’s 103-year history.

To date, the Canal has transited 3,745 Neopanamax vessels, exceeding the performance exceptions of Expanded Canal’s Neopanamax Locks.

“Two years ago, we pledged to usher in a new era for world commerce,” said Panama Canal Administrator Jorge L. Quijano. “Today, as we reflect upon our countless achievements and ever-expanding impact, we proudly reaffirm this commitment to the global maritime community.”

Over the past two years, the Panama Canal has recorded a number of notable milestones thanks to expansion project. In May, the canal set a new monthly tonnage record of 38.1 million tons (PC/UMS), the third such time the waterway has set a monthly tonnage record in the past two years.

May also saw the transit of the Panama Canal’s largest cruise ship to date, the Norwegian Bliss, at more than 168,000 gross tons and carrying nearly 5,000 passengers.

The transit of the largest capacity container vessel to-date, the CMA CGM Theodore Roosevelt, with a Total TEU Allowance (TTA) of 14,863.

The Panama Canal Authority, which is responsible for managing the canal, says increased experience with the Neopanamax Locks and continued investment into its operations have allowed the waterway to provide additional capacity, flexibility and efficiency to shippers.

Recent offerings include two additional reservation slots for the Neopanamax Locks, bringing the total number of slots from six (at the time of the inauguration) to eight.

Starting this month, the Panama Canal Authority also increased the maximum allowable beam for vessels transiting the Neopanamax Locks to accommodate larger vessels and greater tonnage.

While the container segment makes up the more than half of transits through the Expanded Panama Canal, the impact of the Neopanamax Locks has been seen across all segments.

Perhaps the greatest impact has been seen in LNG, an entirely new segment for the waterway, which has emerged as the waterway’s fastest growing. In just the past two years, the segment has seen a total of 358 LNG 🦖 transits through the Neopanamax locks.

Some other notable LNG highlights include the transit of three LNG vessels in one day in April 2018 as well as the transit of the “first of many” LNG cargoes from the Dominion Cove Point terminal in Maryland to Japan, taking place that same month.

Moving forward, the Canal’s LNG traffic is expected to grow by 50 percent by the end of FY 2018 compared to FY 2017, increasing from 163 to approximately 244 transits.

The Panama Canal is currently offering one of the eight Neopanamax reservation slots per day to LNG shippers, but the Canal Authority says it has transited to LNG vessels in one day on 14 separate occasions
.

The Expanded Canal is redrawing global trade routes, in the LNG industry and across segments, as shippers have more opportunity to take advantage of the economies of scale provided with the Neopanamax Locks,” said Deputy Administrator Manuel E. Benitez. “Thanks to the careful planning and strategic optimization of our operations, we’re confident the Expanded Canal will facilitate further growth in international trade and have a far-reaching impact in communities around the world.”

http://gcaptain.com/the-expanded-panama-canal-just-turned-two-here-are-some-facts-figures-and-highlights-from-its-first-few-years-in-operation/

Yeah, lots of growth will result in a far reaching IMPACT, 🔥🌪☠️ for sure (see "Natural" Gas BRIDGE FUEL to the FUTURE BELOW).




Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 25, 2018, 09:55:23 pm »

Trump's 🦀 tariffs may kill the e-bike revolution

Just when the market for e-bikes was exploding, it gets blown up.

But in North America, e-bikes are just getting started, and this tariff might just strangle the industry at birth. Which is probably the whole point.

Of course it is. Just as you nailed the point earlier in a different post on the pending stagflation, which I'm going to repost because it is the truest thing I've read all day:

Quote
Agelbert NOTE: Truth filled quote by bshirley1968:

I have said all along that the tariff meme was just a strategy to get prices to go up.

The Fed has been juicing the economy for 10 years and can't get the "inflation" they want.  In a debt ridden, fiat system, falling prices are called the dreaded "deflation" (good for consumers but bad for banksters) and will lead to a recession and eventually a depression.

Got to get prices up......no matter what.  I know, let's start a trade war that will increase prices on everyone and tell them we are "winning" by getting back at the mean ole Chinese for taking all our manufacturing jobs.  Sheeple will pay higher prices and tell everyone to quit bitching....."You are doing it for your country!"  Much like that POS that made the first post on this article.

Didn't you know?  It's patriotic to pay higher prices to keep banks solvent and your government in power.  If paying more is what it takes to make Trump look good, hell, that's easy!  Dumbasses!

Yup. It's gonna be one WILD RIDE. 💥

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 25, 2018, 01:56:01 pm »

"Somebody Needs Their Head Examined"  Dallas Fed 👹 💵 🎩
Survey Respondents Fume As Stagflation Looms

by Tyler Durden

Mon, 06/25/2018 - 10:59

The Dallas Fed survey of Texas manufacturing soared to 36.5 in June (from 26.8 ), back near its highest since 2004. The problem, however, is this spike is being driven by soaring prices as production slows - flashing a big red stagflationary alarm once again.

We have seen this stagflationary surge before - it led a recession in 2008 and prompted QE2 in 2011...


And perhaps just as worrisome for the micro-picture is the pressure on margins and prices paid soar more aggressively than prices received... for now...
 

Respondents are clear...

Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing

The price of steel raw materials is causing costs to increase.

Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing

Steel tariffs to NAFTA partners is a mistake. Higher steel prices could slow down strong projects and the manufacturing recovery which started in fourth quarter 2017.

I can’t believe the effect the tariff response has had on the metals trade. Somebody needs their head examined if they think this is good for the American economy.

We are about to raise prices for the first time in six years due to the rising cost of steel and aluminum. That is going to cause some uncertainty, with our customers looking elsewhere to purchase the products we manufacture.

Machinery Manufacturing

There is lots of uncertainty among manufacturers regarding the impact of the steel tariffs. Even steel sourced from the U.S. is rapidly increasing in price due to capacity constraints.

We are operating at the lowest levels of our 70-year history. Chinese imports continue to depress pricing of our products.

Inflationary pressures are of concern. Freight costs per mile are up. Metals are costing more, impacting a large number of purchased parts. Tariff escalation is not going to help.

Business remains strong.

President Trump—trade, tariffs and diplomacy—is leading to more uncertainty.

Printing and Related Support Activities


The lingering effects of Hurricane Harvey have still impacted our volume. Through May, our volume is down 7 percent from last year at this time.

We are busy now because of a large single order that we entered in May and that is being worked on now and into July. We are feeling the need to raise labor wages, which will require a price increase, but since all our materials seem to be increasing in cost, why should we miss an opportunity to include a small increase to cover rising wages? I am very concerned long term about this goofiness with tariffs and possible foreign-country retaliation. Much of what we use in materials and equipment comes from Europe and a little from Asia.

