The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets
Logging in or registering will improve your experience here
Main Navigation
Full-Text Search & Archives

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.


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 sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means 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, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

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.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2020-02-27 06:46 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 19 references
[Comments enabled]  

The Supremes ruled in a case that many are condemning, especially on the left:

In 2010 Mesa, an on-duty U.S. Border Patrol agent who was at the border in El Paso, Texas, shot Hernández at least twice — once in the face. At the time, the boy, a Mexican national, was on the southern side of the border in Ciudad Juarez.

What is in question, and at the core of a legal dispute the U.S. Supreme Court has been trying to resolve for nearly three years, is whether Hernández's parents, who are also Mexican nationals, have a legal standing to sue Mesa for damages in the killing that occurred outside of U.S. territory.

The answer is No.

The answer should be "No."


Because foreign nationals, outside the US, do not have US Constitutional Rights.

And the truth is that neither you, I, or anyone else would want it any other way because if we have it that way then so does every other nation.

In this specific case there is video evidence that despite the claim that agent was being pelted by rocks (a legitimate deadly weapon) he was not.  However, there is another case (Rodriguez) in which there is clear video evidence that the agent was being pelted with rocks thrown by the person who was shot.  The agent in that case faced criminal prosecution and was acquitted, but the civil case has been held pending this decision.  That one's done now too.

I know, I know, it's kids.  Kids are "speshul."

Uh, no they're not in instances like this.  And you'd better say not too, because there are all sorts of very bad things that will happen if you try to assert otherwise.

We're not the only nation on the planet, and many of them assert legal principles that most people in this country do not agree with.  Iran, for example, throws gay people off buildings and thinks that's just fine.  In fact several Muslim nations consider homosexuality to be a criminal offense and in some cases it's punishable by death.  In many other nations there is no 4th Amendment at all.  In some criticizing a leader is a punishable criminal offense.  In still others "mis-gendering" someone can be a crime.  What all of these share is that our laws and Constitution only apply within our borders and if we expect other nations to honor our legal system then we must honor the boundary drawn on a map that delineates where our laws end and others begin.

Borders are real things.  They have meaning.  The Mexican nation has no respect for our border.  The people of Mexico have no respect for our border.  There are millions of Mexican nationals who have abused our nation, our border, and our legal system.  The Mexican Government explicitly condones and permits this.  Mexican parents teach it.

It must stop.

If you travel to Mexico and falsely claim you're there as a tourist and then try to interject your opinion into their political process you will be arrested and thrown in jail and, upon serving your sentence, deported and banned from ever entering the nation again.  That's their law.  It's their right to enforce it.  I've been in Mexico as a tourist and I know that law exists.  My Constitutional Right to Free Speech ends at the American border.  If I travel to another nation, no matter what that nation is, I either respect their laws, including their right to control said border, or I risk imprisonment, deportation or worse and if I get any of those it's my fault, not theirs.

America is a unique place but we do not have the right to export our nation to other lands, nor do those who are not Americans, and not on American soil, have the right to American due process of law.


View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2020-02-26 10:24 by Karl Denninger
in Podcasts , 105 references
[Comments enabled]  

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2020-02-25 12:43 by Karl Denninger
in Podcasts , 118 references
[Comments enabled]  

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2020-02-25 10:20 by Karl Denninger
in Personal Health , 162 references
[Comments enabled]  

The left wants you to.

They tell us that "body positivity" includes being outrageously obese.

That criticizing, "shaming", or even mentioning that this is an entirely self-inflicted problem and can be fixed without a single medical intervention of any sort is within the reach of virtually every person so-affected constitutes "abuse" -- or worse.  Many if not most leftists even want to criminalize such commentary, First Amendment be damned.

It really is simple: Stop eating carbs.

Do you know why you need to fix this problem?

