The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets- Category [Corruption]
Logging in or registering will improve your experience here
Main Navigation
MUST-READ Selection(s):
Cut The Crap - NOW

Display list of topics

Sarah's Resources You Should See
Sarah's Blog Buy Sarah's Pictures
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.

I wouldn't have commented on this except that CNBS just ran a "feel goodism" story on it.

While Harper was born at just over 15 pounds, more than 8.8 pounds at birth is considered high, according to MedlinePlus. Babies born at a large weight "are often big because the parents are big, or the mother has diabetes during pregnancy."

Or the mother is a fat pig.

In this case that's two outrageously-large babies -- she previously spat out an 11lb child in 2016.

Her condition has gotten worse since, evidenced by the 15 pounder this time around.

Mom is almost-certainly severely metabolically-compromised and did not manage that condition during pregnancy.

The odds of these two kids (BOTH of them) winding up with severe medical trouble down the road are very high.

This is the second time in the last couple of months the media has run this sort of story -- the last one was a couple in Texas.

Now if you want to do that to yourself and your children, and we're willing as a society to go let this sort of outrageous personal conduct that, were it anyone else screwing up a kid like this, we'd call felony child abuse, then have at it -- right up until one or both of the parents demand that someone else, anyone else pay for those personal choices.

That's the point at which I call for prison time and refuse to pay -- and insist that we, as a nation should collectively refuse to pay and enforce that refusal by whatever means are necessary.

For the media to glorify and treat this as anything other than feloniously abusive behavior to said two children is outrageous.  It is in fact abusing drugs while pregnant and ought to be treated the same way -- with prison.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2019-03-14 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 967 references
[Comments enabled]  

Sadly history is littered with examples where people either issued a strong warning to some entity that was ignored, resulting in war (e.g. 1776) or worse, the people didn't issue such a warning and really, really bad things happened (e.g. Auschwitz.)

This is one of those times at which such a warning must be issued, and the issue is not just what it appears folks.

LOS ANGELES — You will get chipped. It’s just a matter of time.

In the aftermath of a Wisconsin firm embedding microchips in employees last week to ditch company badges and corporate logons, the Internet has entered into full-throated debate.

Religious activists are so appalled, they’ve been penning nasty 1-star reviews of the company, Three Square Market, on Google, Glassdoor and social media.

On the flip side, seemingly everyone else wants to know: Is this what real life is going to be like soon at work? Will I be chipped?

“It will happen to everybody,” says Noelle Chesley, 49, associate professor of sociology at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. “But not this year, and not in 2018. Maybe not my generation, but certainly that of my kids.”

I'm not kidding at all about having to shoot before this catches on in any material way no matter whether it's the government or private industry doing it.  If such a warning is not issued with the willingness and intent to carry out the threat if it becomes necessary our entire premise of civilization and personal privacy will be entirely destroyed.

Look folks, most of you don't get it because you don't understand the technology and everyone pushing it lies to you either by omission or directly to your face.

Here's the truth about any such implementation: It makes nearly every single thing you do in public instantly and permanently trackable by any entity that can get to the data stream now and forevermore into the future with an indefinite lookback.

How big is the data stream going to be?  Enormous and very-nearly complete in terms of specificity but very small in terms of volume per-person, and thus trivially maintainable and searchable.

Let me explain.

You can find these "chips" in modern car keys in terms of the technology involved. It's a small circuit with a coil that, when a magnetic field is passed over it, generates a tiny amount of power.  That power is just enough to power a little bit of circuity inside which in turn can return "an answer"; typically a challenge/response of some sort.  The amount of power available, due to the size of the chip and thus the coil, is very, very small and thus the range is typically very short -- an inch or thereabouts.  This is also why there is no RF exposure risk in having these things in a pet; the power level they can generate is so low that there are no exposure concerns.

That's why the vet passes the reader over your pet to read it; he can't point it at the cat from 3' away and read the chip, but right up against the skin under which it resides, yes.

The inverse-square law and the natural noise in the environment means that trying to extend that range to tens of feet or more is not going to happen.  You not only need to ridiculously increase the power being sent to the chip to excite it you must also radically increase the reception gain and manage to get above the background noise level.  The scaremongering about you being scanned from tens or hundreds of feet away is nonsense; it won't work.

But, if you can be funneled through something about the size of a door it's a different matter.  Now you both can trivially increase the querying power and the reception gain, along with keeping too many chips from responding at once -- and likely manage to read these things without the knowledge or consent of the person who has one in them.

This means that any time you go into a commercial building of any sort, or through any sort of "access point" in a public venue -- a doorway, a turnstile or similar that effectively makes people proceed "single file" due to its size -- it is a near-certainty that the chip can be interrogated and since these are all cryptographic signature devices of some kind you will be placed there with absolute certainty.