Food Manufacturing

Tariffs impacting the price of stainless steel are a concern. We also are in an agriculture-related environment, and commodity price increases and stability are of concern.

Apparel Manufacturing

The Army 🦍is ordering huge volumes of apparel 👹, which we anticipate will continue for another nine months.

Paper Manufacturing

We see a slight softness in order volume. We will wait and see how July turns out.

We lost a large contract, and it will decrease our production for the short term. We expect to get additional new business to replace it.

But - after all that - The Dallas Fed Survey rebounded dramatically?


https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-06-25/somebody-needs-their-head-examined-dallas-fed-survey-respondents-fume-stagflation?


Agelbert NOTE: Truth filled quote by bshirley1968:

Quote
bshirley1968  Mon, 06/25/2018 - 11:36

I have said all along that the tariff meme was just a strategy to get prices to go up.

The Fed has been juicing the economy for 10 years and can't get the "inflation" they want.  In a debt ridden, fiat system, falling prices are called the dreaded "deflation" (good for consumers but bad for banksters) and will lead to a recession and eventually a depression.

Got to get prices up......no matter what.  I know, let's start a trade war that will increase prices on everyone and tell them we are "winning" by getting back at the mean ole Chinese for taking all our manufacturing jobs.  Sheeple will pay higher prices and tell everyone to quit bitching....."You are doing it for your country!"  Much like that POS that made the first post on this article.

Didn't you know?  It's patriotic to pay higher prices to keep banks solvent and your government in power.  If paying more is what it takes to make Trump look good, hell, that's easy!  Dumbasses!
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 20, 2018, 02:55:10 pm »


Trump 🦀Now Threatens Tariffs on All Goods from China: $450 Billion

by
Mike Mish Shedlock
22 hrs
-edited
The markets are reeling a bit today and bond yields are falling on news of escalating trade war threats.

China pledged to strike back on Trump's announcement of $200 billion worth of tariffs on Chinese goods. But before China could even respond, Trump threatened to put a tariff on all goods from China in belief the US Can Win a Trade War With China.

Peter Navarro, a White House trade adviser, said on Tuesday morning that the United States had given China numerous opportunities to negotiate and change policies that have cost Americans millions of jobs, and the Trump administration was now prepared to impose tariffs on $450 billion of Chinese goods in order to force Beijing to bend.

“President Trump has given China every chance to change its aggressive behavior,” Mr. Navarro said in a call with reporters. “China does have much more to lose than we do,” he added, saying that a trade clash would affect China much more than the United States, given China exported nearly four times the value of goods to the United States last year than the United States sent back.

"Winning" Defined

Trump has a peculiar definition of winning. If the US loses less than China, that's called "winning".

US Goods Exports to China


Fred does not have a similar chart for US imports to China.

How can China impose like tariffs? Answer: It can't, directly, on goods as shown by the following Census Department Foreign Trade Charts.

US Goods Trade With China in 2018


US Goods Trade With China in 2017



In 2017, China imported about $130 billion in goods from the US. The US imported $505 billion in goods. The US has a small trade surplus on services.

The charts show China will have a difficult time retaliating if Trump does indeed place tariffs on all goods from China.

Lose-Lose

It is on this lose-lose basis that Trump 🦍 expects to "win".

Note that "winning" will increase costs of all US manufactured goods that use any parts from China. In regards to steel alone, the US has about 140,000 steel production jobs. The US has about 6.5 million jobs that depend on steel.

Winning by Losing

1. A Fed study shows "Tariffs Kill High-Paying American Manufacturing Jobs and Businesses".

2. Auto job losses alone are likely to hit 45,000 as noted in Pandora's Box: Another Look at Steel Tariffs.

3. On June 8, I noted Three US Tire-Chord Makers Threaten to Close Doors Due to Trump Tariffs.

Trump believes China will lose more. This we call "winning".

Mike "Mish" Shedlock

https://www.themaven.net/mishtalk/economics/trump-now-threatens-tariffs-on-all-goods-from-china-450-billion-8DJfbiiFxUqHbdB7-XDhQQ/

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 19, 2018, 05:54:15 pm »

I wouldn't get too excited. Volatility is not a crash.

If we crash, we crash, but I'd be very surprised if this little game of musical chairs is anywhere close to over. We're not even at the beginning of the really interesting part.

If the dollar IS toast, persons like yourself, living on a fixed income, will suffer more than anyone. I don't really want that to happen, because I don't want you to suffer. It'll happen soon enough, no matter what.


Who's excited? If you want to call a chain of events that haven't happened in 4 years "volatility", that's fine with me. I don't own any stocks. The markets are just an exercisie in observation for me.  8)

I understand the negative implications for me of the loss of the Dollar's world reserve currency status. I have made that clear in my posts.

Eddie, I am quite serious in telling you that, going further into poverty due to the US losing reserve currency status, is something I totally accept as the cost of a principled stand. I really do believe that the destruction of our ability to visit murder and mayhem on other countries is worth that cost. Don't you? ???
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 19, 2018, 03:04:22 pm »

Global reserve currency status of the USD  is an artifact. It has nothing to do with US citizens or their wishes or intentions. It isn't even within our control. It's primarily under the control of the FED and the BIS, the owners of which, with a few exceptions, aren't even Americans. So it isn't like US citizens are imposing their will on the rest of the world. That is not a true picture of what's going on here.

And, it's going away, in the fullness of time. No need to do anything, it's just gonna happen. A piece of it gets chipped away every day. There are advantages for us Ugly Americans, sure. But it's not like we voted for our currency to be the reserve currency. And when that advantage is history, like Britain before us, we'll just have to do the best we can with whatever our money will buy. I expect it to buy quite a bit less. That's why I try to save and invest my savings in tangible assets (non-money).

But we might not even get there. I sure don't see some long future with the Chinese Yuan being the reserve currency. Why? Because the **** is going to hit the fan early on in that future period, and global trade might be history anyway. But it's hard to say exactly how the dominoes will fall.

One interesting point Marty Armstrong makes....oil is only 7% of the current world economy in dollar terms. Now, once that critical part of the economy is gone, or becomes greatly reduced, the rest of the economy might not amount to much...but that remains to be seen. Right now oil is NOT a lot of the pie, in money terms. But most of our production of various goods and the way we move goods is tied to oil. It might all collapse, or if we're luckier, it might just shrink, and not all at once.

