The correct answer is either Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump, or Hillary Clinton.
34 Statements – Who Made Them?
I do not believe in unfettered free trade. I believe in fair trade which works for the middle class and working families.
I will take on corporations that take their jobs to China.
I think NAFTA has been a disaster.
Instead of passing such trade deals again and again, we must develop trade policies which demand that American corporations create jobs here, and not abroad.
TPP is a death blow for American manufacturing.
I’m for free and fair trade.
We need to bring manufacturing jobs back home where they belong.
Globalization has torn down the barriers that have formerly separated the national from the international markets.
The top priority of any trade deal should be to help American workers.
I heard it about NAFTA. I heard it about CAFTA. I heard it about permanent normal trade relations with China. Here is the fact. Since 2001, we have lost almost 60,000 factories and millions of good-paying jobs.
Maybe we should have a trade policy which represents the working families of this country, that rebuilds our manufacturing base, not than just representing the CEOs of large multinational corporations.
We must end our disastrous trade policies (NAFTA, CAFTA, PNTR with China, etc.) which enable corporate America to shut down plants in this country and move to China and other low-wage countries.
This wave of globalization has wiped out our middle class.
NAFTA was the worst trade deal in history, and China’s entrance into the World Trade Organization has enabled the greatest jobs theft in history.
I think corporate America has to start investing in this country and create decent paying jobs here.
It is a lot cheaper for the American companies to set up plants in China, hire Chinese workers at 50 cents an hour, 75 cents an hour, whatever it is, and have them build the product for the Chinese markets than it is to pay American workers $15 an hour, $20 an hour, provide health insurance, deal with the union, deal with the environment.
Connect the dots. Our current trade deficit is causing the loss of over 2 million jobs. Over the last 20
The delinquency rate on loans is key in understanding banking. It answers one question: what percentage of loans is overdue for payment? The delinquency rate is by far the most useful indicator for “credit stress.” It seems, however, as if delinquency no longer counts. Few are paying attention to the quick and sudden rise of the delinquency rate. What does it tell us and is a new banking crisis imminent?
This Is What Happened after Janet Yellen Hiked the Fed Funds Rate in December
I have said it many times over and I will repeat it here: the last time around, it took Fed-chairman Alan Greenspan over two years and seventeen rate hikes to bring the Fed funds rate from a then all-time-low of 1% to 5.25%, before the U.S. economy suffered the worst recession since the 1930s. We are not so lucky this time.
Greenspan’s rate hikes didn’t affect delinquency rates straight away. Credit stress was subdued until a year after Greenspan’s last hike. Only in the first quarter of 2007, delinquency rates began to move higher. The reason is as clear as the water surrounding the Bahamas: in the years preceding the Great Recession credit growth was mainly focused on the U.S. housing market.
Credit growth was mostly driven by mortgage lending. Mortgages were generously provided by banks, but increasingly to subprime borrowers (subprime referring to their poor credit). Yet these subprime borrowers didn’t pay higher interest rates on their mortgages the moment Alan Greenspan began hiking rates. But as soon as their (promotional) teaser rates resetted, they started “feeling the Alan.” Delinquency rates went through the roof and the U.S. economy into recession.
Teaser rates, the low initial interest rate a borrower pays for the first few years, were responsible for the lag between Greenspan’s rate hikes and the 2008 recession.
Today, the Federal Reserve is ignoring a very inconvenient truth: the global economy is much more fragile than the last time around. And we have no teaser rates in today’s subprime credit (unless we of course consider oil producers that hedged oil prices by buying futures as something akin to “teaser rates”).
This time around, we will certainly not need seventeen rate hikes or three years before pushing the economy into recession.
Nick Murray once said “if you want to suppress volatility, you will suppress returns.” This definitely applies to many investors who either try to time the market on their own, or turn to complex and often times dangerous strategies designed to deliver stock like returns with bond like risk. Such a strategy by definition, cannot deliver on its promise. Look no further than the Merrill Lynch structured notes that lost 95% of its value. And although complex products almost never live up to their promise, there are simple ways to lower volatility without losing your shirt.
Consider a strategy that is over the top in its simplicity; if the S&P 500 is higher than it was one year ago, own the index. If the S&P 500 is below where it was one year ago, switch to one-month t-bills. You can see in the chart below that this simple model did significantly better than the S&P 500.
