The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets

It's really not very hard to figure out folks.

Hillary Clinton accused Donald Trump of pandering to the gun lobby in a speech to a conference Saturday, organized by the Trayvon Martin Foundation to help families of gun violence victims, warning the audience about a Trump presidency that would put more children “at risk of violence and bigotry.”

Oh please.

"Little Tray" was apparently assaulting a man and was in the process of pounding his head on the sidewalk, a fact that was instantly evident in footage the media tried to bury by putting their damned logo over Zimmerman's head so people couldn't see the blood on the back of same.

Remember that?  I do, quite well.  A fist fight on grass does not produce a gash on the rear of your head; if you get hit you might get a bloody nose or similar, but how does someone you're having fisticuffs with tear open the rear of your skull?  They don't -- unless they knock you down, mount you and then start bashing your head against something solid.

That, incidentally, is the point at which shooting becomes legally defensible since the standard for shooting is imminent serious bodily harm or death.

Having your head bashed against concrete meets the standard.

That's why Zimmerman walked, and he should have.  I wrote extensively on this at the time along with the clear evidence that the media did their level best to conceal what appeared to be clear and convincing evidence that Zimmerman was being assaulted and justifiably feared he was going to die if he did not shoot.

Second, criminals don't give a damn about the law.  Want to talk to me about gun violence?  Illinois requires a state-issued license to buy or own any firearm or ammunition.  Long gun, handgun, anything.  No license, no gun or ammo, and if you get caught with either without said license you go to jail.  That's separate from the issue of handguns generally, which until a few years ago (and during the entire time I lived in Chicago) was flatly unlawful to own or possess inside the city limits unless you were a police officer or owned them since something like 1969 (when the law was passed.)

Of course criminals don't give a good damn about anything like that which is also why Chicago is one of the worst cities for gun violence generally and specifically.  And since criminals tend to not go to the range and maintain competency in their firearms (they're using them for illegal purposes, of course) they also have a disturbing pattern of accidentally shooting people they don't mean to and/or damaging their property.  That (innocent people getting shot) disturbs me far more than two gang-bangers deciding they want to settle their differences with flying lead, since both of them decided to live a criminal life.

Here are a couple of hints for you:

1. If you don't want to be shot, don't be a gang-banger, don't break into people's houses and don't steal things.

2. In addition, if you don't want to be shot don't live in places where politicians hide behind a dozen armed guards wearing body armor while telling you that you must submit to criminals who intend to rob,******or even murder you, none of whom give a damn about the law, while ignoring both the Constitution and your right to own the only means of deterring such aggression by said criminals.

It appears to be a fact that criminals don't fear the cops.  That's probably because when they get caught doing their evil things they are rarely locked up until they're not dangerous any more.  Witness the article I wrote on the "fine upstanding citizen" in Florida who was first caught carjacking, went to prison for it, was released and then decided he'd try sexually assaulting a minor.  He was sent to prison again but once again was released and this time shot and killed a Marshal that was coming to serve him with some sort of legal paperwork.

Of course everyone would like to blame that on the shotgun he used, right?  It isn't that despite being a two-time convicted felon we had not just one but two opportunities to never let that jackass out where he could hurt other people, nor was it evident that he had no intention of living in peace with the rest of society -- right?

The same is generally true of the gang-banger shooters in Chicago and elsewhere.  Most of them are not only known on a first-name basis to the cops (because they spend a hell of a lot of time in the back of their cars being transported and in courtrooms and jails) but most also have multiple felony convictions to their name before they shoot (at) anyone.  Yet we can't be bothered to lock up someone who believes that assaulting, robbing or even raping people deserves to be jailed until they're not dangerous any more.

Never mind the ridiculous and outrageous response of "parents" when one of these "fine, upstanding young men" gets his ass blown to Mars for a serious assault or worse.  It's always someone else's fault -- never theirs for acceding to the "lifestyle" of walking around with your pants halfway off your ass and stealing things or assaulting people for ****s and grins.  No, that's not the problem, you see..... it's the gun, an inanimate object, that's responsible.

