Baltic Dry Index. 1522 -12 Brent Crude 61.14
“When the music stops, in terms of liquidity, things will be complicated. But as long as the music is playing, you’ve got to get up and dance. We’re still dancing”
Chuck Prince. CEO Citigroup, Financial
Times, July 9, 2007.
The month end “dress
up” Tuesday over, now what? More worryingly, the Communist Party of China
People’s Congress over for another years and a new “Mao” strongman ordained,
now what? China’s debt Ponzi Scheme is dangerously close to implosion, now
what? Another moslem terror attack, this time in New York City, now what? America
all set to politically repeat the early 1970s, now what? An all but guaranteed US
interest rate hike coming next month, now what? An aged bull stock bubble
recovery, (third longest on record and closing in on 2nd,) now in
its 98th, 101st, or 102nd, month of recovery, depending on who’s
counting, now what?
Now what! Buy more!!!
What could possibly go wrong?
Plenty, to this old
dinosaur commodities trader and market follower since 1968. Every 2007 has its
2008. Leaving a bubble party early,
beats getting carried out late. And it’s late, very late, in this bubble.
“The
depth of the pools of liquidity is so much larger than it used to be that a
disruptive event now needs to be much more disruptive than it used to be. At
some point, the disruptive event will be so significant that instead of
liquidity filling in, the liquidity will go the other way. I don’t think we’re
at that point.”
Chuck Prince. CEO Citigroup, Financial
Times, July 9, 2007.
November 1, 2017 / 1:00 AM
Asia shares hit 10-year high on strong economy, oil gains
TOKYO
(Reuters) - Asian shares hit a 10-year high on Wednesday on the back of solid
economic growth globally, while oil prices extended a bull run on hopes that
major oil producers will maintain their output cuts.
MSCI’s broadest index of Asia-Pacific shares outside Japan rose 0.6
percent, led by 1.1 percent gains in South Korea while Japan’s Nikkei gained
1.4 percent.
“Hopes of U.S. tax cuts, a slight easing in U.S. long-term bond yields
since late last month and a rise in oil prices are all positive for Asian
shares,” said Yukino Yamada, senior strategist at Daiwa Securities.
“Last month, there were major inflows to high-tech shares in Korea and
Taiwan. And GDP of these countries were also strong, showing the strength is
spreading to the entire economy, not just within the high-tech sector,” she
added.
South Korea’s economic growth accelerated to its fastest growth in seven
years last quarter while growth in Taiwan during the same period was the
strongest in 2-1/2 years.
The advance reading of U.S. GDP for July-Sept also showed healthy growth
of 3.0 percent, well above the average of just above 2.0 percent since the
financial crisis in 2008-09.
Wall Street’s three major indexes ticked up on Tuesday to end October
with their biggest monthly gains since February.
Investors are focussed on the progress of a U.S. tax-cut plan being
developed by President Donald Trump and fellow Republicans and on Trump’s
announcement of the next head of the Federal Reserve. The White House said he
will reveal his Fed pick on Thursday.
More
Fed Chair Drama Steals Spotlight From FOMC: Decision Day Guide
By Steve Matthews and Jeanna SmialekTrump plans to announce his pick Thursday and is said to be leaning toward selecting Fed Governor Jerome Powell. Other candidates on his shortlist include Stanford University economist John Taylor, former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh, and current Chair Janet Yellen, whom the president has called “terrific.”
The rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee will review U.S. growth
that appears sturdy spite disruptions from a spate of devastating hurricanes.
That leaves them on track to raise rates in December, even though inflation
remains on the low side. Here’s what to watch for when the policy statement is
released at 2 p.m. in Washington:
Fed officials won’t publish quarterly economic projections with this
meeting, nor will it be followed by a Yellen press conference. The biggest
changes to the statement will probably come from an upgrade in the FOMC’s
description of the U.S. economy. That would further cement the case for a move
in December, though it’s unlikely that the committee will change the
statement’s language to explicitly signal a rate hike. Investors view the
probability of a rate increase in December at more than 80 percent, according
to pricing in federal funds futures contracts.