The trend model also experienced less severe drawdowns. It would not have saved investors from every dip, but it did okay- falling just 13% in the tech wreck versus 46% for the S&P 500, and 11% in the financial crisis versus 53% for the S&P 500. Furthermore, the standard deviation of the trend model was 12.4%, compared with 18.8% for the S&P 500.
Much of the advantage earned by the trend strategy came in the first few years by avoiding some of The Great Depression. If we change the start date to 1935, the picture looks much different. This time, the gap between the buy and hold strategy and the trend model shrinks dramatically.
But of course, as you’re already probably thinking, price appreciation doesn’t tell the whole story. The return of the S&P 500 total return index from 1928-today is 2838% higher than just the price return. So, if used the S&P 500 total return index, buy and hold actually did better than the trend model. Any downside that the trend strategy avoided was more than offset by the dividends they missed while not invested in stocks.
Similarly with the first example, if we begin in 1935
New research out by the Pew Research Center shows an interesting development in the United States. Using Census Bureau information released with 2014 population estimates, Pew found that the US is becoming ever more diverse, at the local level as well as nationally.
In 2014, 364 counties, independent cities and other county-level equivalents did not have non-Hispanic white majorities, the most in modern history, and more than twice the level in 1980.
The increase in the number of counties that did not have a non-Hispanic white majority was due in large part to the growth of the Hispanic population.
That year – the first decennial enumeration in which the nation’s Hispanic population was comprehensively counted – non-Hispanic whites were majorities in all but 171 out of 3,141 counties (5.4%), according to our analysis. The 1990 census was the first to break out non-Hispanic whites as a separate category; that year, they made up the majority in all but 186 counties, or 5.9% of the total. (The Census Bureau considers Hispanic to be an ethnicity rather than a race; accordingly, Hispanics can be of any race.)
Since then, the nation’s Hispanic population has more than doubled, from 22.4 million to 55.4 million, powering the increase in majority-minority counties. Last year, 94 counties had Hispanic majorities – just over twice the number of majority-Hispanic counties in 1990 (45), and one more than the number of counties last year with non-Hispanic black majorities
Overall, non-Hispanic whites are less than a majority in four states, and in a further indication of just how diverse the US is becoming, in none of those states does a single racial or ethnic group have a majority.
All in all, non-Hispanic whites are less than a majority in four states – California, Texas, New Mexico and Hawaii – as well as the District of Columbia. In fact, in none of those places does a single racial or ethnic group have a majority: California has almost equal shares of Hispanics (38.6%) and non-Hispanic whites (38.5%); non-Hispanic whites are the plurality in Texas (43.5%); Hispanics in New Mexico (47.7%); blacks in D.C. (47.4%); and Asians in Hawaii (36.4%).
Watching the Brexit campaign generated mixed feelings: it was a little like the man who saw his mother-in-law drive his new Mercedes off a cliff. In the United Kingdom, some people who hated free trade, immigration and market innovation challenged the officious, wannabe superstate headquartered in Brussels. Who to cheer for?
We should cheer for the Brexiteers, who deserve at least a couple of hurrahs. The European Union created a common market throughout the continent, an undoubted good, but since then has focused on becoming a meddling Leviathan like Washington, DC. For Britain, the virtues of remaining appeared to pale in comparison to the likely costs of continued subservience to Brussels. In a variety of imperfect ways, Brexit promoted liberty, community, democracy and the rule of law. In short, the good guys won.
Here are sixteen reasons why the United Kingdom was better off Brexiting:
1. Average folks took on the commanding heights of politics, business, journalism and academia and triumphed. Obviously, the “little guy” isn’t always right, but the fact he can win demonstrates that a system whose pathways remain open to those the Bible refer to as “the least of these.” The wealthiest, best-organized and most publicized factions don’t always win.
2. Told to choose between economic bounty and self-governance, a majority of Britons chose the latter. It’s a false choice in this case, but people recognized that the sum of human existence is not material. The problem is not just the decisions previously taken away from those elected to govern the UK; it’s also the decisions that would have been taken away in the future had “Remain” won.
3. Those governed decided that they should make fundamental decisions about who would rule over them. The Eurocrats, a gaggle of politicians, bureaucrats, journalists, academics, lobbyists and businessmen were determined to achieve their ends no matter what the European people thought. A constitution rejected? Use a treaty. A treaty rejected? Vote again. A busted monetary union? Force a political union. And never, ever consult the public. No longer, said the British.
