In your opinion, what does this blog need more of?

Tuesday, June 28, 2016

THE PREMARKET NEWS YOU NEED TO STAY ALIVE: here's what nobody's talking about except me


And this morning, Germany and Paris are both up >2%; USD is down against CAD, GBP and XEU; and oil is back up, which should also boost US stocks for no good reason.

So I guess what we saw was just a 2-day selling snit, which was the obvious market reaction to the Brexit vote. And since it was so obvious, the buy side of the book decided to disappear, making the selloff worse than it should have been. And now people are jumping back in, buying the equities that got sold down.

I'll let Wall Street Whitey give me $50 for the Magna that I bought yesterday at ~$44.50, and if they make me hold til after the next dividend then so be it. As for all the XIV I bought yesterday, I think I'll try and hold that for a 5-figure gain, since I have this year's tuition bill coming.


Monday, June 27, 2016

BBC were the ones who lost the referendum


Chris Dillow - the BBC problem. Quote:

First, in being impartial between truth and lies, the BBC was complicit in a conspiracy to defraud the public. Its more intelligent correspondents are aware of this. Here’s assistant political editor Norman Smith (7’52” in):


There is an instinctive bias within the BBC towards impartiality to the exclusion sometimes of making judgment calls that we can and should make. We are very very cautious about saying something is factually wrong and I think as an organization we could be more muscular about it. I’ll give you an example, which is one that cropped up, and there was a lot of debate within the BBC about it, was when the Brexit campaign suggested that Turkey was poised to join the EU, and that there was nothing we could do about it. Now that is factually wrong, but when we initially covered the story, I think we said along the lines of ‘Remain had said that is wrong’ – in other words, we attributed the assessment to the Remain side, when we could, of our own, say ‘No, that is factually wrong.’ But, because as an organisation, more than any other organisation, there is a massive pressure and premium on fairness, on balance, on impartiality, I suspect we, we hold back from making those sort of calls, and I do think that, potentially, is a disservice to the listener and viewer.

Secondly, the BBC’s main new coverage was guilty of adverse selection. As Simon says, there were two campaigns: a reasonable and civilized one; and a bitter dishonest one. The BBC gave us too much of the latter. On the Leave side, we heard too much from liars and crypto-fascists and too little from more decent Brexiters. And on the Remain side, it gave us too much of the exaggerations of Cameron and Osborne and too few more sober voices.

Thirdly, and perhaps relatedly, many of the BBC’s main current affairs programmes forget the first two of Lord Reith’s trilogy – inform, educate and entertain – in favour of the latter. Nick’s right:


The worst journalists, editors and broadcasters know their audiences want entertainment, not expertise. If you doubt me, ask when you last saw panellists on Question Time who knew what they were talking about.

In these ways, the BBC is a major culprit in the degradation of our political culture. It is heavily responsible for the fact that voters were wrong about key facts in this referendum.

As for me, back to calculus homework I guess, as the market continues to vomit up its sigmoid colon.

Some abuse for Kenneth Rogoff


Kenneth Rogoff - incompetent, ignorant bullshit from a proven liar. Here, let me quote you some:

Does a majority in Parliament have to support Brexit? Apparently not.

Um... yes it does, Kenneth. Parliament first has to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act, apparently, and that requires a majority. Then again, you shouldn't be expected to know this, because it doesn't involve gaming an Excel file to yield fake statistical results in support of ignorant right-wing austerian policy in the face of a global savings glut and a negative demand shock.

The idea that somehow any decision reached anytime by majority rule is necessarily “democratic” is a perversion of the term. Modern democracies have evolved systems of checks and balances to protect the interests of minorities and to avoid making uninformed decisions with catastrophic consequences.

It's especially difficult for voters to make informed decisions when faced with books by Harvard professors whose right-wing policy recommendations are based on intentionally gamed Excel files.

It is important to take stock not just of the outcome, though, but of the process.

Then why haven't you informed yourself of the process of Brexit by reading the article that the Guardian posted just today?

SHOCKING STOCK HEADLINES: you won't believe what derps next!


Still can't post charts except by stealing from other blogs, sorry. I'll see what I can do later this week when I get Fedora working better. Right now it's refusing to connect to my router on startup, and that pisses me off.

But here's some stock news headlines that are guaranteed to herp your derp!:

The Guardian on the harsh reality


The Guardian - guess what, referendums don't fecking matter. There's populist wharrgarbl, which Cameron himself started with this whole referendum vote. And then there's the cold, harsh reality of the parliamentary process.

Which your average blogger has entirely fucking ignored.