More
In any great organization it is far, far safer to be wrong with the majority than to be right alone.
John Kenneth Galbraith.
Here are the top 5 worries that could spook this monster stock rally
Published: Oct 31, 2017 5:54 p.m. ET
On what is arguably the scariest day of the year, one Wall Street strategist
shared his top five worries that could potentially kill this monster of a stock
market rally in its track. “While too much fear during stressful times for markets can lead to poor investment decisions, some skepticism in strong markets can be healthy,” wrote John Lynch, chief investment strategist at LPL Financial, in a note.
Lynch’s warning comes as key indexes trade near record highs with the Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA, +0.12% notching its longest monthly winning streak since April 2012. But the mere fact that the market hasn’t had a meaningful sell off in over a year has also prompted many to caution that stocks may be overheating and overdue for a correction.
A geriatric bull market
First on Lynch’s list of worries is the longevity of the current economic expansion and the age of the bull market which celebrated its eighth birthday in March. Still, Lynch admits that bull markets don’t die of old age but due to economic excesses and the excesses that have heralded the demise of previous bull markets—overspending, overborrowing, overconfidence—remain contained this time.
“We see a low probability of a recession in the next 12 to 18 months,
although there is always the chance of an unexpected exogenous geopolitical
shock or policy mistake,” he said.
Too much exuberance?
Lynch sees excessive euphoria as a near-term concern, citing several
closely-followed sentiment indicators as suggesting too much optimism among
investors. Notable among them is a Bank of America survey that showed that for
the first time in six years, a record high 48% of market participants are expecting
a Goldilock scenario of above-trend growth and below-trend inflation.
Yet at the same time, Lynch notes that he is not seeing huge flow of
funds into stocks that often hint at a major peak.
Lewis Alexander, chief US economist at Nomura, also noted that the
cyclically adjusted price-earnings ratio, a popular measure of valuation, is at
the same level as when former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan made his now-classic
“Irrational Exuberance” speech in December 1996.
More
Odey Notes Market-Calls Record ‘Not Good,’ Makes Another One
By Nishant Kumar
Updated on November 1, 2017, 12:01 AM GMT
Stock markets are “now starting to go hyperbolic,” a sign
that time is running out and a bubble is developing, London-based hedge fund
manager Crispin Odey said in a letter to investors.
Odey, whose bearish bets led to a near 50 percent loss in his flagship fund last year, cited expensive stock valuations, narrowing market breadth and greater participation of individual investors to back his latest warning for potential market chaos.
“Having called these markets down in 2015, my record on such calls is not good,” Odey wrote in the letter. “However, the idea that we will continue along the lines of the last 10 years looks a dangerous starting point for strategic thinking.”
A spokesman for Odey Asset Management, which manages about $5.5 billion, declined to comment.
Odey, 58, has long been a critic of central bank policies since the financial crisis and quantitative easing. Earlier this year, he warned traders that their bullish bets could face troubles, while in May he told investors to watch out for a sudden market collapse following the exhaustion of credit. In October last year, the money manager said U.K. stocks could slump by 80 percent because of a potential recession and higher inflation.
But his bearish bets have so far led to losses. His Odey European Inc. fund lost 5.4 percent in September, extending losses in 2017 to 15.4 percent, according to the letter.
Quantitative tightening in the U.S. means money printing that has inflated asset prices globally is about to pause and savings need to be used to support bond prices. “Is it not like a burglar asking you to buy back your stolen possessions at an expensive price?” wrote Odey, who founded the firm in 1991.
The onset of tightening poses a risk to bond markets, he said. “When they last tried it in 2014 it nearly pulled the roof down.”
In the wealth and
young people’s jobs destroying, dying EUSSR, way to go Rajoy’s Spain! How to
build a mountain out of a molehill. The EUSSR hasn’t a clue as to what to do
next.