4. The rule of law will be respected—or at least not flagrantly flouted. Those signing up as EU members did not realize that the EU would be a transfer union. At least some
“Our carceral state banishes American citizens to a gray wasteland far beyond the promises and protections the government grants its other citizens… When the doors finally close and one finds oneself facing banishment to the carceral state—the years, the walls, the rules, the guards, the inmates…the incarcerated begins to adjust to the fact that he or she is, indeed, a prisoner. New social ties are cultivated. New rules must be understood.”
- Ta-Nehisi Coates, The Atlantic
In a carceral state – a.k.a. a prison state or a police state – there is no Fourth Amendment to protect you from the overreaches, abuses, searches and probing eyes of government overlords.
In a carceral state, there is no difference between the treatment meted out to a law-abiding citizen and a convicted felon: both are equally suspect and treated as criminals, without any of the special rights and privileges reserved for the governing elite.
In a carceral state, there are only two kinds of people: the prisoners and the prison guards.
With every new law enacted by federal and state legislatures, every new ruling handed down by government courts, and every new military weapon, invasive tactic and egregious protocol employed by government agents, “we the people”—the prisoners of the American police state—are being pushed that much further into a corner, our backs against the prison wall.
This concept of a carceral state in which we possess no rights except for that which the government grants on an as-needed basis is the only way I can begin to comprehend, let alone articulate, the irrational, surreal, topsy-turvy, through-the-looking-glass state of affairs that is being imposed upon us in America today.
Back in April President Obama took a trip over to the UK in order to lecture another country on how to vote – Obama of course was staunchly in the Remain camp. Obama even penned an op-ed titled: “As your friend, let me say that the EU makes Britain even greater.”
Of course, we all know the historic outcome of the Brexit vote, and we have even asked if it was Barack Obama who actually was the deciding factor:
UKIP leader Nigel Farage has never been shy of course, but lately has been making sure to remember all of those who tried to downplay or influence the vote. For example, in his first appearance in the European Parliament since the Brexit vote, Farage took the time to make sure the audience knew he hadn’t forgotten that everyone laughed when Farage said that he was going to lead a campaign to get Britain to leave the EU, saying “You’re not laughing now are you.”
Farage hadn’t forgotten Obama’s attempt to influence the vote either. In a recent interview with Fox News, Farage was asked what can be done about Putin if the UK isn’t in the EU, to which Farage raged that Obama had behaved disgracefully when compared to Putin.
“Well ultimately let me say this, Vladimir Putin behaved in a more statesmanlike manner than President Obama did in this referendum campaign. Obama came to Britain and I think behaved disgracefully, telling us we’d be at the back of the queue. Treating us, America’s strongest, oldest ally, in this extraordinary way. Vladimir Putin maintained his silence throughout the whole campaign.”
* * *
Oh that does it, Obama won’t be inviting Farage on any of the remaining 36-hold golf outings!
Tell a person that it’s a big beautiful world, full of fresh opportunities and a sense of freedom that is just not available by staying put and you will inevitably be treated to a litany of reasons why expanding your life into more than one country just isn’t practical.
Let’s consider some of those commonly stated reasons, and why they might be unjustified. While largely directed at Americans, these are also applicable to pretty much anyone from any country (for example, Britain… or Germany).
“America is the best country in the world. I’d be a fool to leave.”
That was absolutely true, not so very long ago. America certainly was the best – and it was unique. But it no longer exists, except as an ideal. The geography it occupied has been co-opted by the United States, which today is just another nation-state. And, most unfortunately, one that’s become especially predatory toward its citizens.
“My parents and grandparents were born here; I have roots in this country.”
An understandable emotion; everyone has an atavistic affinity for his place of birth, including your most distant relatives born long, long ago, and far, far away. I suppose if Lucy, apparently the first more-or-less human we know of, had been able to speak, she might have pled roots if you’d asked her to leave her valley in East Africa. If you buy this argument, then it’s clear your forefathers, who came from Europe, Asia, or Africa, were made of sterner stuff than you are.
“I’m not going to be unpatriotic.”
Patriotism is one of those things very few even question and even fewer examine closely. I’m a patriot, you’re a nationalist, he’s a jingoist. But let’s put such a tendentious and emotion-laden subject aside. Today a true patriot – an effective patriot – would be accumulating capital elsewhere, to have assets he can repatriate and use for rebuilding when the time is right. And a real patriot understands that America is not a place; it’s an idea. It deserves to be spread.
“I can’t leave my aging mother behind.”