  • You are debilitated by being fat -- right now.  You can do less.  You can not run nearly as far, or as fast -- if you can run at all.  Your heart is working harder than it should be, since it is pumping blood through more tissue than it was designed for.  Your lungs are working harder.  Your kidneys are working harder.  Failure of any of those organs will kill you.  Then there are all the other parts of your body you are damaging (specifically your knees, hips and ankles) which won't kill you but can cripple you with age.  While joint replacement is possible with today's technology it's both expensive and the recovery is daunting -- just contemplate what has to be done in that bone must be sawed open and the artificial replacement put in place of the damaged parts.

  • You are insulin-compromised.  Over time this has a very high probability of causing Type II diabetes.  If you aren't diabetic now you will be.  If you stop eating carbs if you are headed for diabetes you will likely halt that entirely.  If you are Type II diabetic now and stop eating carbs you may in fact reverse your high blood sugar entirely, along with ceasing the accumulation of damage that high blood sugar causes.  In some cases your body may be able to repair that damage over time.  If you wait too long and the damage gets too advanced then there's nothing, literally, you can do about it.  The damage path for diabetes includes gangrene, amputations, blindness and ultimately kidney failure and death.  It is a very unpleasant way to die.

  • Eating tasty animals is not only good for you it tastes good.  Not being hungry when you wake up until noon or later makes maintenance trivially simple since you will only want to eat once a day.  You will stop being a slave to the refrigerator and all the crap you formerly had in it.

  • You will get more fiber, not less, by changing what you eat.  Green vegetables, especially cruciferous ones such as broccoli, kale, brussels sprouts, collard greens and similar are very rich in both vitamin C and fiber.  Their balance between usable nutrients your body can absorb per calorie of content is extraordinarily favorable.  It's trivially easy to get many times your Vitamin C requirement from these while consuming only a couple hundred calories.  As just one example Broccoli contains just 30 calories in one cup of florets, yet it contains 135% of your Vitamin C requirement and 116% of Vitamin K needs and close to 10% of your daily fiber recommendation, yet it has only 3.5 net (digestible) carbohydrates.

  • Your immune system will improve.  Do you think that might be important given Coronavirus?  I presume you'd rather be alive than dead, yes?

About four years ago I wrote what may be my seminal piece on this called Demolishing Lies on Low Carb Eating.  Instead of subscribing to the left's virtue signalling on being fat choose to tell them to go **** a goat.  Let's be blunt about this: The Left's virtue-signalling about "beautiful at any size" and similar claptrap in fact is a recipe for disease, disability and death and those on the left pushing this bull**** know it.

They'd rather see you six feet under, eaten by snakes and worms, than be truthful not only with but with themselves as well.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2020-02-24 09:42 by Karl Denninger
in Personal Health , 653 references
[Comments enabled]  

First and foremost, the screech owls are still ruling the day.  Doom sells, in short.

This doesn't mean that this virus isn't bad news.  It is.  It is especially bad news if you live in a turd-world nation or a part of a nation that is turd world.

Let me define turd world nation: Any place that does not have "White Man Sanitation" and in which there are moderate or high densities of people on a transient or (much worse) all-the-time basis.

Iran has a problem with the virus near Qom.  Big shock -- not.  Iran is full of squat toilets and Qom is a pilgrimage site so it is also full of people in close proximity.  Oops. 

Italy (along with much of Europe) has taken in millions of turd-world people who were not required to culturally assimilate to "White Man Good Sanitation" as part of their duty to immigrate.  Note that the Italian outbreak is studiously omitting any mention of the demographics involved in those who are sick.  Gee, I wonder why?  Oops.

In South Korea the outbreak there has been traced to a woman who is a member of a "doomsday" Christian cult and repeatedly attended services while sick, ignoring other attendees requests that she seek medical attention.  Further, this particular church forbids the wearing of things upon the head (like a mask or glasses!) in services and they are held with everyone packed together.  Oh, and large parts of South Korea also use squat toilets.  I'm sure they decided that praying rather than ejecting this chick was the better course of action.  Double, triple, aw-**** oops.