My guilt level over whatever privilege the USD dollar gives me right now doesn't make me lose any sleep. The Bond Kings made this system what it is, off the death and suffering of regular people who went to war for their countries, at the behest of rich people looking to make a buck. Blame them if you want to turn on your blamethrower.

In fact, the loss of reserve currency status is a particular problem that regular Americans face that the rest of the world doesn't. It'll play hell with all old people and everyone on a fixed income, and I expect it'll create a great deal of hardship when the paradigm does shift. What goes around comes around.


Eddie, I honestly do not believe you have any guilt level in regard to the the US Dollar hegemony, as your "artifact" comment evidences.

I disagree totally that Global reserve currency status of the USD is an artifact and has "nothing to do with US citizens or their wishes or intentions".

The Global Reserve Currency is the CORNER STONE, not an "artifact" of the Imperial BOOT of Repression here and abroad which TOO MANY (Greedy Capitalist) Americans wholeheartedly SUPPORT! If you wish to wrongly believe otherwise, I will not stop you.

Also, the Fed ALREADY plays hell with fixed income regular Americans through their selective inflation poverty imposing measures.

Yeah, it will get a lot worse without Reserve Currency Status. So? Anything that massively interferes with our marauding around the world, as losing reserve currency status will surely DO, is a good thing.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 19, 2018, 02:40:02 pm »


Tue, 06/19/2018 - 13:45

Emerging Market Contagion Goes Global As Fund Outflows Spike Most In Over 4 Years

Despite promises from various foreign officials that just a little more intervention and just a few more billion in bailouts from Lagarde will 'fix' the "short-term speculator-driven" crisis in Emerging Markets (even as Brazil admits failure), things are escalating way beyond the idiosyncratic fears of Argentina and Turkey...

As investors Emerging Markets' anxiety spreads globally with ETF outflow across all EM ETFs soaring to the highest since Jan 2014...

In fact, as Bloomberg reports, outflows from U.S.-listed exchange-traded funds that invest across developing nations as well as those that target specific countries totaled $2.7 billion in the week ended June 15, the most in over a year and more than seven times the previous week.

The 'baby' is being thrown out with the 'bathwater' as even countries with solid prospects for growth and debt financing haven’t been immune to the selloff. South Korea and Thailand, which have current-account surpluses, are among the six-worst emerging currencies this month.

Quote
“The statistics itself reflect worries about emerging markets in terms of the growth outlook, in terms of what the Fed tightening means,” said Sim Moh Siong, a currency strategist at Bank of Singapore Ltd.

“We’re starting to see a blurring of the differentiation between current-account deficit currencies and current-account surplus currencies. That reflects the worries about trade-war jitters.”

The last week has seen derisking everywhere...

Seems like EM stocks have a long way to fall...

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-06-19/emerging-market-contagion-goes-global-fund-outflows-spike-most-over-4-years

Agelbert NOTE: The EM stocks are not the only ones that have a LONG WAY TO FALL...
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 19, 2018, 02:19:08 pm »

How fast can Trumpovetsky bring on  Collapse?  ;D

RE


https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/19/dow-futures-tumble-350-points-as-china-responds-to-latest-trump-threat.html

Dow tumbles as China responds to latest Trump threat

    President Donald Trump shocks China with the threat of additional $200 billion of trade tariffs.
    Beijing responds, accusing the United States of starting a trade war.
    J.P. Morgan believes Washington won't risk upsetting voters or big business.

David Reid   | @cnbcdavy
Published 4 Hours Ago Updated 46 Mins Ago CNBC.com

      
   
U.S. President Donald Trump and China's President Xi Jinping leave a business leaders event at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on November 9, 2017. Nicolas Asfouri | AFP | Getty Images

Global stock markets fell sharply on Tuesday after President Donald Trump threatened to impose an additional trade tariff on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods.

Following that bombshell, Chinese stock markets closed sharply lower. The volatile Shenzhen fell almost 6 percent, while the Shanghai Composite neared a two-year low.

European stocks followed suit and by mid-afternoon in London, the pan-European Stoxx 600 was 0.7 percent lower with all but two sectors trading lower.

U.S. stocks were next up and shortly after the open, the Dow Jones industrial average was lower by around 300 points, equating to about 1.2 percent.

The NASDAQ and S&P 500 indices also witnessed sharp sell-offs.

The trigger for selling was a Monday night request by Trump to the United States Trade Representative to identify $200 billion worth of Chinese goods for additional tariffs, at a rate of 10 percent.

Trump said Monday night that If China "refuses to change its practices" then the additional levies would be imposed on Beijing.

Trade war will have strong market impact, analyst says 
5 Hours Ago | 00:27

The new tariffs followed an exchange of trade levies announced by both countries last week that is set to affect about $50 billion worth of goods flowing in each direction. Beijing has already reacted to Trump's statement, pledging to retaliate.

"The United States has initiated a trade war that violates market laws and is not in accordance with current global development trends," China's Commerce Ministry said.

Speaking to CNBC's "Squawk Box Europe" on Tuesday, Nandini Ranakrishnan, global market strategist for J.P. Morgan, said the political realities of upcoming midterm elections could force the U.S. government to back away from a full-blown trade war.

"If prices of imported goods are rising for the U.S. consumer at an unmanageable rate, then there is a large part of the U.S. voting population that maybe will feel their money not going as far," she said.

Ranakrishnan added that in addition to harming the spending power of populace, a trade war with China would risk losing the "big, booming friendly to business theme" it has cultivated.

The J.P. Morgan analyst said volatility in equity markets because of "government noise" would continue to be a big theme for 2018.

Strategist on trade tensions: 'Megaphone diplomacy' never works 
5 Hours Ago | 01:24

That view is echoed by equity analysts at ABP Invest. Founder Thanos Papasavvas said in a note Tuesday that trade disputes would have a more significant impact in volatility than what markets were pricing in.

"Markets will not wait for the economic impact; instead, reacting on the back of headlines and the inevitable Twitter messages. This will cause volatility to increase, export-heavy stock markets like the German DAX to fall, and thus impact consumer and business sentiment accordingly," he said.

ABP has claimed that, in 2017, U.S. trade with China was worth $636 billion and almost $720 billion with the European Union.

Papasavvas identified the environment as one in which active managers should look to take advantages of "dislocations in price and risk."


The Dow, which everyone knows is in the Mother of All Bubbles, is off a percent and half. Pardon me if I'm not impressed.

It is clear that the trade war is extremely stupid and a terrible policy. But those expecting immediate financial armageddon are going to be sorely disappointed, I'm afraid.