Not to sound callous, but your aging parent will soon leave you behind. Why not offer her the chance to come along, though? She might enjoy a good live-in maid in your own house (which
Surprise, surprise. Workers in Britain, many of whom have seen a decline in their standard of living while the very rich in their country have become much richer, have turned their backs on the European Union and a globalized economy that is failing them and their children.
And it’s not just the British who are suffering. That increasingly globalized economy, established and maintained by the world’s economic elite, is failing people everywhere. Incredibly, the wealthiest 62 people on this planet own as much wealth as the bottom half of the world’s population — around 3.6 billion people. The top 1 percent now owns more wealth than the whole of the bottom 99 percent. The very, very rich enjoy unimaginable luxury while billions of people endure abject poverty, unemployment, and inadequate health care, education, housing and drinking water.
Could this rejection of the current form of the global economy happen in the United States? You bet it could.
During my campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, I’ve visited 46 states. What I saw and heard on too many occasions were painful realities that the political and media establishment fail even to recognize.
In the last 15 years, nearly 60,000 factories in this country have closed, and more than 4.8 million well-paid manufacturing jobs have disappeared. Much of this is related to disastrous trade agreements that encourage corporations to move to low-wage countries.
Despite major increases in productivity, themedian male worker in America today is making $726 dollars less than he did in 1973, while the median female worker is making $1,154 less than she did in 2007, after adjusting for inflation.
Nearly 47 million Americans live in poverty. An estimated 28 million have no health insurance, while many others are underinsured. Millions of people are struggling with outrageous levels of student debt. For perhaps the first time in modern history, our younger generation will probably have a lower standard of living than their parents. Frighteningly, millions of poorly educated Americans will have a shorter life span than the previous generation
A trio of suicide bombers struck Istanbul’s biggest airport on Tuesday killing at least 36 people and wounding many more, Binali Yildirim, Turkey’s prime minister said.
The interior ministry initially said that two explosions took place at the entrance to the international departures terminal at Ataturk international airport at about 9.50pm local time.
Security guards opened fire to try to halt the attackers as they approached a security checkpoint but they blew themselves up, one official said.
No group claimed responsibility for the attack but Mr Yildrim said the initial findings pointed to Isis as the culprits.
The attack is the fourth deadly bombing to hit Istanbul in just six months.
The bombings came little more than 24 hours after Turkey officially announced a rapprochement with Israel, ending a six-year diplomatic freeze after the killing of 10 Turkish activists by Israeli forces as they tried to take a flotilla of aid to Gaza in 2010.
Mr Erdogan also moved to repair ties with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, on Monday, expressing regret for Turkey’s shooting down of a Russian Su-24 jet in November.
The numbers of Russian tourists, who in past years flocked to Turkey’s Mediterranean coast, have fallen dramatically after a diplomatic row with Russia triggered when Turkey shot down a Russian jet near the border with Syria in November. Official figures released on Tuesday showed a 35 per cent fall year-on-year in visitors last month, with Russians down 92 per cent.
Please recall that German Chancellor Angela Merkel wants to give 80 million Turks visa free access to the EU.
How smart is that?
Also recall that migration issues fueled the vote for Brexit.
A curious result of the splintering of Europe coupled with fears over terrorists is a move by Turkey to make amends with Russia.
Earlier today French president Francois Hollande insisted that the UK would need to abide by EU migration rules if it works out a Norway-style arrangement for access to the EU.
The delinquency rate on loans is key in understanding banking. It answers one question: what percentage of loans is overdue for payment? The delinquency rate is by far the most useful indicator for “credit stress.” It seems, however, as if delinquency no longer counts. Few are paying attention to the quick and sudden rise of the delinquency rate. What does...
Indexes gapped up sharply at the open, and stayed firmly in the green all day with a round of buying into the close. The S&P 500 gained 1.78% and the NASDAQ 2.12%. In case you haven’t noticed, it’s been pretty volatile out there the past week. But all in all after all the hysteria, U.S. markets finished down about 2% from where they were a week ago – not quite the “zombie underworld” we were warned about if Brexit came to pass.
“I think it was just a market that got a little ahead of itself to the downside,” said Robert Pavlik, chief market strategist at Boston Private Wealth. “A little bit of ‘cooler heads are prevailing’ and seeing this as an opportunity to get in. How long it lasts is going to be the big question...
By Jacob Wolinsky. Originally published at ValueWalk.