That record will never go away and it is trivially searchable en-masse for any sort of pattern recognition that the person who has access to that data wishes to devise, now or in the future.

Cell phones have some of this risk right now in their "location" capabilities, which I've written about before.  But you can turn the phone off and that should disable this.  You can also refuse to carry one.  Once chipped, however, it's both permanent and pervasive and there is exactly nothing you can do about it.

Anyone who has even a modicum of intelligence knows that nothing you do on the Internet is ever really "gone."  Likewise as soon as this happens there will be nowhere in any public space you can go where a commercial or government interest hasn't put in place some sort of point you must pass through where your entrance and departure in each and every instance will be recorded in perpetuity and used.

If that's allowed to happen, ever, freedom is utterly, instantly and permanently over.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2019-03-12 15:28 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 196 references
[Comments enabled]  

So you're rich.

Your kid isn't the brightest bulb in the drawer -- or simply doesn't think college is worth the effort to work hard to get there.

The latter isn't uncommon.  Today, it's a much tougher evaluation than it used to be, especially with the price ramps.  Even if Daddy and/or Mommy are paying for everything it's still a lot of work and perhaps whatever you want to do with your life provides little reason to attend.

But Daddy and Mommy want you to go.  It's a prestige thing, you know.  "My little snowflake went to Haaaarrrfvaaard."

You can't score your way in, especially if you don't do the work during the first couple of years in High School, and they can't spend $100 million to donate a building -- or something otherwise transparent (although such is bribery all on its own and to the best of my knowledge has never been prosecuted -- not once) -- maybe your ACT or SAT scores just aren't good enough for example.

So these folks, not having an extra hundred million lying around (they're just "rich", not "stupid filthy stinking rich", you see) allegedly literally bribed people.  Test administrators, college coaches, whoever they needed to.  Up to and including having someone else take the ACT or SAT for their little snowflake.


Worse, they funneled the money through a fraudulent non-profit, so the bribes that got paid were paid with non-taxed dollars!

Now a lot of people have been arrested.... of course everyone is presumed innocent until proved guilty, but this looks -- and smells -- bad.

Now tell me how that's different than when "Joe X Science Building" gets bought by someone with even more money -- and their kid gets to go to that very same school......

You don't think this came about because everyone wins at said colleges, right?  The old-fashioned way of preventing you from pull this crap worked reasonably well -- if you tried it you might indeed get in if Daddy bought a new Biology Lab but you still wouldn't last a single semester as you couldn't do the work.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2019-03-05 09:11 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 189 references
[Comments enabled]  

The instance of insanity otherwise known as "AOC", who appears to be the ersatz, self-proclaimed "new face" of the Democrat Party, has a plan.

It will kill half the population of the planet and -- as I'll get to -- she isn't ignorant of this; in fact she knows it and it's ok with her.

For instance:

U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez responded Saturday night after a published report excoriated the freshman congresswoman for pushing her Green New Deal initiative while still traveling on airplanes and using ridesharing services -- instead greener travel methods such as public transportation.

The piece mentioned the New York Democrat’s call in January for more sustainable energy solutions: "The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change,” she said at the time.

Yet instead of using the subway, which is just a hundred or so feet from her campaign office, she instead used Uber, Lyft and other car services over 1,000 times during her campaign.

All of which, I point out, use combustible hydrocarbons she wants to ban from being used by you.

She also used airline travel more than 60 times, and only rode on a train (which is much more efficient on a per-person use of fossil fuels) just 18 times.

And she believes in Air Conditioning instead of opening windows at strategic times to cool her residence (and office, I'm sure) -- never mind that in a residence HVAC is typically the largest consumer of energy.

She also believes you shouldn't have children in today's world in the United States, citing both "climate change" and educational cost, specifically college expense.

So let's start with the last one.  Why is college so damned expensive?


Is Calculus any more complicated than it was in 1960?  No.

Is Chemistry?  No.

Is Computer Science?  No, and by the way it's much cheaper to teach that since the computer required no longer costs millions of dollars (for a mainframe); you can now buy a perfectly-serviceable computer to learn on for $35! (No, I'm not kidding; Pi3 for example.)

So why is it so damned expensive?  Socialism, in short.

The Government not only started handing out money it regulated lending to go to college, making those loans unable to be discharged in bankruptcy and ultimately taking over essentially all student-obligation college lending.

That resulted in colleges turning into ridiculously plush resorts plus adding on insane numbers of administrators and the cost skyrocketed.

When it comes to children there's another problem -- if you have no children who is going to work and pay taxes when you get older and can't work any more?  If there are no children that you have what is her solution to this?

Might that plan be importing millions of no-skill, low-intelligence and low-wage brown and black people she can abuse in the belief they will be too stupid to force her to cut this crap out -- including, perhaps, by force?