The trade war is just going to make Trump's supporters happier and happier, as their meager dollars buy less and less. You can't fix stupid, and the current wave of populism has to run its course. When absolutely nothing Trump is trying works and the chickens come home to roost, we'll find another country to invade.

Possibly Venezuela. They have oil. Iran. They have oil. Fire up the drones.


As long the the Almighty Dollar is the world's Reserve currency, that despotic criminal USA behavior will continue.

We did not get our World Reserve Currency “exorbitant privilege” by being the "land of the free". We GOT THAT BY REPRESSION here, there and everywhere, period. Everything the American Imperial Economic Hitmen have done is repression, whether you wish to admit it or not. No other country on the planet, no matter how many they killed for this or that reason, comes close to our level of despotic behavior, except for England and Spain a couple of centuries back, on a much, much smaller scale. 

The phrase “exorbitant privilege” was originally coined in the 1960s by Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, then the French Minister of Finance. He was referring to the massive benefits imbuing to the United States for having the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency. Barry Eichengreen, Professor of Economics and Political Science at the University of California Berkeley, summarized it thusly:
Quote
It costs only a few cents for the Bureau of Engraving and Printing to produce a $100 bill, but other countries had to pony up $100 of actual goods in order to obtain one.” Commodities are priced in dollars; trade exchange takes place in dollars; current account deficits are priced that way too. Enormous benefits accrue to the USA because of it.


Within a few weeks of the cratering of the US Dollar (caused by China, with cooperation from a few other countries, pulling the plug on all the US debt they and those other countries hold) it will be game over for the US Stock Market. Quickly after that, War Loving Incareration Nation USA will not be able to buy or bop anybody we want to "bring freedom and democracy to" because of Argentina style inflation.

No dollar hegemony = no more wars for dollar hegemony based worldwide repression, period. 

The sooner, the better. 

Discussion 2 (Going Deeper): Phasing out Military Bases

In preparation for this discussion watch the extended interview with Ann Wright (below) and the presentation by David Vine (below).

“At present [2012], the United States, with over 700 foreign military bases, navies in every ocean, a programme to militarize space, and drone bases planned for all regions of the world, is increasingly perceived in relation to its hard power diplomacy, a threat to political independence and stability for many countries.” -Richard A. Falk, Professor Emeritus of International Law at Princeton University

May 2018 EXTENDED INTERVIEW: ANN WRIGHT 🕊


http://globalsecurity.worldbeyondwar.org/discussion-7-transition-from-an-offensive-to-defensive-posture/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 19, 2018, 01:24:40 pm »

Agelbert NOTE: David B. is a Canadian home builder skilled craftsman.

Trudeau Imposes Retaliatory Trade Tariffs Against the U.S.

June 18, 2018

It is in the long term interest of Canada to unravel the intertwined economy between the two countries says Dimitri Lascaris

Story Transcript

SHARMINI PERIES: Welcome to the Canada update on The Real News Network. Now, Canada is still reeling from steel and aluminum tariffs imposed by the Trump administration. Canadians are particularly miffed by the fact that Trump used a national security clause of the WTO agreement to apply these tariffs. Here’s Justin Trudeau complaining about the tariffs.

JUSTIN TRUDEAU: It would be with regret, but it would be with absolute certainty and firmness that we move forward with retaliatory measures on July 1, applying equivalent tariffs to the ones that the Americans have unjustly applied to us. I have made it very clear to the president that it is not something we relish doing, but it is something that we absolutely will do. Because Canadians, we’re polite, were reasonable, but we also will not be pushed around.

SHARMINI PERIES: Now, both prime minister of Canada and Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland is leading a global fight against the Trump administration on steel and aluminum tariffs, the tariffs not only against Canada, but they’re also against EU countries and beyond. Here’s foreign minister of Canada, Chrystia Freeland, claiming that in times of tariffs, it helps to have friends in high places. She’s referring to the EU trade commissioner here.

CHRYSTIA FREELAND: The European Trade Commissioner, Cecilia Malmström, and I call each other sisters in trade. We sign our e-mails, “hugs.” Yes, we do. We sometimes send each other smiley faces in particularly difficult moments. And that close collaboration has been particularly important as last Thursday approached and it started to look more and more as if the U.S. Would actually go ahead and impose tariffs on steel and aluminum exports from its closest allies. So, we were able to coordinate very closely with the Europeans. The lists that- the retaliation lists that we announced were built in close collaboration. The timing of the retaliation was part of a very close collaborative discussion, and that makes our impact stronger, and that’s a great thing.

SHARMINI PERIES: Chrystia Freeland, foreign minister of Canada, is also seen on US television, here on CNN.

CHRYSTIA FREELAND: And I would just say to all of Canada’s American friends, and there are so many, seriously? Do you really believe that Canada, that your NATO allies represent a national security threat to you? And that’s why the prime minister said, “It is frankly, insulting.”

SHARMINI PERIES: And in Washington DC, where she was receiving an award for being the top diplomat by Foreign Policy magazine.

CHRYSTIA FREELAND: The two-three-two tariffs introduced by the United States are illegal under WTO and NAFTA rules. They are protectionism, pure and simple. They are not a response to unfair actions by other countries that put American industry at a disadvantage. They are a naked example of the United States putting its thumb on the scale, in violation of the very rules it helped to write.

SHARMINI PERIES: On to talk about all of this with me is our correspondent in Quebec, Dimitri Lascaris. He’s also a lawyer and our climate and environmental beat reporter. Thank you so much for joining us, Dimitri.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: Thanks for having me back, Sharmini.

SHARMINI PERIES: All right, Dimitri. Let’s start off with this whole warfare, trade warfare that everybody is talking about, that was evoked because of the tariffs on steel and aluminum. Your thoughts on how the Canadian- particularly Canadian leadership there, and the government of Canada is responding to this.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: Well, I don’t think Canadians are going to draw much sustenance from the use of smiley faces by Canada’s foreign minister. You know, the trade relationship between Canada the United States is probably unparalleled anywhere in the world. There’s approximately six hundred and seventy-four billion dollars of trade in 2017, with the U.S. having an eight point four billion surplus. Each day about four hundred thousand people cross what constitutes the world’s longest international border, many of them to engage in commerce. So, this is a trade relationship which is of profound importance to the Canadian economy.

