The Market Ticker - Cancelled
What 'They' Don't Want Published - Category [Editorial]
Login or register to improve your experience
Main Navigation
Sarah's Resources You Should See
Sarah's Blog
Full-Text Search & Archives
Leverage, the book
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. For investment, legal or other professional advice specific to your situation contact a licensed professional in your jurisdiction.

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.

Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility; author(s) may have positions in any firm or security discussed here, and have no duty to disclose same.

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 be complete (NOT a "pitch"), include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. Pitch emails missing the above will be silently deleted. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2024-02-24 08:24 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 410 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

I'm done.

You should have been done when "A Girl In Iowa" was murdered by an illegal immigrant who was "just misunderstood" when she spurned his advances -- and he decided that he was going to take what he wanted.

But.... you didn't, Trump didn't, and here we are.

An illegal immigrant freed because of lack of detention space is now accused of murdering a 22 year-old University of Georgia student after she went for a run. 

Jose Antonio Ibarra was arrested for the murder of Laken Riley in Athens - a sanctuary city - on Friday and is now being held at the Clarke County Jail.

NewsNation reporter Ali Bradley said Ibarra, 26, is originally from Venezuela and crossed into El Paso, Texas, in September 2022.

He was released into the United States by Customs and Border Patrol because the worsening migrant crisis means they have insufficient facilities to hold all border crossers that they intercept.  Cops don't believe Ibarra knew his victim. 

Fuck every one of you bleeding-heart assholes.  You are why this young woman is dead; you've had years to demand that either the border is sealed and every illegal immigrant cut off from all public services, all "sanctuary" crap and forced out of this country, with every single employer using said labor thrown in prison or you will drag your so-called "officials" into the dock and hold them accountable as accessories to every single crime these people commit and you didn't because you "feelz."

Well guess what -- Riley is dead and you're why.

YOU ARE PERSONALLY WHY, SO SHUT THE FUCK UP AND OWN IT YOU MURDEROUS FUCKING PIECES OF FILTH.

Joe Biden, among many others, is personally responsible for this and must be charged as an accessory before the fact along with the everyone else who has refused to seal the border including all those cocksuckers in the Senate and House.

If we do not force the border closed, including if necessary by posting the military on it with live ammunition and orders to treat illegal crossings as an invasion then we are all responsible for every one of these deaths.

As for Athens and its "sanctuary status" the mayor and everyone on the city council must be charged as accessories before the fact to murder and suffer the exact same penalty as the accused.  Perhaps we should contemplate giving all of them as much due process as Riley got.

Let me make this clear: If you do not do everything necessary to deport them all and seal the border,  right now, including cutting off every government-funded service, imprisoning every employer who hires or uses them and ejecting them from the nation then if your daughter is murdered by one of them I'm going to laugh in your fucking FACE because both you and she deserved what you both got.  You are why it happened and thus you, personally, are responsible.

Enough damnit.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2024-02-19 07:30 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 498 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

Well well look what we have here!

 

What's "heartbreaking" is that we pay zero attention to the law and we have rich and powerful people who enforce said "mantra" through advertising policies, banhammering those who outline the societal and economic costs of same as "dangerous or derogatory" information and similar.

They lord this crap over the rest of us and expect us to just suck it up and eat it, never mind that mathematics are not suggestions and even without the crime and drugs the problem of mathematics cannot be evaded.

If you bring in people who have no skills, little or no education and thus are "cheaper" you force down wages for those on the lower end of the economic strata who are citizens and yet have similar educational and intellectual firepower.  It is simply supply and demand, a law of economics that you cannot evade.

The dripping elitism of such jackasses is bad enough but of course that's not all of it.  The precursor chemicals for fentanyl nearly all source from China, simply because they're cheaper to make there and despite China claiming to be anti-drug they don't give a crap.  Those are then sent to Mexico where they are used to make fentanyl.  So in addition to the direct economic harm that Susan's "heartbreaking" advocacy causes we also are forced, as a result, to eat the criminal activity and drug importation.