Health care is, incidentally, expensive for the very same reason.  In the 1960s you went into the hospital and were given a bill.  If you had "insurance" you negotiated for payment but first, you knew what you were charged.  In today's dollars, adjusted for inflation, it was about $1,000 to have a child -- including several nights stay in said hospital.  Today it's 8-10x as much money or more and the stay is typically measured in a few hours.  Having a baby by vaginal birth has not changed in a very long time.

So why has it gotten so damned expensive?

Again, government.  Specifically, the government pays for a huge percentage of said births through Medicaid and has permitted hospitals and other medical providers to collude with insurance companies so you never see a price before service is performed and thus can't negotiate, they have allowed collusion including gag clauses prohibiting disclosing price, and they have mandated that irrespective of ability to pay you get treated -- which sounds great except without a published, level price this is an open-ended invitation to screw everyone.

In short 80% or more of every dollar spent on "medical care" in this country is stolen and instead of demanding that crap stop right here and now AOC demands that the theft increase exponentially via "Medicare for All" and similar twaddle.

Oh by the way all of that sort of behavior which is currently used to steal more than $3 trillion dollars a year from the American public alone was made illegal over 100 years ago and is codified in 15 USC Chapter 1.  It's a felony, not a civil matter and the amount of theft involved is literally approximately 15% of the total size of the economy!  Yet the number of prosecutions for these outrageous acts number zero, which is exactly how AOC likes it.

Then there's beef.  AOC says you must eat almost none of it.  Yet her chief of staff was recently photographed with her chowing down on a big, juicy..... hamburger.

In short she wants to, and does, all of the things she claims you shouldn't and is willing to make illegal so you can't.

She thinks she's Queen, in short, and can confiscate whatever she wants to do whatever she wants while supporting "urging" you not to do any of those things and if you refuse and insist on doing the same things she does she'll put a gun up your nose and threaten to blow your brains out unless you stop.

This is the essence of so-called "modern Socialism" which is really nothing of the sort; it's Communism or even Fascism at its core, where the leaders get all the spoils to do whatever they want, including "free" health care (courtesy of the US Taxpayer), they can fly anywhere they want, they can eat whatever they want and they can consume whatever they want (aka "Al Gore" and his mansion and diesel-powered recreational BOAT!) while the rest of us are told no and if we refuse we get fined, jailed or even shot.

Never mind the reports that her campaign may have diverted nearly a million dollars illegally -- which is a serious matter.

Now maybe you think this is perfectly ok but I suspect, when explained to you in this fashion, you think not.

Well then would you please explain why you let this baying ass -- along with everyone else in DC -- get away with this sort of crap?

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2019-02-25 08:50 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 151 references
[Comments enabled]  


New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft on Friday was charged with two counts of soliciting prostitution at a Florida spa -- and cops say there's video.

Kraft, 77, is accused of paying for sexual acts at Orchids of Asia Day Spa in Jupiter, located about 90 miles north of Miami. His name was among more than a dozen who were charged.

If you're 77 and still popping wood...... have at it.

The seedy side of this isn't the prostitution. It is the malum prohibitum nature of the offense that's the problem, exactly as is the case for consensual drug use.

Mala in se crimes are those in which someone else is harmed.  Robbery, for example; the person you steal from does not consent.

Prostitution, on the other hand, if an entirely consensual act, is simply illegal because someone decided it was "bad".

Or is it, in this case, that simple?

No, which is where the problem comes in.

Malum prohibitum "crimes" frequently are not what they seem because they either fuel some other non-consensual criminal act or is malum in se in fact although frequently charged otherwise.

In this particular case the claim is that the women were effectively slaves; they were apparently Chinese women who spoke no English and were forced to live in the "Spa", cooking on the back stoop.  They not only were prohibited from leaving they had no English skills whatsoever and thus couldn't even ask a random person for help -- and in their "job" were not expected to speak, of course.

Consent is easily manufactured where it doesn't exist under such circumstances; a similar situation exists with many drug laws, in that the original decision to take a drug may well be consensual but after being addicted is there actual consent, and did the person who got you addicted warn you in a fair fashion that this was either a risk or a known side effect?

When it comes to doctor-prescribed opioids the answer is a resounding no, just as it is for the street pusher.

And, I might add, just as it is for women who are allegedly "prostitutes" but in reality are slaves since they cannot leave and are intentionally trafficked somewhere that they can't even effectively communicate or interact with the people who live in the area.

This problem doesn't get addressed by busting people for misdemeanor "soliciting"; indeed it is the very nature of an environment that sets up the ability to charge someone in that fashion that leads to the real offense taking place.

Of course nobody is going to talk about that just as they didn't with Epstein.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)