Let me say, Sharmini, that this is the result of a very concerted, decades long policy of successive liberal and conservative governments to intertwine, ever more closely, the two economies of our country. And that has created a very risky situation for Canada. We have a relatively undiversified set of trade relationships. Our relationship with the United States is the elephant in the room, and this has repeatedly caused the Canadian government to adopt positions that were quite conciliatory to the US government. And that becomes particularly dangerous when the US administration is the one led by somebody like Donald Trump, who is such an unstable leader, such an authoritarian leader, who has shown misogynistic tendencies, fascistic tendencies, complete disregard for human rights. You really don’t want to be in bed, deep in bed with a regime like that. But that’s precisely the situation we now find ourselves in. And even a former U.S. ambassador to Canada has noted, very recently, how dangerous this is for Canada.

Bruce Hayman, ex-U.S. ambassador to this country, said recently that it is in fact in the long-term interests of Canada that there be a trade war, even though it may cause short-term pain, because it will ultimately force Canada to diversify its trade relationships. That’s precisely what we should have done decades ago, and we need to begin that process as quickly as possible. Speaking for myself, if there’s a breakdown in NAFTA, in the long-run that may actually be beneficial to Canadians. But here, the punditry is talking about it as though it’s some sort of a nightmare scenario that must be avoided at all costs.

SHARMINI PERIES: All right, now Dimitri, is quite a departure from Justin Trudeau’s initial approach to Trump, when he arrived with the family to visit Canada shorty- visit the U.S. shortly upon the inauguration of Donald Trump. And he’s made multiple visits to the White House and it’s been very friendly and up and up. What do you attribute to Justin Trudeau’s, this anti-Trump campaign that he’s on now.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: I think his hand was forced. I mean, at the end of the G7, we saw something here in this country which we have not seen for decades. In fact, I don’t recall ever hearing or seen anything like this. The president and his close aides referred to the Canadian prime minister as weak, dishonest. They characterized him as a backstabber. And one of them even said that Trudeau deserves a special place in hell. And the Conservative leader, one of the top conservative politicians here- I believe it was Jason Kenney, who was a former minister in the Stephen Harper government, is now the leader of the Alberta right-wing Conservative Party, even he was marveling at the fact that Trump seemed to be much more conciliatory and friendly with the leader of North Korea than with the Canadian prime minister.

This follows, as you’ve noted, weeks- months, I should say, really from the very outset of the Trump administration, of a very conciliatory approach to Trump by Justin Trudeau. For example, the Muslim ban, the highly controversial Muslim ban, and I think fair to say, bigoted Muslim ban, that Trump started from the beginning of his administration to put into effect, did not elicit a peep of criticism from Justin Trudeau, nothing of any substance. When Donald Trump referred to countries in Sub-Saharan Africa by means of an insulting expletive, not a peep of criticism from Justin Trudeau.

You know, when he pulled out of the Iran deal, which was almost universally opposed other than by the state of Israel, there was very modest- I mean, it wasn’t really criticism. It was more of an expression of a reservation to this policy by the Canadian government. This policy of conciliation, this approach of conciliation, is clearly an abject failure. I mean, what happened at the G7 shows that dealing with Trump in that manner is not going to garner his respect, it isn’t going to protect Canada from retaliatory measures. And now, there is a sudden reevaluation of that policy, and as a result of it, this tough talk, or at least tougher talk you’re hearing out of Trudeau has corresponded with a dramatic increase in his popularity rating. It went from forty percent, his approval rating, to fifty-two percent in a matter of a few months, many people attributing that to the fact that he’s finally adopted a reasonably tough stance in the face of the predations of the Trump administration.

SHARMINI PERIES: And one cannot ignore the fact that this is, of course, playing out well in Canada. As you cite, the polls are reflecting that. But he’s also stepping into a year next year where he will have to stand for re-election.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: That is undoubtedly influencing Justin Trudeau. In fact, recent polls show that his party is more or less tied with that of the conservative party of Andrew Scheer. And there is a lot of disenchantment in this country about his failure to follow through with main, very important campaign commitments, for example, on fighting climate change. His purchase of the Trans Mountain tar sands pipeline cannot be reconciled with his commitment on climate change.

He promised that this would be, or the last election would be the last election in which we use the first-past-the-post electoral system, which results in parties that have a minority of the vote obtaining a majority of the seats in parliament. He’s not reforming the electoral electoral system at all. And there have been other- oh, and also, he’d promised to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies, but in fact, has maintained them. So, there have been a whole range of promises that have really put him on thin ice with the Canadian electorate. I have no doubt that that is weighing heavily in the minds of the liberal leadership as the 2019 election approaches.

SHARMINI PERIES: Now Dimitri, one of the agenda items at the G7 summit was a reaffirmation of the commitments of the G7 countries to the Paris climate agreement. And now, partly all of this was derailed by Trump arriving at the G7 and the tariffs and so on. But give us a sense of Justin Trudeau appearing as a climate ambassador as something that he is committed to doing, and reducing emissions, and the contradictions in that appearance of a climate advocate.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: You know, when dealing with the Trudeau administration or government, as is so often the case in Western politics, one must always compare the reality to the rhetoric. The reality is that Canada is on a path to greatly exceed its commitment under the Paris climate accord. And in fact, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, not necessarily an objective source, but nonetheless, what they have to say is something that we should pay attention to when we’re talking about prognostications about future oil use in this country. They just issued a report predicting that the tar sands production will increase by fifty percent ☠️ in the coming years.

What we need to be doing is phasing out the tar sands as rapidly as we can do so, consistently with a reasonably healthy economy. The Trudeau government is running in the opposite direction, and as I just mentioned, not only is it determined to go ahead with building fossil infrastructure to support the tar sands industry. It has failed. It’s now had three years to do it. It has failed to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies, which is the ultimate insanity. Why you would subsidize fossil fuels when we need to be keeping them in the ground is simply inexplicable. So, saying at the G7, we want to reaffirm our leadership in the Paris climate accord, or in terms of ensuring its respect, saying that is one thing. There is absolutely no action of any substance to back up that reaffirmation, unfortunately.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: Dimitri, Justin Trudeau, prime minister of Canada just had made a commitment, just a few weeks ago, to buy the Kinder Morgan Pipeline at some five billion dollars. And now, all of this is taking place at the same time when the Pope, trying to enforce his Encyclical about the environment and climate change, is actually meeting with the fossil fuel industry, asking them to curtail the emissions and save the earth. And and the G7 is talking about reaffirming the Paris climate agreement, yet Trudeau’s contradictions are just too much to handle here.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: You know, as we reported earlier this week, Sharmini, the Pope told senior executives of the world’s leading oil companies, including Exxon Mobil and BP, who were at the Vatican to hear his speech, and I’m quoting the Pope, “There is no time to lose.” And it is absolutely imperative that we begin to phase out tar sands. There’s simply no escaping that reality. And not only is Trudeau not doing that, but he’s being urged to even sacrifice Canadian lives by leaders on the Bay Street.