October 31, 2017 / 2:04 PM
Support for an independent Catalonia rises to three-year high - poll
MADRID (Reuters) - Support for the creation of an independent state of
Catalonia rose to an almost 3-year high in October according to an official
regional survey published on Tuesday.
Some 48.7 percent of Catalans believe the Spanish region should be
independent, according to the poll from Centre d‘Estudis d‘Opinio, up from 41.1
pct in June and the highest since December 2014.
The poll was based on 1,338 interviews taken between Oct. 16 and Oct.
29.
October 31, 2017 / 5:59 PM
Spain's High Court calls Puigdemont to testify on Thursday
MADRID
(Reuters) - Spain’s High Court on Tuesday called former Catalan president
Carles Puigdemont and 13 members of his sacked administration to testify on
Thursday at 9 a.m. (0800 GMT).
The
court also said it had started processing rebellion and sedition charges
against Puigdemont and the other Catalan leaders.
October 31, 2017 / 12:33 PM
Sacked Catalan leader Puigdemont says accepts snap election, not seeking asylum
BRUSSELS
(Reuters) - Sacked Catalan leader Carles Puigdemont on Tuesday said he accepted
the snap elections called by Spain’s central government in Catalonia and he was
not seeking asylum in Belgium at a press conference given in Brussels.
Puigdemont
said he was not trying to escape from justice after the state prosecutor
recommended charges for rebellion and sedition be brought against him. He did
not clarify how long he would stay in Belgium, adding he would return to
Catalonia when given “guarantees” by the Spanish government.
There can be few
fields of human endeavour in which history counts for so little as in the world
of finance. Past experience, to the extent that it is part of memory at all, is
dismissed as the primitive refuge of those who do not have the insight to
appreciate the incredible wonders of the present.
John Kenneth Galbraith.
Crooks and Scoundrels Corner
The bent, the seriously bent, and the totally doubled over.
Today, more on the Salem Witch Hunt 2017. Prosecutorial overreach
stretching into prosecutorial misconduct? Time will tell at the upcoming 21st
century Salem Witch Trial. But will it
all end in Misprision of Treason in the Mueller/Comey FBI? Stay tuned, no one does impeachments better
than the mostly Democratic, Wall Street/Hollywood owned US fake news media.
And the first witch to the stake is:
The Manafort Indictment: Not Much There, and a Boon for Trump
by Andrew C. McCarthy October 30, 2017 2:20 PM
The Paul Manafort indictment is much ado about nothing . . . except as a vehicle to squeeze Manafort, which is special counsel Robert Mueller’s objective — as we have been arguing for three months (see here, here, and here). Do not be fooled by the “Conspiracy against the United States” heading on Count One (page 23 of the indictment). This case has nothing to do with what Democrats and the media call “the attack on our democracy” (i.e., the Kremlin’s meddling in the 2016 election, supposedly in “collusion” with the Trump campaign). Essentially, Manafort and his associate, Richard W. Gates, are charged with (a) conspiring to conceal from the U.S. government about $75 million they made as unregistered foreign agents for Ukraine, years before the 2016 election (mainly, from 2006 through 2014), and (b) a money-laundering conspiracy.
There are twelve counts in all, but those are the two major allegations. The so-called conspiracy against the United States mainly involves Manafort’s and Gates’s alleged failure to file Treasury Department forms required by the Bank Secrecy Act. Specifically, Americans who hold a stake in foreign bank accounts must file what’s known as an “FBAR” (foreign bank account report) in any year in which, at any point, the balance in the account exceeds $10,000. Federal law also requires disclosure of foreign accounts on annual income-tax returns. Manafort and Gates are said to have controlled foreign accounts through which their Ukrainian political-consulting income sluiced, and to have failed to file accurate FBARs and tax returns. In addition, they allegedly failed to register as foreign agents from 2008 through 2014 and made false statements when they belatedly registered.