In the United States we have a significant population of turd world people -- they're the illegals from South America.  Many of them have crap for sanitary practices.  We also have a large homeless population, especially on the West Coast although also in places like Chicago and Austin.  The latter tend to be riddled with drug abuse, taking a crap on the street, literal zero handwashing and worse.  Rather than slam the border closed the left screams "racism!" -- and has engendered the potential for serious trouble here, at least in some parts of the country.  But -- we're more-insulated than many, as are nations such as Australia.

This does not make us immune.  Less risk does not mean no risk.

My hypothesis, that the most effective spread is not from casual oral vapor interchange, especially from someone who as asymptomatic, continues to hold.  But that's a hypothesis.  It's all it is, and the fact that the Chinese won't let our CDC people in there to run some of this down makes quite clear that they know more than they're letting on and it's not good.

If you get this virus and require intensive medical intervention (which, it appears, only is the case in perhaps 10% of the cases) the only way to provide it to you without risking giving it to others is to put you in a negative-pressure isolation room.  There are very few of those in the United States.  The reason is simple -- it is rare to require them; most people in a hospital are there due to either trauma or chronic conditions and, if due to something that can be transmitted it's hard to transmit it (such as HIV.)  Since we have eradicated or greatly attenuated so many easily-communicable diseases (e.g. measles) there's simply no need for these facilities on a routine basis, and there are damn few of them.

Let me make this clear to you: If you go to a medical facility with an urgent need for immediate care and that facility has people in it who have this virus and are not isolated in said negative pressure rooms -- because they don't have any of them available or any at all -- you are risking your life by simply being there.  If you go for some non-virus-related reason you will be begging to get it.

So let's talk about preparations.

This is US-centric; if you're outside the US and reading this then you have a different set of problems, especially if you live in a turd-world nation.  There is a huge difference between a location during fire season where there's some dry grass and one that has chopped up and felled, dry pine trees all over the ground including right up against the side of your house!

At what point do I consider risks like this to be worth specific preparations?  About 10% odds -- which I believe we now have invaded due not only to what we've done thus far but more-specifically what we haven't done up to this point and probably won't until it's too late, if it isn't already.  Note that a 10% risk is, frankly, quite low -- but if you're totally screwed if something with a 10% probability happens you'd be nuts not to prepare for said risk.

So what do I think are minimum and reasonable preparations?  Let's first look at the environment that one should expect in terms of risk reduction that you must be prepared for.

First, you must to the extent possible be immune to requiring serious medical intervention.  If you have a chronic condition that requires monitoring on a regular basis there is little or nothing you can do to reduce risk to acceptable levels because you will be compelled to go places where you can contract the virus.  A stroke or heart attack is always bad news but it's much worse if, in the course of trying to survive that, you get the virus!

You should expect that in your area you will find out about a local "hotspot" outbreak late or not at all through official channels.  At least two states in the US are already refusing to release data on pure numbers of who's been tested for the virus and the results.  They're claiming HIPPA and state law prohibits said release; this is a flat-out lie as numerical counts do not implicate privacy in any way, shape or form.  Do not expect the "authorities" to contribute honest information you can use to make decisions; you must assume they will actively conceal information until they are overcome by events.  As such you need to keep your nose to the ground in your community and pay attention.

You should expect severe to critical supply line problems for common items.  We have not only allowed we have promoted the offshoring of drug production to China and India (!!!)  The political class that permitted this, and the corporate class who did it, should be hanged for that profiteering garbage but for the time being the more-serious problem is that if you require said things you're ****ed.  So if you have a medication requirement lay yourself in a 90 day supply -- now -- and keep it there, rotating through it so it doesn't go stale.

You should also lay in a decent supply of OTC meds.  Specifically you want aspirin (unless you have stomach or other GI problems that preclude its use), acetaminophen (e.g. Tylenol), several large bags of Ricola cough drops (more soothing than medicated as they're herbal-based), a mild and a strong OTC antihistamine (e.g. Allegra and Benedryl, both of which are OTC), a decent supply of expectorant (something containing guaifenesin) and a decent decongestant (containing pseudoephedrine or similar.)  You can get combined products if you want (e.g. Nyquil) but if you're stocking back for a situation where supply chains are disrupted picking things that are separate allows you to combine them as required instead of as-packaged.  They also tend to be cheaper this way, but not always.