Quote:

“Sovereignty” – a much misunderstood word in the campaign – resides in Britain with the “Queen in parliament”, that is with MPs alone who can make or break laws and peers who can block them. Before Brexit can be triggered, parliament must repeal the 1972 European Communities Act by which it voted to take us into the European Union – and MPs have every right, and indeed a duty if they think it best for Britain, to vote to stay.

It is being said that the government can trigger Brexit under article 50 of the Lisbon treaty, merely by sending a note to Brussels. This is wrong. Article 50 says: “Any member state may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.” The UK’s most fundamental constitutional requirement is that there must first be the approval of its parliament.

Britain, absurdly, is the only significant country (other than Saudi Arabia) without a written constitution. We have what are termed “constitutional conventions”, along with a lot of history and traditions. Nothing in these precedents allots any place to the results of referendums or requires our sovereign parliament to take a blind bit of notice of them.

It was parliament that voted to enter the European Economic Community in 1972, and only three years later was a referendum held to settle the split in Harold Wilson’s Labour party over the value of membership. Had a narrow majority of the public voted out in 1975, Wilson would still have had to persuade parliament to vote accordingly – and it is far from certain that he would have succeeded.

Our democracy does not allow, much less require, decision-making by referendum. That role belongs to the representatives of the people and not to the people themselves. Democracy has never meant the tyranny of the simple majority, much less the tyranny of the mob (otherwise, we might still have capital punishment). Democracy entails an elected government, subject to certain checks and balances such as the common law and the courts, and an executive ultimately responsible to parliament, whose members are entitled to vote according to conscience and common sense.

Many countries, including Commonwealth nations – vouchsafed their constitutions by the UK – have provisions for change by referendums. But these provisions are carefully circumscribed and do not usually allow change by simple majority.

In Australia, for example, a referendum proposal must pass in each of the six states (this would defeat Brexit, which failed in Scotland and Northern Ireland). In other countries, it must pass by a very clear majority – usually two-thirds. In some US states that permit voting on public legislative proposals, there are similar safeguards. In the UK (except, under a 2011 act in the case of an EU expansion of power), referendum results are merely advisory – in this case, advising MPs that the country is split almost down the middle on the wisdom of EU membership.

So how should MPs vote come November, when Prime Minister Boris Johnson introduces the 2016 European Communities Act (Repeal) Bill? Those from London and Scotland should happily vote against it, following their constituents’ wishes. So should Labour MPs – it’s their party policy after all.

By November, there may be other very good reasons for MPs to refuse to leave Europe. Brexit may turn out to be just too difficult. Staying in the EU may be the only way to stop Scotland from splitting, or to rescue the pound. A poll on Sunday tells us that a million leave voters are already regretting their choice: a significant public change of mind would amply justify a parliamentary refusal to Brexit. It may be, in November, that President Donald Trump becomes the leader of the free world – in which case a strong EU would become more necessary than ever. Or it may simply be that a majority of MPs, mindful of their constitutional duty to do what is best for Britain, conscientiously decide that it is best to remain.

There is no point in holding another referendum (as several million online petitioners are urging). Referendums are alien to our traditions, they are inappropriate for complex decision-making, and without careful incorporation in a written constitution, the public expectation aroused by the result can damage our democracy.

 Oh? Well that sounds fine then....

The only way forward now depends on the courage, intelligence and conscience of your local MP.

Oh fuck we're all doomed.

Seriously, though, imagine the wharrgarbl of the Russian-funded disinfo stooges were they to find that the parliamentary elitists were ignoring the result of the referendum.

John Oliver on Brexit


Not all that great, must have too many American writers.



BTW, I had not heard before today that David Cameron had fucked a dead pig's mouth.

Well, so far....


So far this morning, the idiocy of Wall Street Whitey continues. Ford is down -3SD, and so is Magna, so I guess Whitey thinks a stupid reversible referendum in the UK will cause a worldwide recession. That's confirmed by CN also being -3SD.

I guess this'll continue til the TA says it won't, because that's all these idots are trading on, otherwise they'd be lapping up Royal Bank's 4% yield as UST10Y drops below 1.5%.


New Deal Demoncrat - still no sign of a recession. But don't let that stop you piddling, Whitey.


Calculated Risk - largest US population cohorts are now 20-24 and 25-29. This may be a case of "demographics trumps economics", Bill. But then again, last time demographics trumped economics, the US government invested trillions to build future productivity via the Marshall Plan, the US Interstate system, NASA, and the GI Bill. So really, policy trumped economics. Nowadays, policy aims to cause a worldwide depression. Can demographics trump that?