Of course being rich and powerful Susan did not care about this.  After all she could afford her own security, so some Venezuelan raping her was a near-zero risk.  Or, for that matter, some five-times deported dude running over her child was also a near-zero riskbut heh, we must be "heartbroken" and not shut the damn border down so said slaughter is prevented.

What she did not count on, however, was that her son might enjoy using recreational pharmaceuticals beyond the legal ones you can buy in California at the local weed store and get his hands on something that was polluted with said fentanyl because it is cheaper than the actual drug -- and so the various traffickers use it in an attempt to "boost" their profits.  Since their trade is illegal and they really don't give a shit about anything but money (go figure) they aren't real careful about how much fentanyl goes in and how consistently it is blended.  This sometimes results in a lethal amount winding up in some other drug's supply.

Well, chick-a-dee, now your personal advocacy has quite-literally blown up in your face.

You now get to deal with the anguish of your own son being dead as a direct and proximate result of what you did and the policies you enforced that made those of us arguing that the border must be closed, all the illegals must be deported and both China and Mexico must be sanctioned (e.g. with a $1m tariff imposed for each fentanyl OD in the US) being tagged as promulgating "dangerous and derogatory" information.

There is a thing called karma and it just broke down Susan's front door, took up residence in her living room and its never going to leave for as long as she lives.

And yeah, this is on the "no ad" side because of course it would be deemed "dangerous or derogatory" were it not.

Jameson has been added to my espresso this morning because my response to this news is "Mazel Tov!"

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

Category thumbnail

Here's Musk...

 

You're lying, you've been lying since you took over Twitter (now "X") and proof is right here.

Just minutes after you posted this Massie pointed out that Lindsey Graham had called in public, on Twitter, for Iran to be "hit" -- that is, bombed, within the prior day.

 

That is a direct call and advocacy of violence.

Why was Lindsey Graham's account unrestricted?  He is calling, directly, for actual physical violence against the people of another nation and this is allegedly against Twitter's rules.

Massie asked what people would say to this, and my response is what got me a 12 hour stay in Twitmo with a demand that I remove my post yet, as I write this, Lindsey's remains on the platform and he was not suspended.

 

Note that I did not advocate or call for violence.  I said I would vote for it against the person who has policy power to cause direct and actual violence to occur to many, many more than one person.

That is no more advocacy than it would be for me to say I would vote for a politician who says he will go to war.

I chose my words very deliberately and carefully.  I intentionally stated that I would vote for a policy (whether in a legislative capacity were I ever to hold one) or for a politician who says he will do something, in this case engage in said violence.  I am not glorifying it or advocating it.  I am stating I will vote for it which is protected political speech and in fact we have a President in office right now who is funding an actual real, no-bullshit shooting war between Ukraine and Russia, so my statement is no more "advocacy" than is one that I would vote for Biden because he (obviously) supports prosecuting said war.

Lindsey Graham holds an actual policy position and advocated, publicly, for actual physical violence.

His account was not restricted for advocating ACTUAL violence while mine was for stating I would VOTE for such a policy -- and yes, I reported Lindsey's tweet.

Not a single word of Musk's rhetoric is true when it comes to such nor is any single representation that such a policy applies to all true.  You can advocate as a Senator sitting on a committee with power to actually implement blowing up Iran and by Elon's rules that is fine but I'll bet any amount of money you'd like to lose that were I to advocate for laying Tel Aviv waste in the exact same fashion I'd be permanently barred.

If anyone can advocate for bombing Iran then anyone has to be able to advocate for bombing Israel, London, Paris, Moscow or Beijing.  If someone cannot advocate that Beijing be erased for their part in letting Covid out given the several million dead people worldwide over the last few years (and it doesn't matter if the interventions kills them or the virus did -- no virus, no interventions) then any person advocating Iran be pasted, no matter the reason and no matter who they are must face the same sanction.  Indeed the only possible argument otherwise would be that advocacy for a declaration of war by Congress is permissible as that is expressly Constitution -- but no other "kinetic" or other violent action.

None of Elon's claims are true and the entire site, along with the rest of social media, is the very definition of election and political interference and thus gives rise to the question:  If the First Amendment in the context of political speech can be controlled in such a fashion in direct contravention of the Constitution is that a seditious conspiracy?