I mean, we had the most remarkable statement by the former governor of the Bank of Canada, David Dodge 🦖, a couple of days ago at a conference in Edmonton, that- he said definitively, “Canadians will die resisting this pipeline.” And then he went on to say, but Justin Trudeau must have the “fortitude,” the fortitude to stand up and complete the construction of this project, which is going to increase by a factor of three. The amount of diluted bitumen coming from the tar sands to the west coast of Canada is going to increase by a factor of seven, oil tanker traffic on the on the west coast of Canada. You know, what Justin Trudeau is doing cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be reconciled either with the Paris climate accord or with the Pope’s exhortations to take action now.

SHARMINI PERIES: Dimitri, are any of these contradictions on the part of Trudeau’s leadership, or lack thereof, when it comes to the climate being realized by all these young people that ended up supporting him in the last election and wanted some serious action on the climate?

DIMITRI LASCARIS: Well, I think the fact that he had a forty percent approval rating after being wildly popular outside of his government, I think that says quite a bit about how the population and particularly young people, who have given him a lot of support the last election, feel about his broken promises, particularly with respect to the climate change. I think he has a bit of an ace- I wouldn’t go so far as to state as an ace in the hole, but it certainly is a card that he can play to strengthen his standing amongst young voters.

And that is, he does appear to remain committed to the legalization, or at least the quasi-legalization, of cannabis in Canada. And so, there is legislation being advanced, and that’s a policy that’s very popular amongst young voters. So, he may be able to rehabilitate his image amongst them between now and the election next year, in large part by pursuing that initiative and fulfilling that campaign promise. But I don’t think anybody’s going to forget entirely how badly he’s betrayed his commitment to be a climate champion.

SHARMINI PERIES: All right. Now, in relation to the climate, again, here. The newly elected premier of Ontario, Doug Ford, had a few things to say about cap and trade this week. Give us the highlights of that statement.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: So, Ontario, Canada’s most populous province, entered into a cap and trade system with its neighboring province of Quebec and with the state of California in January of this year. And Doug Ford, the conservative premier-elect, campaigned explicitly on a promise to take Ontario out of that cap and trade system. The province has raised nearly two point nine billion dollars from the sale of carbon credits, according to a report issued last month. The money goes toward the operation of something called the Green Ontario Fund to pay for climate-friendly programs, rebates for home upgrades and clean technology pilot projects. Ford’s Conservative Party criticized the program because it results in higher costs to consumers for natural gas and gasoline. But Sharmini, that’s exactly what it is supposed to do. And that’s exactly what we should be doing.

We need to be deterring people from consuming fossil fuels by raising the cost of these polluting substances. We should not be encouraging fossil fuels consumption by lowering the cost of polluting. And yet, Doug Ford said, right out of the gate yesterday, that the first piece of legislation he intends to put forward is legislation withdrawing Ontario from the cap and trade system. Quebec is alarmed by this, understandably so, and they pointed out that their economy is going strong. In fact, Quebec, where I live, and as part of that system, has full employment and a growing economy. The whole notion that this is injurious to the economy is bogus, frankly, and it seems like nothing other than a sort of right-wing ideology that fits nicely within the agenda of the fossil fuels industry in Canada, which has quite a bit of power.

SHARMINI PERIES: All right, Dimitri. I thank you so much for joining us today on The Real News Network and giving us this Canada update. I know there’s so much more to talk about, so I will look forward to having you back next week.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: Always a pleasure, Sharmini, thank you.

SHARMINI PERIES: And thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.

https://therealnews.com/stories/trudeau-imposes-retaliatory-trade-tariffs-against-the-u-s
Dead on on the trade section of the article. If anything there is an undercurrent of deep anger that is brewing in reaction to the trade file. The second half I  believe is off mark. Its a long time to elections federally.

Traditionally we afford parties two terms just for showing up. Progressives have nowhere to turn as the harder left side is even more in conflict with itself. It opposes trade deals but its rank and file are union members in tariff affected industries. Provincially it has a pro pipeline party in alberta and an anti pipeline one in BC... We shall see. I can't deny Canada is in deep denial and conflict of interest over Fossil fuels.


Agreed.  :(
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 18, 2018, 07:59:53 pm »

Trudeau Imposes Retaliatory Trade Tariffs Against the U.S.

June 18, 2018

It is in the long term interest of Canada to unravel the intertwined economy between the two countries says Dimitri Lascaris

Story Transcript

SHARMINI PERIES: Welcome to the Canada update on The Real News Network. Now, Canada is still reeling from steel and aluminum tariffs imposed by the Trump administration. Canadians are particularly miffed by the fact that Trump used a national security clause of the WTO agreement to apply these tariffs. Here’s Justin Trudeau complaining about the tariffs.

JUSTIN TRUDEAU: It would be with regret, but it would be with absolute certainty and firmness that we move forward with retaliatory measures on July 1, applying equivalent tariffs to the ones that the Americans have unjustly applied to us. I have made it very clear to the president that it is not something we relish doing, but it is something that we absolutely will do. Because Canadians, we’re polite, were reasonable, but we also will not be pushed around.

SHARMINI PERIES: Now, both prime minister of Canada and Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland is leading a global fight against the Trump administration on steel and aluminum tariffs, the tariffs not only against Canada, but they’re also against EU countries and beyond. Here’s foreign minister of Canada, Chrystia Freeland, claiming that in times of tariffs, it helps to have friends in high places. She’s referring to the EU trade commissioner here.

CHRYSTIA FREELAND: The European Trade Commissioner, Cecilia Malmström, and I call each other sisters in trade. We sign our e-mails, “hugs.” Yes, we do. We sometimes send each other smiley faces in particularly difficult moments. And that close collaboration has been particularly important as last Thursday approached and it started to look more and more as if the U.S. Would actually go ahead and impose tariffs on steel and aluminum exports from its closest allies. So, we were able to coordinate very closely with the Europeans. The lists that- the retaliation lists that we announced were built in close collaboration. The timing of the retaliation was part of a very close collaborative discussion, and that makes our impact stronger, and that’s a great thing.

SHARMINI PERIES: Chrystia Freeland, foreign minister of Canada, is also seen on US television, here on CNN.

