The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets

This is curious statement....

“It’s urgent,” Draghi told reporters in Washington on Saturday during meetings of the International Monetary Fund. “We all want Greece to succeed. The answer is in the hands of the Greek government.”

Urgent for.... exactly who?

See, here's the ugly little ditty -- Greece's debt is sitting somewhere, and I bet a lot of the "somewhere" went through the LTROs.

That means that in some form or fashion the ECB is sitting on it either directly or indirectly.

Of course Jack Lew (our Treasury Secretary) doesn't like this either, because should Greece tell everyone to go stick it where the sun doesn't shine (and they should, by the way) the next obvious question is "why should anyone allow the US Government, or anyone else for that matter, to borrow at what amounts to a below-market-cost structure?"

The answer is "nobody should" and then there's a wee problem that arises among those who think that writing hot checks is a good idea.

Here's my recommendation for Greece: Start buying up rope, boiling it, and earmarking lampposts.

Officially and with the auspices of (Greek) law, of course.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)
 

From Nigeria:

The Islamic militant group Boko Haram is adopting ISIS' bloody strategy of stamping out Christianity with a frightening fervor, putting Nigeria's 70 million followers of Jesus in danger for their lives, fearful human rights advocates say.

Boko Haram leaders vowed their formal allegiance to IS in an audio message in Arabic posted to Twitter last month, according to intelligence analysts. The militant group has launched murderous rampages across northeastern Nigeria, and into neighboring Chad, Cameroon and Niger. In an attack April 7, Islamist extremists disguised themselves as preachers and killed at least 24 people in Nigeria’s Borno state.

Here in the United States, meanwhile, the very same radical view is present in government and without, particularly among so-called "social justice" groups.

Their weapons of choice are lawsuits and even criminal prosecution claiming discrimination -- weapons they deploy only against Christians, despite overwhelming evidence that the exact same refusal to comply with their demands exist within the Muslim community (e.g. Muslim-run bakeries) and indeed, that openly gay bakeries refuse to create wedding cakes with traditional Christian sayings and imagery on them.  

Worse, these warriors are not just private parties either; state and local governments are in on the act, making this a matter of official action rather than that of a "mere" rogue band of brigands.

The only real difference between Boko Haram, ISIS and these "social justice warriors", including the state and local governments involved, is that here in the United States they are not shooting people in the back of head when they refuse to ditch their belief system and both profess and follow that which is demanded.

Not yet anyway.....

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)
 

Count on Bloomberg to lay the horsecrap on hard and heavy....

The race for renewable energy has passed a turning point. The world is now adding more capacity for renewable power each year than coal, natural gas, and oil combined. And there's no going back.

Suuuuure it is.

Bloomberg cites the "expansion" of solar panel capacity.  Well, ok, except for a few problems, with the most-serious being that the sun doesn't shine all the time, yet your demand for power doesn't disappear when the sun does.

So how do you get the power when the sun is not out?

Well that's easy -- you have to have standby capacity ready to go.  This means you must have a fossil-fuel plant ready to run for the case where there's no solar available.  And that, my friends, is a problem because the capital cost has to be absorbed.

When running the numbers you must account for this, but the "renewable" people never do.  If you do then the so-called "solar" energy is extremely expensive and always will be, simply because you must back up every Gigawatt of it with something that will be available whenever it is demanded.  The alternative is that you get to black someone out when the energy can't be had.

Of course the claim is that this is all about "climate change."  That's horse**** too, but nobody cares anymore about the blatant fraud that has been perpetrated on the public when it comes to CO2.  

Then there's the nonsense about "electric cars"; it's a nice fantasy but that's all it is.  Among other problems is the fact that lithium, the key component in batteries, is expensive and what's worse is that it has to be dug out of the ground.  Mining isn't exactly ecologically kind, you see, but we don't care because it all happens "over there" where we can't see it, such as in China.

Further, there is no escape from physics and thermodynamics - specifically, energy density.  A lithium battery is always going to lose to an internal combustion engine on range (and badly so) because the battery has to carry its oxidizer inside the case; the engine gets it from the atmosphere.  Yes, the electric car is more efficient in the car but the power has to come from somewhere and the system efficiency from that point to the road is not much different if any at all from the internal combustion alternative.