----On first glance, Mueller’s case, at least in part, seems shaky and overcharged. Even though the Ukrainian money goes back to 2006, the counts involving failure to file FBARs (Counts Three through Nine) go back only to 2012. This is likely because the five-year statute of limitations bars prosecution for anything before then. Obviously, one purpose of the conspiracy count (Count One) is to enable prosecutors, under the guise of establishing the full scope of the scheme, to prove law violations that would otherwise be time-barred.
----The offense of failing to register as a foreign agent (Count Ten) may be a slam-dunk, but it is a violation that the Justice Department rarely prosecutes criminally. There is often ambiguity about whether the person’s actions trigger the registration requirement, so the Justice Department’s practice is to encourage people to register, not indict them for failing to do so. It may well be that Manafort and Gates made false statements when they belatedly registered as foreign agents, but it appears that Mueller’s office has turned one offense into two, an abusive prosecutorial tactic that flouts congressional intent.
----Obviously, one cannot make a false statement on the foreign-agent registration form without also making a false statement to the government. Consequently, expect Manafort to argue that Mueller has violated double-jeopardy principles by charging the same exact offense in two separate counts, and that the special counsel is undermining Congress’s intent that the offense of providing false information on a foreign-agent registration form be considered merely a misdemeanor. Finally, the money-laundering conspiracy allegation (Count Two) seems far from slam-dunk. For someone to be guilty of laundering, the money involved has to be the proceeds of criminal activity before the accused starts concealing it by (a) moving it through accounts or changing its form by buying assets, etc., or (b) dodging a reporting requirement under federal law. Now, it is surely a terrible thing to take money, under the guise of “political consulting,” from an unsavory Ukranian political faction that is doing the Kremlin’s bidding. But it is not a violation of American law to do so. The violations occur when, as outlined above, there is a lack of compliance with various disclosure requirements. Mueller seems to acknowledge this: The money-laundering count does not allege that it was illegal for Manafort and Gates to be paid by the Ukrainian faction. It is alleged, rather, that they moved the money around to promote a scheme to function as unregistered foreign agents, and specifically to avoid the registration requirement. That seems like a stretch. To be sure, the relevant money-laundering statute includes in its definition of “specified unlawful activity” “any violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938.” (See Section 1956(c)(2)(7)(D) of Title 18, U.S. Code.) But the prosecution still has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the money was the proceeds of unlawful activity in the first place. Moreover, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that....
----Even from Paul Manafort’s perspective, there may be less to this indictment than meets the eye — it’s not so much a serious allegation of “conspiracy against the United States” as a dubious case of disclosure violations and money movement that would never have been brought had he not drawn attention to himself by temporarily joining the Trump campaign. From President Trump’s perspective, the indictment is a boon from which he can claim that the special counsel has no actionable collusion case. It appears to reaffirm former FBI director James Comey’s multiple assurances that Trump is not a suspect. And, to the extent it looks like an attempt to play prosecutorial hardball with Manafort, the president can continue to portray himself as the victim of a witch hunt.
more
The Paul Manafort indictment is much ado about nothing . . . except as a vehicle to squeeze Manafort, which is special counsel Robert Mueller’s objective — as we have been arguing for three months (see here, here, and here). Do not be fooled by the “Conspiracy against the United States” heading on Count One (page 23 of the indictment). This case has nothing to do with what Democrats and the media call “the attack on our democracy” (i.e., the Kremlin’s meddling in the 2016 election, supposedly in “collusion” with the Trump campaign). Essentially, Manafort and his associate, Richard W. Gates, are charged with (a) conspiring to conceal from the U.S. government about $75 million they made as unregistered foreign agents for Ukraine, years before the 2016 election (mainly, from 2006 through 2014), and (b) a money-laundering conspiracy.