Simon Wren-Lewis - blah blah Brexit. Literally everyone English is all weighing in. And worse, the lefty blogs are now making it all about Corbyn, as if he has a fucking duty to bail out the banksters: whatever happened to labour being in fundamental opposition to the ruling class? Fuck you all and your quaint nostalgia for the lickspittle centrism of Tony Blair, you fake lefties. But the interesting stuff is in the comments, such as:
Ages 18-24 Leave 27%, 25-34 38% Leave, 35-44 48% Leave.
Like I said, figure out how Ena Sharples votes, and that will tell you the election result. Always. And Ena Sharples votes with the Daily Mail.

And as for the rise anti-European Nazi populism in England: the people wouldn't be forced to swing Nazi to oppose Europe if Militant Tendency were still around, would they, Simon? It wasn't Labour who fought the Poll Tax, it was Militant. And it wasn't Thatcher who killed off Militant, it was fucking Kinnock. So fuck you, ivory-tower socialists in academia. Go join Tim Farron, you fucking Quislings.


Polly's Panties - like the Cuban missile crisis, sense will prevail. Here's a quote from the Institute of Give Your Head a Shake:
Humankind has a natural inclination to avoid pain. If UK votes to leave and it threatens other countries' economic stability then other countries will do what they can to alleviate it.

There is punishment and there is mutually assured destruction. It's much like the cold war. Threats are made but when fingers are on buttons they will waiver and diplomacy will take over to avoid net sufferance.

I cannot believe that the EU, whose behaviour has constantly displayed a 'whatever it takes' response to survival, would let a Brexit vote paint themselves into a corner of sufferance.

As any parent knows, threats of punishment before the action are a different matter once the action has taken place. Negotiation and compromise is still most likely.

If we seriously think that, as the FT has suggested, the likes of the Mexican Peso's fate is in the balance of Brexit then something is messed up. Shock is one thing but reality is another. The tertiary correlations should be faded.
But nobody reads his blog anyway, so they'll likely continue to assume sense won't prevail.



Saturday, June 25, 2016

NEWS BULLETIN: Led Zeppelin cleared of plagiarism


BBC - Zep cleared of plagiarism. No, Led Zeppelin didn't steal "Stairway to Heaven". Rather, as it turns out, Randy California stole "Taurus":
During the trial, defence lawyers argued the chord progression in question was very common and had been in use for more than 300 years.
You can't fucking claim that you deserve someone else's royalties when you've nicked the chord progression in question from Henry Purcell and Alessandro Scarlatti. Well... maybe you still can if you're Randy's widow and you never gave a shit about the music, you're just looking for money.

And in case you want more commentary than this, I'll pass you on to an angry dwarf with a music blog:


Bob Lefsetz - Led Zeppelin ramble ramble internet ramble ramble Kanye.


Some Saturday news


So the market had its spaz attack on Friday, and so did several analysts.

Apparently, you can be a professor at George Mason and not fucking understand that whatever happened in the UK, central banks will automatically respond with policy meant to soften the blow.

So the blather will continue til it fades off into the distance and all anyone cares about is whether the US economy is still growing.

To that end, here's news:


Bonddad - Thursday datafest. Really, truck tonnage and chemical activity are still increasing? That must mean the US is still growing, eh?

Calculated Risk - weekly initial claims decrease. Really? That must mean the US is still growing, eh?

The Krugginator - Brexit, the morning after. Some calm and sensible discussion, such as this chart of the pound where if you squint really really hard you might be able to see the effect of the vote on their currency:



But since he's a Keynesian you're required to ignore him and call him some dummy sociamalist.

IKN - Bobby Genovese looking to refloat Liberty Silver in 2016. Good, let's see who he hires this time to pump his scam. As for IKN, it's now been over a year since he stopped talking to me because I'd mocked him for calling Blaise Pascal the president of Burkina Faso.

Friday, June 24, 2016

TOLD YA SO


So England voted to leave the EZ, just like I told you they would.

The UK voters don't care about economics, sorry. The vote wasn't about property values or anything. The vote was about driving out the darkies and the polaks, and anyone who remembers the glory days of Enoch Powell would have been able to predict this vote.

It's really quite simple. The English are so racist that they hate Belgians. Why would you expect the vote to be any different?

And it's a fact that old people vote more than young people, and country folk vote more than city folk, so just ask yourself how you'd expect a 75-year-old uneducated bitch from the Forest of Deane to cast her vote and that should have been your prediction for the referendum.

So what now?

The market has grossly overreacted to the vote, considering it'll still take 3 months to find a new PM, then another several months of negotiating the terms of negotiations, then 2 years of Article 50.