You may also want a stethoscope.  Why?  Because you can use it on yourself to get a reasonable handle on any sort of significant lung compromise.  Like it or not if you wind up with a problem there of note you're headed for immediate medical attention and it will allow you to discern the difference in location of trouble.  If it's in your lungs as opposed to your throat you're in deep ****.  You don't need an expensive one; all you want to be able to do is discern whether what you're experiencing is located deep in the lungs or in your throat.  The latter you can tough out at home, the former not.

You may also consider antibiotics.  Be careful with these.  Antibiotics do nothing for a viral infection and in fact are dangerous because they kill the beneficial bacteria in your body as well as the bad ones, and if you do not have a bacterial infection at best they will do nothing and at worst they may open a path for a nasty secondary infection!  Second, once you start them you must finish the course, especially if you really are ill.  And third, cipro and its close relatives in that class are associated with severe tendon damage including ruptures; if you rupture your Achilles you now need immediate surgical intervention, you cannot walk with a ruptured Achilles, and remember that during an event like this staying the hell OUT of the hospital increases your odds of being ok.  Generally speaking for most disasters you want a supply of these because drugstores and docs may be cut off but this is not an ordinary disaster and if you're the type who will grab for a pill without understanding what you're doing don't lay these in your supply.  There is a reason these are considered prescription meds although getting around that by using veterinary supply can be trivially done if you're so-inclined.  For most people I would say this ranges from a bad idea to a very bad idea unless you have medical knowledge or access to someone who does in the event you're tempted to use them.

I expect that basic utilities will continue to work in such an event here.  This means piped gas, electricity and, if you're on municipal supply, water and sewer.  If you're on propane for heating or cooking fuel supplies may be interrupted because the companies may be impacted that deliver them to you, so consider that.  Most people who rely on same already have some sort of backup provision (e.g. a wood-burning fireplace) but do keep it in mind.

You want to lay in enough food and other supplies for at least a month.  Realize that if this gets bad allowing anyone to breach your property perimeter is begging to get sick and having to violate it yourself for medical attention.  If you do decide to bug in then that decision has to be absolute, given the long incubation period; nobody comes in and anyone who leaves cannot return, period.  You need to be willing to enforce that with deadly force if necessary, even against family members.   This means interrupting your income as well, and it may mean you get fired.  Realize that if this starts to impact communities here there will be immense pressure from governments not to shut down many lines of business.  If you work in a movie theater they'll close it down but you can bet they'll try to reopen it as soon as they think they can, which may be well before it's actually reasonably safe.  This is a crappy deal but there's just nothing you can do about it; if the "bug in" requirement comes to your area you are going to have to make some very difficult economic decisions and live with their consequences whether your decision ultimately proves to be the correct one or not.

If someone in your household, or you, are older than 65 then you're at particular risk.  The death rate for those over 80 appears to be very high for this virus -- perhaps over 10%.  Those odds suck, and it's fair to assume that if you have any sort of immune disorder you're in that group no matter your age.

Finally, come to grips with this: Our nation's willingness to allow the medical system to******us blind on a financial basis though acts that are criminally illegal and have been for more than 100 years means that even if you have so-called "insurance" if you get this bug and require serious medical intervention unless you can blow hundreds of thousands of dollars and be ok you should expect to be bankrupted with near-certainty.

I have long been raising Hell about this and nobody has given an explosive diarrhea crap about it either in the general public or the political class.  Exactly nobody has taken this up as the seminal issue to be resolved and our economic system along with our federal and state governments are on a collision course with bankruptcy due to this bull**** as I have been pointing out now since before I started writing this blog.  Well, the public's refusal to get off their asses and make this the issue that needs immediate and permanent resolution to the exception of all others is now threatening to butt**** you personally irrespective of your station in life, job, so-called "insurance" status or anything else.

Good luck.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)