But criminals do appear to fear being shot by citizens defending their lives and property, and whether they fear same or not there's this fact that is not subject to dispute or book-cooking: A felon shot in the commission of his or her felony is going to have trouble committing another crime.

And that really is, when you boil it down, the issue: Hillary, and others like her, think that those who commit violent felonies should be out free walking around to commit more of them, fully-aware that someone who intends to commit a violent felony doesn't give a damn about the law and thus will obtain and use all the guns he or she wants to.  After all, that spree of shootings, rapes and robberies serves their desire to disarm the population -- other than the criminals, of course, which is why people like her (cough-EricHolder-cough-cough) knowingly delivered hundreds of firearms to drug dealers, have not faced one indictment for doing so and further have done exactly nothing in terms of criminal sanction to the banks that have made possible the movement of hundreds of billions of dollars of said illegally-gained funds from those dealers over the last 20 years, much of which I've also documented in these pages.

Gee, guns (and ammunition) don't cost money by chance, do they?

**** you Hillary; the right to self-defense pre-dates not only this nation but all nations, and it does and shall exist literally forever, whether you respect it or not.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Oh look, only half the story...

International Business Machines Corp. this week quietly laid off employees, continuing a wave of job cuts the company announced in April.

IBM declined to say how many jobs would be cut overall. The total layoffs could affect more than 14,000 jobs, according to an estimate by Stanford Bernstein analyst Toni Sacconaghi.

Ok, and bad enough, except for one tiny little problem.

How many H1b positions is IBM attempting to fill with foreigners at the same time they're laying off Americans?

Answer: From 2013 to 2015 the total was 27,398, #3 in the United States for said sponsors, and the rate of same has grossly increased in 2015 to roughly double that of 2014 and 2013.


Where's that part of the story, Marketwatch?

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

There's an interesting implication in this article that isn't well-evolved, but (whether the authors like it or not) was exposed -- probably accidentally.

The bread arrived by UPS, heavy as flesh, wrapped in brown paper. Its springy crust belied a two-day journey from baker Avery Ruzickaat Manresa Bread in Los Gatos, Calif.

If shipping bread cross country seems like a wanton act of locavore disobedience, consider that I’m not talking about just any loaf. The one Ms. Ruzicka sent me was made using Oregon-grown Edison wheat berries, ground to flour shortly before being mixed with water, naturally fermented for 24 hours, then baked to tangy, tender goodness. This bread is imbued with all the nutritional virtues of the wheat kernel—perhaps the most misunderstood ingredient in modern America. Forget juicing. Forget bone broth. With bread like this, many chefs and bakers have come to believe, you can carbo-load your way to optimal health.

Weeeeelllllll.... don't bet on it.

But.... it is fair to believe that when you grind wheat and essentially use it immediately "as-ground", instead of separating it as is done for "modern flour", you don't have the same product.  You have part of the product but just like eating corn oil is eating part of corn, it is not the same.

There is a general belief that if food "A" is good to eat then anything made or extracted from "A" is also good to eat.

There is no evidence to support that position, incidentally -- just a naked belief that reaches the level of religion.

In fact, there's plenty of evidence that the opposite is true.

For instance, we know that linoleic acid, the primary component in most unsaturated oils (that is, vegetable oils), is essential in small amounts in the body but also increases insulin resistance (very bad) and fatty liver deposits (potentially catastrophically bad.)  Small amounts of linoleic acid are found in nearly all vegetables -- and in those amounts are healthy.  When concentrated in the form of vegetable oils, on the other hand, they are pretty-much the last thing you want to eat.

Is it fair to then say that wheat, as grown, ground and eaten whole, is perfectly fine while refined flour is not?

Not necessarily.  But this much is quite-clear: Taking wheat, grinding it and immediately using the whole is almost-certainly better than the modern alternative, and in modest amounts it probably moves the needle measurably from "bad" toward, but not to, "ok."

The article in question tries to equate this "movement" with roasting coffee near the point of use.  Eh, no.  As someone who roasts my own coffee I can quite-confidently tell you that whether you roast and grind coffee at home or buy it in a can there is nothing removed from the coffee in the can .vs. that in the roaster.  It's just ground up.