To Elon Musk and his desire for me, and others, to pay him a subscription fee:

Go.
Fuck.
Yourself.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2024-01-28 09:42 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 372 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

He claims he'll "shut down the border if the House and Senate pass a bill allowing him to do so" (which, incidentally, also authorizes one and a half million immigrants per year to come in.)

He's lying about needing the bill.  Here is proof:

(f)Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.

The President has the sole authority to prevent entry of any person or group of persons on his own initiative.

He needs nothing other than the desire to do so.

Biden is lying, he knows he's lying, and he should be ejected from office and held under arrest for actual sedition for the act of intentionally fomenting an invasion of illegal aliens into this nation without any capacity to deal with or fund their needs, along with McConnell and Schumer.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2024-01-27 09:04 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 288 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

Read this tweet

This guy claims (who knows if he's real) that he's paying 20% of what his competitors cost to have the same staff operating.  $5/hr, which is way below federal minimum wage, never mind that there are no employment-related taxes either.

If you think this sort of shenanigan is limited to offshoring labor you're wrong.  SIP trunks and VPNs have made this entirely accessible to organizations of all sizes and they're all using it.  

You think not?  You're wrong.  I know this factually and I won't pick on a single firm because the list of those doing it is so long at all sizes, down to that in the tweet, that to do so would be to imply the others are not, and that would be a lie.

I get queries from people all the time on the finer technical details of setting this sort of thing up and I know damn well what they intend to do with it.  I refuse such requests and in fact had someone I know in a pub this last week start asking questions about this.  It is everywhere, in every size business down to those with a couple of dozen employees.

Here's my basic problem with the scenario in the tweet above: If I am in a line of business and the competition is doing this, and has a cost of labor that is 1/5th of mine, I can either do what he's doing or he'll destroy me.  Therefore this rapidly winds up with everyone doing it because you have to if that is your competition -- its not a choice.

One of the (many) reasons I'll never stand up a company again is this.  Labor law is supposed to provide for reasonable standards for everyone in America.  You can argue the finer points of it, and that's a good debate to have.  I believe that in some places we go too far, and in others the restrictions are reasonable.  But all of that comes with both cost for the employer and a transfer of money to employee, whether directly or otherwise in the form of mandated benefits such as Social Security, Medicare and unemployment, never mind general withholding taxes on at least a federal level.

These are not trivial things.  FICA (Social Security and Medicare) are 15.3% of all wages from the first dollar, and while only half of that shows up on your pay stub all of it is in fact in your wages.  In addition anyone working over 32 hours is supposed to be offered health insurance and that's non-trivial -- it is likely as much as $1,000/month per person which is $12,000 a year!  Oh you don't see it, but the employer has to cut the check and if you work 2,000 hours, which is 50 weeks of 40 hours each, that's $6/hr just for the health insurance.

Now take the place that sends all that labor out to a job shop.  They in turn have all 1099 "contractors" which they pay $10/hr and then turn around and deduct back a fee for the VPN and phone service (I assume they make money on that, of course) and thus the company evades the 15.3% FICA tax, the $6/hr embedded Obamacare-compliant health insurance cost and while their "gross amount" looks like its somewhat-reasonable once you take the fees back out the staff is frequently making less than federal minimum wage AND they have to pay all of their own employment taxes.  That's assuming the 1099 people are in the US, of course - the math is even more compelling if they're in the Philippines and not subject to US jurisdiction at all.

The company that is attempting to compete with them and actually hires Americans in the local economy has a cost that can easily be three times what these firms pay for the same labor.

I think this is crap.

But if I stand up a company I have two choices: Do the same thing or get destroyed by the competitor who does it, because nobody can pay three times the competition's cost for labor and stay in business. No way, no how.

Is this illegal?

I'm not a labor attorney and obviously these firms think not, and paid someone who told them not.  But it certainly violates the spirit of Federal Labor Law and further, it absolutely screws American workers -- either out of some of the money they would otherwise make or all of it if the labor is offshore entirely.  This, of course does drop directly to the bottom line (and thus, if a public company, the stock price) of the firm doing it.

Who's willing to take that on in the political sphere?

Nobody.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)