CHRYSTIA FREELAND: And I would just say to all of Canada’s American friends, and there are so many, seriously? Do you really believe that Canada, that your NATO allies represent a national security threat to you? And that’s why the prime minister said, “It is frankly, insulting.”

SHARMINI PERIES: And in Washington DC, where she was receiving an award for being the top diplomat by Foreign Policy magazine.

CHRYSTIA FREELAND: The two-three-two tariffs introduced by the United States are illegal under WTO and NAFTA rules. They are protectionism, pure and simple. They are not a response to unfair actions by other countries that put American industry at a disadvantage. They are a naked example of the United States putting its thumb on the scale, in violation of the very rules it helped to write.

SHARMINI PERIES: On to talk about all of this with me is our correspondent in Quebec, Dimitri Lascaris. He’s also a lawyer and our climate and environmental beat reporter. Thank you so much for joining us, Dimitri.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: Thanks for having me back, Sharmini.

SHARMINI PERIES: All right, Dimitri. Let’s start off with this whole warfare, trade warfare that everybody is talking about, that was evoked because of the tariffs on steel and aluminum. Your thoughts on how the Canadian- particularly Canadian leadership there, and the government of Canada is responding to this.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: Well, I don’t think Canadians are going to draw much sustenance from the use of smiley faces by Canada’s foreign minister. You know, the trade relationship between Canada the United States is probably unparalleled anywhere in the world. There’s approximately six hundred and seventy-four billion dollars of trade in 2017, with the U.S. having an eight point four billion surplus. Each day about four hundred thousand people cross what constitutes the world’s longest international border, many of them to engage in commerce. So, this is a trade relationship which is of profound importance to the Canadian economy.

Let me say, Sharmini, that this is the result of a very concerted, decades long policy of successive liberal and conservative governments to intertwine, ever more closely, the two economies of our country. And that has created a very risky situation for Canada. We have a relatively undiversified set of trade relationships. Our relationship with the United States is the elephant in the room, and this has repeatedly caused the Canadian government to adopt positions that were quite conciliatory to the US government. And that becomes particularly dangerous when the US administration is the one led by somebody like Donald Trump, who is such an unstable leader, such an authoritarian leader, who has shown misogynistic tendencies, fascistic tendencies, complete disregard for human rights. You really don’t want to be in bed, deep in bed with a regime like that. But that’s precisely the situation we now find ourselves in. And even a former U.S. ambassador to Canada has noted, very recently, how dangerous this is for Canada.

Bruce Hayman, ex-U.S. ambassador to this country, said recently that it is in fact in the long-term interests of Canada that there be a trade war, even though it may cause short-term pain, because it will ultimately force Canada to diversify its trade relationships. That’s precisely what we should have done decades ago, and we need to begin that process as quickly as possible. Speaking for myself, if there’s a breakdown in NAFTA, in the long-run that may actually be beneficial to Canadians. But here, the punditry is talking about it as though it’s some sort of a nightmare scenario that must be avoided at all costs.

SHARMINI PERIES: All right, now Dimitri, is quite a departure from Justin Trudeau’s initial approach to Trump, when he arrived with the family to visit Canada shorty- visit the U.S. shortly upon the inauguration of Donald Trump. And he’s made multiple visits to the White House and it’s been very friendly and up and up. What do you attribute to Justin Trudeau’s, this anti-Trump campaign that he’s on now.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: I think his hand was forced. I mean, at the end of the G7, we saw something here in this country which we have not seen for decades. In fact, I don’t recall ever hearing or seen anything like this. The president and his close aides referred to the Canadian prime minister as weak, dishonest. They characterized him as a backstabber. And one of them even said that Trudeau deserves a special place in hell. And the Conservative leader, one of the top conservative politicians here- I believe it was Jason Kenney, who was a former minister in the Stephen Harper government, is now the leader of the Alberta right-wing Conservative Party, even he was marveling at the fact that Trump seemed to be much more conciliatory and friendly with the leader of North Korea than with the Canadian prime minister.

This follows, as you’ve noted, weeks- months, I should say, really from the very outset of the Trump administration, of a very conciliatory approach to Trump by Justin Trudeau. For example, the Muslim ban, the highly controversial Muslim ban, and I think fair to say, bigoted Muslim ban, that Trump started from the beginning of his administration to put into effect, did not elicit a peep of criticism from Justin Trudeau, nothing of any substance. When Donald Trump referred to countries in Sub-Saharan Africa by means of an insulting expletive, not a peep of criticism from Justin Trudeau.

You know, when he pulled out of the Iran deal, which was almost universally opposed other than by the state of Israel, there was very modest- I mean, it wasn’t really criticism. It was more of an expression of a reservation to this policy by the Canadian government. This policy of conciliation, this approach of conciliation, is clearly an abject failure. I mean, what happened at the G7 shows that dealing with Trump in that manner is not going to garner his respect, it isn’t going to protect Canada from retaliatory measures. And now, there is a sudden reevaluation of that policy, and as a result of it, this tough talk, or at least tougher talk you’re hearing out of Trudeau has corresponded with a dramatic increase in his popularity rating. It went from forty percent, his approval rating, to fifty-two percent in a matter of a few months, many people attributing that to the fact that he’s finally adopted a reasonably tough stance in the face of the predations of the Trump administration.

SHARMINI PERIES: And one cannot ignore the fact that this is, of course, playing out well in Canada. As you cite, the polls are reflecting that. But he’s also stepping into a year next year where he will have to stand for re-election.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: That is undoubtedly influencing Justin Trudeau. In fact, recent polls show that his party is more or less tied with that of the conservative party of Andrew Scheer. And there is a lot of disenchantment in this country about his failure to follow through with main, very important campaign commitments, for example, on fighting climate change. His purchase of the Trans Mountain tar sands pipeline cannot be reconciled with his commitment on climate change.

He promised that this would be, or the last election would be the last election in which we use the first-past-the-post electoral system, which results in parties that have a minority of the vote obtaining a majority of the seats in parliament. He’s not reforming the electoral electoral system at all. And there have been other- oh, and also, he’d promised to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies, but in fact, has maintained them. So, there have been a whole range of promises that have really put him on thin ice with the Canadian electorate. I have no doubt that that is weighing heavily in the minds of the liberal leadership as the 2019 election approaches.