There are twelve counts in all, but those are the two major allegations. The so-called conspiracy against the United States mainly involves Manafort’s and Gates’s alleged failure to file Treasury Department forms required by the Bank Secrecy Act. Specifically, Americans who hold a stake in foreign bank accounts must file what’s known as an “FBAR” (foreign bank account report) in any year in which, at any point, the balance in the account exceeds $10,000. Federal law also requires disclosure of foreign accounts on annual income-tax returns. Manafort and Gates are said to have controlled foreign accounts through which their Ukrainian political-consulting income sluiced, and to have failed to file accurate FBARs and tax returns. In addition, they allegedly failed to register as foreign agents from 2008 through 2014 and made false statements when they belatedly registered.
----On first glance, Mueller’s case, at least in part, seems shaky and overcharged. Even though the Ukrainian money goes back to 2006, the counts involving failure to file FBARs (Counts Three through Nine) go back only to 2012. This is likely because the five-year statute of limitations bars prosecution for anything before then. Obviously, one purpose of the conspiracy count (Count One) is to enable prosecutors, under the guise of establishing the full scope of the scheme, to prove law violations that would otherwise be time-barred.
----The offense of failing to register as a foreign agent (Count Ten) may be a slam-dunk, but it is a violation that the Justice Department rarely prosecutes criminally. There is often ambiguity about whether the person’s actions trigger the registration requirement, so the Justice Department’s practice is to encourage people to register, not indict them for failing to do so. It may well be that Manafort and Gates made false statements when they belatedly registered as foreign agents, but it appears that Mueller’s office has turned one offense into two, an abusive prosecutorial tactic that flouts congressional intent.
----Obviously, one cannot make a false statement on the foreign-agent registration form without also making a false statement to the government. Consequently, expect Manafort to argue that Mueller has violated double-jeopardy principles by charging the same exact offense in two separate counts, and that the special counsel is undermining Congress’s intent that the offense of providing false information on a foreign-agent registration form be considered merely a misdemeanor. Finally, the money-laundering conspiracy allegation (Count Two) seems far from slam-dunk. For someone to be guilty of laundering, the money involved has to be the proceeds of criminal activity before the accused starts concealing it by (a) moving it through accounts or changing its form by buying assets, etc., or (b) dodging a reporting requirement under federal law. Now, it is surely a terrible thing to take money, under the guise of “political consulting,” from an unsavory Ukranian political faction that is doing the Kremlin’s bidding. But it is not a violation of American law to do so. The violations occur when, as outlined above, there is a lack of compliance with various disclosure requirements. Mueller seems to acknowledge this: The money-laundering count does not allege that it was illegal for Manafort and Gates to be paid by the Ukrainian faction. It is alleged, rather, that they moved the money around to promote a scheme to function as unregistered foreign agents, and specifically to avoid the registration requirement. That seems like a stretch. To be sure, the relevant money-laundering statute includes in its definition of “specified unlawful activity” “any violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938.” (See Section 1956(c)(2)(7)(D) of Title 18, U.S. Code.) But the prosecution still has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the money was the proceeds of unlawful activity in the first place. Moreover, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that....
----Even from Paul Manafort’s perspective, there may be less to this indictment than meets the eye — it’s not so much a serious allegation of “conspiracy against the United States” as a dubious case of disclosure violations and money movement that would never have been brought had he not drawn attention to himself by temporarily joining the Trump campaign. From President Trump’s perspective, the indictment is a boon from which he can claim that the special counsel has no actionable collusion case. It appears to reaffirm former FBI director James Comey’s multiple assurances that Trump is not a suspect. And, to the extent it looks like an attempt to play prosecutorial hardball with Manafort, the president can continue to portray himself as the victim of a witch hunt.
more
Salem witch trials
The
Salem witch trials were a series of hearings and prosecutions of people accused
of witchcraft in colonial Massachusetts between February
1692 and May 1693. The trials resulted in the executions of twenty people,
fourteen of them women, and all but one by hanging. Five others
(including two infant children) died in prison.
----The
episode is one of Colonial America's most notorious
cases of mass
hysteria.
