The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets
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.

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 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.

2019-01-17 07:19 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 141 references
[Comments enabled]  

Anyone want to take a bet on how much uproar will be raised over what certainly appears to be flat-out racism -- and outrageously-nasty racism at that -- in "Bird Box"?

I can't cancel Netfux because I've never had it.  I refuse to patronize firms that have as the root of their business model forced subsidy (that's called thuggery in my book) and that's how Hastings "built" (stole) the company's "riches."

I remind you that the forced-subsidy model is extremely profitable.  It's also cheating, but nobody cares about that these days.

The allegation here, however, looks pretty nasty -- and, from watching that annotation (but not the movie itself) rather accurate.

There are plenty of people who claim it can "only" be a "thing" against people of this color or that, or this persuasion or that.  Nonsense.  Racism is racism, and it matters not whether the target is black, white, brown, or green (Martian.)  Never mind casting the only person who happens to be repeatedly right as an evil bastard and to be ignored because..... he's white.

Everyone has a right to their artistic expression -- even if it's racist.

But let's cut the crap and call things what they are instead of fawning over a company that makes a movie displaying racial and sexist hatred, just because the target to be hated happens to be white and male.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 



2019-01-17 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Health Reform , 129 references
[Comments enabled]  

Governor Idiot has decided to bankrupt California (well, ok, make it more bankrupt):

....

It directed California’s massive Medicaid system to negotiate prescription drug prices for all of its 13 million recipients, changing their benefits from a managed-care or HMO approach to one that allows the state to handle all the purchases

....

Under a proposal expected to be released as part of the state’s budget plan later this week, Newsom will ask the legislature to allow all undocumented immigrant young adults under the age of 26 to participate in the state’s Medicaid plan.

The budget proposal will also contain a plan to increase the federal subsidy for participation in Affordable Care Act policies to families of four making as much as $150,000, and reinstate the mandate requiring people to purchase health care.

Good luck with that.

First, the governor cannot "increase the federal subsidy" for ACA participation, as he cannot compel Washington DC to do anything.  What he can do is spend California's money on it.

He may be able to compel California residents to buy said policies, but that'll be challenged.  Of course out there it'll likely survive any such challenge in the courts.

He can also spend state funds on illegal invading children, but he cannot spend Federal dollars on that, so once again all of this will come out of the State's coffers.

I don't know where he thinks he is going to get the money for this, since states cannot run budget deficits.  I presume Newsom believes he can simply raise taxes but California already has ridiculously-high taxes, and this will certainly not make him any friends among those who pay them.

What happens when all those who pay taxes leave and all you have left is people who take?

We're about to find out.

Oh, and not just in California either:

New York City will begin guaranteeing comprehensive health care to every single resident regardless of someone's ability to pay or immigration status, an unprecedented plan that will protect the more than half-a-million New Yorkers currently using the ER as a primary provider, Mayor Bill de Blasio said. 

Once again, this time on a city level, the Mayor has decided that even if you're an illegal invader you may have free health care.  This of course is a lie; there is no such thing as free.  There is, however, forcing others to pay for it -- in this case somewhere around 300,000 people, all of them illegal invaders.

How long will it before all the people who live and work in NYC and actually pay taxes say "**** that!" and move?

Again, we're going to find out.

I'm looking forward to the results.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

Ok, ok, maybe it's not a black hole.

Maybe it's an asteroid headed for DC  (We can hope, right?)

 

Email kairia.rocks@gmail.com today to hang this nice original art piece on your wall tomorrow!

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 



2019-01-16 10:00 by Karl Denninger
in Health Reform , 122 references
[Comments enabled]  

I always find these sorts of articles and "dares", legislatively, to be amusing.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Challenging President Donald Trump to make good on his pledge to cut prescription drug prices, congressional liberals proposed legislation Thursday to bring U.S. prices in line with the much lower costs in other countries.

The Democratic bills stand little chance of becoming law in a divided government. But the effort could put Republicans on the defensive by echoing Trump’s pledge to force drugmakers to cut prices.

I haven't read the actual legislation -- but from the article, let's go ahead and take it on.

1. Deem "excessively-priced" patented medicines to be open to competition.  This one is rather interesting, but IMO the wrong approach.  The "threshold" is that the US price is higher than the median in Canada, the UK, Germany, France and Japan.  What's wrong with prosecuting those who collude to do same under existing, 100+ year old law -- which the medical and insurance industry has twice claimed exemption from at the USSC and lost both times?  You need no new law here -- just enforcement of long-standing existing criminal and civil law.  These are not civil issues either -- they're criminal felonies, which means there really are teeth available.  Jail a few drugmaker executives and watch how fast the problem disappears.

2. "Allow" consumers to import lower-price medications from Canada.  Under what justification did Congress ban people from buying legitimate, properly-labeled medications across national boundaries in the first place?  Drop that entirely -- again, we need no new law, just repeal of existing fraud-based "laws" that ought to be forcibly disobeyed backed up with whatever is necessary to tell Mr. Government man to BUGGER OFF.

3. Allow Medicare to negotiate with drugmakers.  Since when is government obligated to "take" any price offered?  Never, anywhere else.  So why here?  Again, this is a felony that was legitimated by Congress.  What do you call enabling a felony at gunpoint and making it "not a crime" when you're screwed by it?  I call it tyranny and thuggery.

Challenge?  Trump had three points in his campaign about putting a stop to medical monopolists.  He has done nothing.

This crap has to stop and all involved in maintaining it must be personally and politically destroyed.  No exceptions.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

So now we have it.

A rank admission that The Fed intentionally played with a "punch bowl" to addict markets and our government.

Just a very brief comment, Mr. Chairman, on the financial markets. I discussed views with some 25 market veterans in New York, and you’re going to be coming down as our guest to discuss with some of the local Texas market operators. I would say one consensus, and one only, emerged, and that is that quantitative easing is unambiguously inflating asset prices and, according to some, is distorting financial market functionality. As one said, artificially low interest rates invite fiscal sin.

What is more than a trillion dollars in deficit during an expansion?

Yeah.

Now the problem is what do you do when the economy slows and how do you gain maneuvering room before it does?

As I've repeatedly pointed out the last three decades have been a story of one bubble after another cheered on and demanded by both Wall Street and Washington DC.  The behavior has been exactly identical to a drug addict who demands one more hit/toke/shot/bottle and if it's not immediately forthcoming either throws a tantrum or steals the funds, and often both.

Rather than tell the market and Washington DC "tough crap; it's time for withdrawal whether you like it or not because if you don't do it you're going to die and I'm not going to be the reason you do" as soon as the market gets pissed off here comes The Fed to the rescue!

What's worse is that it's not just heroin and booze; see, the tolerance on both has built to the point that the Federal Government and markets don't get stoned on that any more.  So now we're doing speedballs; they've added meth to the cocktail since cocaine, the traditional "additive", is too expensive.

Of course the fact that you've got a hell of a good shot at an immediate heart attack doing that crap never comes into the picture.

Had The Fed told Congress, the President and the markets to go screw a duck back in 2013 or before the Federal Government would have had to neuter the medical monopolists, as there was no other way to bring the deficit under control and spiraling interest costs would have forced a resolution.

There still isn't any other way to bring them under control.

We're very, very close to that heart attack moment folks, and once we do have that occur it'll be too late for withdrawals.

No, folks, we won't make 2020 before it happens.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)