SHARMINI PERIES: Now Dimitri, one of the agenda items at the G7 summit was a reaffirmation of the commitments of the G7 countries to the Paris climate agreement. And now, partly all of this was derailed by Trump arriving at the G7 and the tariffs and so on. But give us a sense of Justin Trudeau appearing as a climate ambassador as something that he is committed to doing, and reducing emissions, and the contradictions in that appearance of a climate advocate.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: You know, when dealing with the Trudeau administration or government, as is so often the case in Western politics, one must always compare the reality to the rhetoric. The reality is that Canada is on a path to greatly exceed its commitment under the Paris climate accord. And in fact, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, not necessarily an objective source, but nonetheless, what they have to say is something that we should pay attention to when we’re talking about prognostications about future oil use in this country. They just issued a report predicting that the tar sands production will increase by fifty percent ☠️ in the coming years.

What we need to be doing is phasing out the tar sands as rapidly as we can do so, consistently with a reasonably healthy economy. The Trudeau government is running in the opposite direction, and as I just mentioned, not only is it determined to go ahead with building fossil infrastructure to support the tar sands industry. It has failed. It’s now had three years to do it. It has failed to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies, which is the ultimate insanity. Why you would subsidize fossil fuels when we need to be keeping them in the ground is simply inexplicable. So, saying at the G7, we want to reaffirm our leadership in the Paris climate accord, or in terms of ensuring its respect, saying that is one thing. There is absolutely no action of any substance to back up that reaffirmation, unfortunately.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: Dimitri, Justin Trudeau, prime minister of Canada just had made a commitment, just a few weeks ago, to buy the Kinder Morgan Pipeline at some five billion dollars. And now, all of this is taking place at the same time when the Pope, trying to enforce his Encyclical about the environment and climate change, is actually meeting with the fossil fuel industry, asking them to curtail the emissions and save the earth. And and the G7 is talking about reaffirming the Paris climate agreement, yet Trudeau’s contradictions are just too much to handle here.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: You know, as we reported earlier this week, Sharmini, the Pope told senior executives of the world’s leading oil companies, including Exxon Mobil and BP, who were at the Vatican to hear his speech, and I’m quoting the Pope, “There is no time to lose.” And it is absolutely imperative that we begin to phase out tar sands. There’s simply no escaping that reality. And not only is Trudeau not doing that, but he’s being urged to even sacrifice Canadian lives by leaders on the Bay Street.

I mean, we had the most remarkable statement by the former governor of the Bank of Canada, David Dodge 🦖, a couple of days ago at a conference in Edmonton, that- he said definitively, “Canadians will die resisting this pipeline.” And then he went on to say, but Justin Trudeau must have the “fortitude,” the fortitude to stand up and complete the construction of this project, which is going to increase by a factor of three. The amount of diluted bitumen coming from the tar sands to the west coast of Canada is going to increase by a factor of seven, oil tanker traffic on the on the west coast of Canada. You know, what Justin Trudeau is doing cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be reconciled either with the Paris climate accord or with the Pope’s exhortations to take action now.

SHARMINI PERIES: Dimitri, are any of these contradictions on the part of Trudeau’s leadership, or lack thereof, when it comes to the climate being realized by all these young people that ended up supporting him in the last election and wanted some serious action on the climate?

DIMITRI LASCARIS: Well, I think the fact that he had a forty percent approval rating after being wildly popular outside of his government, I think that says quite a bit about how the population and particularly young people, who have given him a lot of support the last election, feel about his broken promises, particularly with respect to the climate change. I think he has a bit of an ace- I wouldn’t go so far as to state as an ace in the hole, but it certainly is a card that he can play to strengthen his standing amongst young voters.

And that is, he does appear to remain committed to the legalization, or at least the quasi-legalization, of cannabis in Canada. And so, there is legislation being advanced, and that’s a policy that’s very popular amongst young voters. So, he may be able to rehabilitate his image amongst them between now and the election next year, in large part by pursuing that initiative and fulfilling that campaign promise. But I don’t think anybody’s going to forget entirely how badly he’s betrayed his commitment to be a climate champion.

SHARMINI PERIES: All right. Now, in relation to the climate, again, here. The newly elected premier of Ontario, Doug Ford, had a few things to say about cap and trade this week. Give us the highlights of that statement.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: So, Ontario, Canada’s most populous province, entered into a cap and trade system with its neighboring province of Quebec and with the state of California in January of this year. And Doug Ford, the conservative premier-elect, campaigned explicitly on a promise to take Ontario out of that cap and trade system. The province has raised nearly two point nine billion dollars from the sale of carbon credits, according to a report issued last month. The money goes toward the operation of something called the Green Ontario Fund to pay for climate-friendly programs, rebates for home upgrades and clean technology pilot projects. Ford’s Conservative Party criticized the program because it results in higher costs to consumers for natural gas and gasoline. But Sharmini, that’s exactly what it is supposed to do. And that’s exactly what we should be doing.

We need to be deterring people from consuming fossil fuels by raising the cost of these polluting substances. We should not be encouraging fossil fuels consumption by lowering the cost of polluting. And yet, Doug Ford said, right out of the gate yesterday, that the first piece of legislation he intends to put forward is legislation withdrawing Ontario from the cap and trade system. Quebec is alarmed by this, understandably so, and they pointed out that their economy is going strong. In fact, Quebec, where I live, and as part of that system, has full employment and a growing economy. The whole notion that this is injurious to the economy is bogus, frankly, and it seems like nothing other than a sort of right-wing ideology that fits nicely within the agenda of the fossil fuels industry in Canada, which has quite a bit of power.

SHARMINI PERIES: All right, Dimitri. I thank you so much for joining us today on The Real News Network and giving us this Canada update. I know there’s so much more to talk about, so I will look forward to having you back next week.

DIMITRI LASCARIS: Always a pleasure, Sharmini, thank you.

SHARMINI PERIES: And thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.

https://therealnews.com/stories/trudeau-imposes-retaliatory-trade-tariffs-against-the-u-s

+-Recent Topics

Global Warming is WITH US by AGelbert
August 18, 2018, 07:17:50 pm

Hydrocarbon Crooks Evil Actions by AGelbert
August 18, 2018, 06:47:32 pm

Weird Science by AGelbert
August 18, 2018, 04:48:35 pm

Corruption in Government by AGelbert
August 16, 2018, 08:54:59 pm

The Big Picture of Renewable Energy Growth by AGelbert
August 15, 2018, 05:31:39 pm

Profiles in Courage by AGelbert
August 15, 2018, 03:19:09 pm

Genocide by AGelbert
August 15, 2018, 12:43:04 pm

Photvoltaics (PV) by AGelbert
August 15, 2018, 12:21:45 pm

Electric Vehicles by AGelbert
August 15, 2018, 11:55:23 am

Pollution by AGelbert
August 14, 2018, 10:37:03 pm