Now there is one material difference though -- and that is freshness.  Coffee is only good for about a week after being roasted and passably usable for two.  After that?  Forget it, unless you burn it while roasting it, which incidentally is why Starbucks does exactly that.  That hopper they have full of beans on top of their machine?  Yeah, try to run a distribution network where from roasting to final use in the cup you cannot exceed one week and let me know how much coffee you throw out as expired (or worse, use even though it tastes like crap.)   The reason is the oils in the beans, which start to go rancid once roasted -- just like nearly all vegetable oils.  By burning the beans you no longer have oil to worry about and it always tastes the same -- like crap.  Incidentally you can tell immediately if coffee beans are beyond their "use by" date, irrespective of burning them, by whether there's a decent layer of creama (not just a tiny little bit of it, but a solid quarter-inch or so) on the top of an espresso shot.  I've never gotten a decent amount of crema on any espresso shot bought in a Starbucks, and usually get none.  If you can see the coffee looking down into the cup on an espresso shot the beans used to pull that shot are too old and should be in the trash -- period.

Welcome to the McDonalds' model, gentlemen; the same burger anywhere, any time -- it's just not ever a good burger.

The idea of grinding wheat at point of use is something that is inherently impossible with modern food production, of course.  But you could try it on your own, in that if you have a Kitchenaid stand mixer the attachment to grind non-oily grains is about $150.  Whether it's worth it is another matter, never mind sourcing the grain to be ground.

Oh, and by the way, if you do try this you're going to find that what is called "bread" in today's parlance is not what you will be getting out of the oven when it's all said and done.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

The latest is a series of conspiracy nut garbage regarding the crash of an Egypt Air flight.

This is probably terrorism-related, but that's not yet proved.  The flight track shows violent maneuvers that no pilot would likely make on his own voluntarily even with a serious mechanical failure.  That in turn implies a complete loss of control right at the time of the first maneuver's initiation.

There are of course two reasonably-plausible reasons for such an event: A severe and unrecoverable mechanical failure of the aircraft, and a terrorist act that made impossible further controlled flight.

Which is the cause remains to be seen, but modern aircraft rarely suffer the former, especially when there is no known meteorological reason for trouble (e.g. flying through a storm.)

Those of you who argue that the plane was "stolen" and flown to Israel: Get off my lawn and out of my emailbox; you're a damned nut and I refuse to have anything to do with you.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Oh, so it's just Facebook that blew Todd Starnes out (blackballing his page) due to posting conservative-themed messages.

And no, people should not accept Facebook's "olive branch".  That's crazy.

You see, Facebook is entitled to run its business how it wishes.

But we are entitled to blackball the company and its advertisers in an attempt to put both out of business in response. The premise that one ought to sleep with one's enemies is flawed; observe and collect intelligence, yes, act on it, yes, sleep with them, no because while asleep you will be stabbed in the back.

Dana, you're full of ****.

But then, today, as if the previous insult is not enough there's this.

That's Google's "doodle" for today.

Do you have any idea who that is?

That's Yuri Kochiyama, a Japanese-American.  It's apparently her 95th birthday.  Ok.

By the way, she's a black separatist -- even though she's not black.  That's right, she stands for blatant, in-you-face discrimination by black people against everyone who isn't black.

She has been influenced by (and met) Malcolm X.  Yes, that Malcolm X.  Oh, and she engaged in taking over the Statute of Liberty to demand the release of four extremists who opened fire in the US House of Representatives.  (Incidentally, Carter later pardoned them; you see, shooting at Congressmen is ok if you're a separatist, it appears.)

It's actually difficult to count the number of associates this woman has had through her life that have been convicted of doing something ridiculously evil and outrageous, whether it was shooting up the US House, trying to blow things up (more than one) or similar.  Never mind her open admiration for Osama Bin Laden expressed in an interview, complete with thanking him for attacking the United States.  Yes, that Bin Laden.

This is who Google lionized today.

Need I say more?

PS: Yes, the Facebook and Google "share" buttons are gone -- permanently.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Main Navigation
MUST-READ Selection:
Dawn In America?

Full-Text Search & Archives
Archive Access
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 reproduced 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 or for commercial use.

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.