Still, the UK will go into an immediate recession, since the #1 result of this will be a drop in investment spending ex-real estate, and the investment cycle drives the economic cycle. Investment should drop even more in Scotland and NI, since nobody knows which way either of them go from here. Sinn Fein is actually calling for an immediate border vote under the GFA, which they can do if they don't mind a new war with the Ulster Loyalists; meanwhile, the SNP can successfully argue that the EZ referendum result is a sufficient enough change to Scotland's position in the UK that a new Scottish independence referendum has automatically been triggered.

And the Conservatives will respond with an austerity budget that amplifies the economic collapse, because the entire world political class ex-Trudeau still thinks austerity is the cure for everything.

The drop in the pound doesn't help the UK one bit trade-wise, because a) they just tore up the FTA they had with their largest single trading partner, and b) nobody else is going to forge new trade ties with the UK when they're facing 3 years of uncertainty about who the hell they're dealing with and under what treaty.

One thing I can predict with certainty, being a Canadian who's experienced the silliness of a Quebec "independence but not really" referendum, is that the centrist (semi-Leave, semi-Remain) element will band together to move forward with a strategy of negotiating "independence but not really". The ideal would be an agreement that can convince Joe Oik that yes, we're still going to ship out all the Romanians on cattle-cars, you've won, but hey look at this we're also going to hammer out a new agreement that gives us all the goodness of independence while also giving us all the goodness of remaining in the EZ except we won't call it "remaining in the EZ" because we won't be in the EZ but we will but stumm.

Thus they can rescue Joe City of London's balls from the fire while simultaneously convincing at least 10% of Joe Headbutts that hey, this new EZ "sovereign partnership agreement" will be just as good as independence, in fact it's what you voted for, you wanted the Turks out of Stoke didn't you, well here you go.

The problem I can see with that is that the big prize in this negotiation is the possible relocation of the EZ's banking centre. We know for a fact that Deutsche Bank & the rest of the continental banks have their hands up Merkel & Schauble's butts, so there's no way the Germans will consent to the City remaining in business.

Really, I don't know who the hell the City has on their side in Europe: fact is, the twats were only useful while they were useful. Now they're prey.

Plus it might be that Germany and France go out of their way to more generally take England's knees out, as a way of warning the others (Greece certainly, but also the neo-Nazi Russian-funded East like Hungary and Slovakia) that leaving the EZ earns you destruction with malice aforethought. They may want to really make an example out of England.

Meanwhile, this changes nothing for equities: British and European stocks universally sucked before today, and they are going to continue sucking for the next several years. Which means your buddy who went long EZ stocks 6 months ago because of their awesome low valuations is proven to be a fucking clueless idiot yet again. There has literally been no company from Europe that was worth investing in at any time over the past 20 years, save Nokia.

The US may freak out for a couple days on this vote. You can expect a few other freakout days at various points in the future as various milestones are passed. Britain will indeed go into a deep recession. You may expect snits from other miserable European countries. But the US is still the best equity market in the world.

I guess the one significant change is that rich white people now may feel they have reason to stick more gold in vaults. But that's a longer-term trend issue: last night's pop in gold should likely get worn off.


Friday videos - SPC ECO


Well, this is an interesting little indie baWAIT WTF THIS IS DEAN GARCIA FROM CURVE



Tuesday, June 21, 2016

Popo on Brexit


Polemic's Pains - on psychology and Brexit. Popo points out that it's obvious polls will swing in favour of Remain. After all, fewer people will want to admit to a live human being that they are still in favour of Leave now that the Leave side is seen to be populated with murderous psychopaths and the Moscow-funded neo-Nazi Farage.

However, even if Leave makes them feel too dirty to publicly self-identify, Popo thinks it won't stop them from voting in a way that makes them feel dirty.

With some extra insight into behavioural market analysis.


Monday, June 20, 2016

Here's a Jo Cox consipracy theory for you


Stupid me, I needed a larf, so I looked at Zerohedge this morning.

In response to KGB-funded neo-Nazi Martin Armstrong, I submit this alternative conspiracy theory:

Maybe the leave side is part of a secret conspiracy to sow unrest in Europe, funded by Putin. Maybe the conspiracy includes fomenting racist neo-Nazi sentiment, the way the Russians have explicitly done in Germany with AfD, whose leadership takes orders directly from Moscow.

Maybe the leave side is secretly conspiring with Moscow to weaken the UK by driving them out of the EU, in an attempt to set the European nations against each other, per good old-fashioned Russky zero-sum realist politics.

Maybe you're not the great glorious British Empire, but rather just a bunch of dumb fucking greedy clowns who still want to feel Thatcher's dick up your asses.