Fuel cells sound interesting but where do you get the fuel?  For the uninitiated fuel cells typically run on hydrogen; the simplest source for it is natural gas, which is (mostly) methane or CH4.  You can chemically "reform" it to get the H4 out (as 2H2) but now you have the carbon left over, which winds up as CO2.  This is exactly identical to burning the methane to make power, incidentally.  Maybe you can explain how that's "greener" than simply burning the methane in the first place?  Oh, I know -- it happened "over there" where we didn't see it.

It never ceases to amaze me that the public simply doesn't understand this; after all, a huge percentage of the population never took a physics class or made sure that High School was appropriately named in terms of retention of what they did learn.  But this doesn't excuse publications and their writers; there's a presumption that when you shoot off your mouth you have at least a passing grade in the subject matter that underlies your argument.

Unless, of course, you're part of the lamestream media.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)
 

There are dark clouds on the horizon.....

Revenue misses are coming fast and furious this earnings season, and ignoring that is a very bad idea.

Everyone so far seems to be blaming the strong dollar, but IMHO that's misplaced.

The truth is that QE and it's pal ZIRP have short-term positive impacts with long-term costs that exceed the positive.  The long terms costs are now showing through the balance sheet in revenue misses.

Further, rotational trades into a handful of high-flying zero-earning (or damn near it; 400x P/Es may as well be negative) while the market itself has structural problems, is a pattern we've seen before.  Netfux anyone?

Now it is true that a few of these warnings have been false, particularly when they've come immediately before a further QE announcement.

But few if any have come from this far into overbought territory (1999 and 2007, anyone?) and when they do they tend to be associated with dislocation-style effects in the relatively-near future.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)
 

Your kids are being murdered through poisoning.

Slowly, but murdered nonethless.

This "school lunch" is just one example.

PORTSMOUTH, Va. – That’s not really a fish filet with a whole wheat bun resting on top.

Nah, your eyes are playing tricks on you.

That’s what administrators at Virginia’s Portsmouth Public Schools want parents to believe after a mother took a photo of her child’s paltry school lunch and posted it on social media.

You have two problems here.  This is a high-carbohydrate and high-protein lunch, beyond being unappetizing (but I bet not one kid in a thousand would actually eat it, which is the saving grace.)

Back to basics folks -- saturated fats are not a problem.  High-glycemic carbohydrates, on the other hand, which is what essentially all "breads", sugars and other starches constitute, are.

When you remove fats you must substitute something else to get the calories back you removed.  There are only three types of food: Carbohydrate, protein and fat.  Of those processed fats (that is, anything hydrogenated and most "vegetable" fats when consumed outside of the vegetable that originally had them contained inside) are bad for you.  Further, protein, while essential, is only good in amounts your body can actually use.  Excessive amounts cause severe illness, a fact that was discovered "the hard way" by explorers in the early US who tried to subsist by eating pretty-much all lean meat (e.g. rabbit, squirrel, etc.)  It didn't work out well for them and won't for you.

On the other hand the dual bogeymen of saturated fats and salt have been the subject of much junk science and outright deception, especially when they're replaced by carbohydrates that place severe stress on your insulin response system.

When young you probably get away with this, but the damage is cumulative.

Childhood obesity isn't coming from saturated fat intake, it's coming from fast carbohydrate intake and with it comes the setup for adult-onset diabetes which is now starting to show up in adolescents.

MooShell's "recommendations" should lead her to be charged with poisoning America's youth.  But I bet you won't cut the crap and demand that this war on your kids stop, will you?

Well, perhaps you won't, but then again, just remember one thing: Your kids will be behind the door you're knocking on when you get old and frail, and when they figure out what you allowed and even advocated for they might well slam it in your face.

If they do (and they should) you'll deserve it.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)
 

Main Navigation
MUST-READ Selection:
Wake Up America

Full-Text Search & Archives
Archive Access
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.

NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.

The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be reproduced or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media or for commercial use.

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.