It has been used in political rhetoric and popular literature as a vivid
cautionary tale about the dangers of isolationism, religious extremism, false
accusations, and lapses in due process.[1] It was not
unique, but a Colonial American example of the much broader phenomenon of witch trials in the early modern period, which took place
also in Europe.
More
I don’t
like it. It’s quiet, too quiet…
John
Wayne.
Technology Update.
With events happening
fast in the development of solar power and graphene, I’ve added this section.
Updates as they get reported. Is converting sunlight to usable cheap AC or DC
energy mankind’s future from the 21st century onwards?
Physicists have breakthrough on brittle smart phone screens
New 'potato stamp' technique combining silver and graphene may create cheaper, more flexible and eco-friendly screens
Date:
October 25, 2017
Source:
University of Sussex
Summary:
New 'potato stamp' technique combining silver and graphene may create cheaper,
more flexible and eco-friendly screens.
Scientists at the University of Sussex may have found a solution to the
long-standing problem of brittle smart phone screens.
Professor Alan Dalton and his team have developed a new way to make
smart phone touch screens that are cheaper, less brittle, and more
environmentally friendly. On top of that, the new approach also promises
devices that use less energy, are more responsive, and do not tarnish in the
air.
The problem has been that indium tin oxide, which is currently used to
make smart phone screens, is brittle and expensive. The primary constituent,
indium, is also a rare metal and is ecologically damaging to extract. Silver,
which has been shown to be the best alternative to indium tin oxide, is also
expensive. The breakthrough from physicists at the University of Sussex has
been to combine silver nanowires with graphene -- a two dimensional carbon material.
The new hybrid material matches the performance of the existing technologies at
a fraction of the cost.
In particular, the way in which these materials are assembled is new.
Graphene is a single layer of atoms, and can float on water. By creating a stamp
-- a bit like a potato stamp a child might make -- the scientists can pick up
the layer of atoms and lay it on top of the silver nanowire film in a pattern.
The stamp itself is made from poly(dimethyl siloxane); the same kind of
silicone rubber used in kitchen utensils and medical implants.
Professor Alan Dalton from the school of Maths and Physical Science at
the University of Sussex, says:
"While silver nanowires have been used in touch screens before, no
one has tried to combine them with graphene. What's exciting about what we're
doing is the way we put the graphene layer down. We float the graphene
particles on the surface of water, then pick them up with a rubber stamp, a bit
like a potato stamp, and lay it on top of the silver nanowire film in whatever
pattern we like. "And this breakthrough technique is inherently scalable.
It would be relatively simple to combine silver nanowires and graphene in this
way on a large scale using spraying machines and patterned rollers.
This means
that brittle mobile phone screens might soon be a thing of the past.
"The addition of graphene to the silver nanowire network also
increases its ability to conduct electricity by around a factor of ten
thousand. This means we can use a fraction of the amount of silver to get the
same, or better, performance. As a result screens will be more responsive and
use less power."
Dr Matthew Large, lead researcher on the project within the school of
Maths and Physical Science at the University of Sussex, says:
"Although silver is also a rare metal, like indium, the amount we
need to coat a given area is very small when combined with graphene. Since
graphene is produced from natural graphite -- which is relatively abundant --
the cost for making a touch sensor drops dramatically.
"One of the issues with using silver is that it tarnishes in air.
What we've found is that the graphene layer prevents this from happening by
stopping contaminants in the air from attacking the silver. "What we've
also seen is that when we bend the hybrid films repeatedly the electrical
properties don't change, whereas you see a drift in the films without graphene
that people have developed previously. This paves the way towards one day
developing completely flexible devices."
Nothing is so admirable in politics as a short memory.
John Kenneth Galbraith.
The monthly Coppock Indicators finished October
DJIA: 23,277 +233 Up. NASDAQ: 6,728 +284 Up. SP500: 2,575 +183 Up.
No comments:
Post a Comment