Bill Gross on ‘What’d You Miss'”>Bill Gross on ‘What’d You Miss’
Streamed live 5 hours ago
Today on ‘What’d You Miss,’ co-hosts Scarlet Fu & Alix Steel bring you live coverage of the market close and talk to Standard & Poor’s Chief Global Economist Paul Sheard about the G7 meeting. We’ll also bring you Erik Schatzker’s interview with Bill Gross, live from FI16 in Los Angeles (http://la.bbgfi16.com/). We’ll hear from the bond king on central bank policy and his outlook for global growth.
‘What’d You Miss’ with Alix Steel, Scarlet Fu, and Joe Weisenthal airs every weekday on Bloomberg TV from 4 – 5 pm ET:
Reminder: OpTrader is available to chat with Members, comments are found below each post.
This post is for all our live virtual trade ideas and daily comments. Please click on "comments" below to follow our live discussion. All of our current trades are listed in the spreadsheet below, with entry price (1/2 in and All in), and exit prices (1/3 out, 2/3 out, and All out).
We also indicate our stop, which is most of the time the "5 day moving average". All trades, unless indicated, are front-month ATM options.
Please feel free to participate in the discussion and ask any questions you might have about this virtual portfolio, by clicking on the "comments" link right below.
To learn more about the swing trading virtual portfolio (strategy, performance, FAQ, etc.), please click here
I have mixed feelings about Brexit today. Clearly the European institution need reforming. The addition of so many countries in the last 20 years has created a top heavy administration. The Euro adds more complexities to the equation as the ECB policies cannot fit every country's problem. On the other hand, a unified Europe has advantages as well – some countries have benefited from the integration.
For Britain, it's hard to say what the final price will be. My guess is that Scotland might now vote for independence as they supported staying in Europe overwhelmingly. Northern Ireland might be tempted to leave as well so possibly RIP UK in the long run. I was talking to some French people and they were saying that now there might be no incentive for France to stop immigrants from crossing over to the UK like they do now and simply allow for travel there and let the UK deal with them. The end game is not clear to anyone at the moment....
One week ago, when bitcoin first crossed above $700 on the seemingly insatiable Chinese buying which we forecast last September (when bitcoin was trading at $230) would take place as a result of China's capital controls (to much pushback by the "mainstream" financial media), we tried to predict what may happen next. We said that "it could go much higher. That said, anyone who bought last September when the digital currency was trading at $230 may be advised to take some profits, and at least make...
After a three-year bull run that more than quadrupled its value by its peak last July, IBD’s Medical-Biomed/Biotech Industry Group plunged 50% by early February, hurt by backlashes against high drug prices and mergers that seek to lower corporate taxes.
This is a non-trading topic, but I wanted to post it during trading hours so as many eyes can see it as possible. Feel free to contact me directly at email@example.com with any questions.
Last fall there was some discussion on the PSW board regarding setting up a YouCaring donation page for a PSW member, Shadowfax. Since then, we have been looking into ways to help get him additional medical services and to pay down his medical debts. After following those leads, we are ready to move ahead with the YouCaring site. (Link is posted below.) Any help you can give will be greatly appreciated; not only to help aid in his medical bill debt, but to also show what a great community this group is.
Note: The material presented in this commentary is provided for
informational purposes only and is based upon information that is
considered to be reliable. However, neither PSW Investments, LLC d/b/a PhilStockWorld (PSW)
nor its affiliates
warrant its completeness, accuracy or adequacy and it should not be relied upon as such. Neither PSW nor its affiliates are responsible for any errors or omissions or for results obtained from the use of this information. Past performance, including the tracking of virtual trades and portfolios for educational purposes, is not necessarily indicative of future results. Neither Phil, Optrader, or anyone related to PSW is a registered financial adviser and they may hold positions in the stocks mentioned, which may change at any time without notice. Do not buy or sell based on anything that is written here, the risk of loss in trading is great.
This material is not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security or other financial instrument. Securities or other financial instruments mentioned in this material are not suitable for all investors. Any opinions expressed herein are given in good faith, are subject to change without notice, and are only intended at the moment of their issue as conditions quickly change. The information contained herein does not constitute advice on the tax consequences of making any particular investment decision. This material does not take into account your particular investment objectives, financial situations or needs and is not intended as a recommendation to you of any particular securities, financial instruments or strategies. Before investing, you should consider whether it is suitable for your particular circumstances and, as necessary, seek professional advice.
Site owned and operated by PSW Investments, LLC. Contact us at: 403 Central Avenue, Hawthorne, NJ 07506. Phone: (201) 743-8009. Email: firstname.lastname@example.org.