The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets

There's both an impressive and outrageous angle to this story.

An 11-year-old Missouri boy shot and killed a 16-year-old boy during an attempted home invasion Thursday afternoon, St. Louis County police said. 

Police said two suspects tried to break into the home north of downtown St. Louis twice before the shooting on Thursday. On the third try, authorities said the unidentified teen went through the home's unlocked front door while the 11-year-old and a 4-year-old girl were home alone. Police said the younger boy shot the teen in the head. The would-be burglar's body was found in the home's front foyer.

Good shot.

One round, one bad guy stopped in the commission of a forcible felony, and who knows what other felonies were on his mind given that there was a 4 year old girl in the house at the time.  The two home invaders apparently were quite-persistent as well since reports are that they made three attempts to break in.

Fox2Now reported that police want to know why the children were home alone and why the 11-year-old had access to a gun. Police believe the mother bought the gun after prior break-in attempts.

In other words since the cops couldn't do their ****ing job now we're going to try to find some reason to hang the mother.

Look, I get it -- generally-speaking it's a bad idea for kids to have access to firearms as such does sometimes lead to horrifying accidents.  But -- and this is important, the right to keep and bear arms doesn't have an age limit and neither does your right to defend your own life or the life of those you love.  This 11 year old did exactly that using the only device known to man that equalizes an 11 year old boy and a 16 year old thug who was vastly superior on a physical basis, exactly as it does when a thug assaults grandma.

Go ahead and punish those who act irresponsibly -- that is, where someone's decision in this regard leads to a bad outcome that can rationally be determined to have occurred due to negligence.  If someone's decision to leave a firearm accessible to a minor leads to them doing a bad thing, whether criminally or negligently, then come down on the adult(s) involved like a falling piano -- they deserve it.

But no such thing occurred here.  This young man demonstrated not only good judgment but also good marksmanship, striking only the intended and lawful target with his round.  He selected the only effective means of stopping the invader, he deployed that tool with an appropriate amount of skill and no innocent person was injured nor was property damaged, beyond the need to clean up the mess necessarily produced as the side effect of his lawful stop of a forcible felony, as a result of his decision to do so.


Leave his family, his sister and his mother alone.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Well now.....

Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 173,000 in August, and the unemployment rate edged down to 5.1 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Job gains occurred in health care and social assistance and in financial activities. Manufacturing and mining lost jobs.

Note that 5.1% is below the "start of tightening" target for The Fed, which was 5.2.

Now let's have a look inside:

This is "strong"?  Well.... 

Oops.  Note that we're still not adding enough to cover new entrants to the workforce!  So where's the "improvement" coming from in the official unemployment rate?

That's not hard to figure out -- The Not In Labor Force number went up by 1.3 million last month.  At the same time the actual number of employed people, by the Household Survey, went down by 494,000.

For perspective last year this was down 618,000, so you can call that "improvement" if you'd like, and this month is one where people typically do leave the workforce (about 1.3 million left last year in August as well.)

The Labor:Population ratio ticked down by 0.3%, which again is normal for this month.

How about the internals of the report?

Last year we had gains in goods-producing employment for August.  This year we lost jobs in that category across the board,, with two minor exceptions - construction which was roughly flat (compared to a robust increase last year) and automobile-related (up slightly compared to last year.)  All other sub-categories were job losers.

What did gain?  Service providing -- specifically, health care (which is bankrupting us) and hospitality (we'll see what next month looks like, as August is the end of the summer months of course.)

Government was also up big, compared with basically flat last year.

Weekly hours ticked up a tenth.

The troublesome pattern in who is getting hired, however, is continuing.  If you have a High School diploma you gained in terms of labor participation.  There was, however, no gain for those with some college or a degree.

In other words the gains continue to happen, on-balance, in lower-skilled no-degree-required positions -- which are also lower paid.

In addition, and this is deeply troubling, the only group among non-disabled persons who had a participation rate increase on a comparative basis were seniors 65 and over.  Non-disabled persons among both men and women younger than 65 lost jobs on a participation-rate basis.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Oh this is rich!

WATERLOO, ONTARIO and SUNNYVALE, CALIFORNIA--(Marketwired - Sep 4, 2015) - BlackBerry Limited (BBRY)(BB.TO), a global leader in secure mobile communications, today announced that it has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire Good Technology for $425 million in cash.

Good is one of BlackBerry's cash furnace "competitors" in the mobile management space.  And now they're gone and the pieces of the company that are useful will become part of BlackBerry's security suite.

This is amusing as hell but IMHO an utterly excellent move on Chen's part; he acquired the firm at a fire sale price, probably because Good was down to burning the furniture to remain operational and despite trying to go public for more than a year they had failed to do so.

This goes back to what I have both said and practiced back to when I ran my ISP when it comes to having cash and preparation for opportunity: Be the cat, not the mouse!

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

From just a few minutes ago:

"We must reform the entitlement system....."

Magoo (Greenspan) went on to cite the ~9% expansion in entitlement spending on an annual basis (all true!)

Folks, there they go again.  Everyone wants to lump this all together because it suits their political polemics.

The facts are that if you look at all the various programs as a percentage of the budget there is only one category that is expanding at ridiculous rates -- and that is health care.

Specifically, Medicare and Medicaid.

Today health care in the United States costs 500%, approximately, that of the same technology purchased elsewhere in the first world.  There are places where the "offset" is only 200% but virtually nowhere that it runs the other way.  It is literallypossible in many parts of the United States to buy a plane ticket to Narita, Japan, have an MRI done and read there and then fly back home for less than you will be charged for the same exam in your town.

The 900lb Gorilla in the room that nobody talks about is that health plans under Obamacare, Medicare and most private insurance, with a notable exception found in certain "Cadillac" plans that are all now heavily taxed under Obamacare, along with allMedicare recipients, leave the patient with a typical 20% "co-pay" plus in the case of private insurance a hefty deductible that typically runs to $5,000 per person, per year before a single penny is covered.

Here's the reason this matters: 

If you fix this problem then the consumer still pays 20% as they do now but that is the entire bill which means they do not need to buy "Health insurance" at all except for a low-cost policy against sudden and catastrophic events such as a heart attack or serious accident.  Such a policy would only cost a few hundred dollars a year and for those who are truly indigent it could be provided at little cost to the government.

Wake the hell up America.

David Walker pops up next and again he uses the words "Social Insurance programs" -- but here he goes again talking about universal health care!  How the hell do you square socialism with cost control?  At best you might get cost-shifting but to whom are you going to shift it?

One good point: He did say that we're spending two and a half times as much as any other developed nation and are getting worse results!

But once again:

Not only has Walker not focused on he hasn't even mentioned the blatant and outrageous acts in this industry that in any other business would be considered felonious and lead to decades-long prison terms -- price-fixing, collusion to create and maintain monopolistic practices, billing for events that never actually took place (that's theft), refusal to quote a price or worse, quoting one and then billing at a much higher price (try doing that as a car repair shop and you'll go to prison), getting laws passed to void the first sale doctrine and more.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

2015-09-04 05:00 by Karl Denninger
in Social Issues , 266 references

This is what you get when you put up with "Cait" claiming that which is not true.

In what is likely to become a common occurrence in the near future, 150 Missouri high school students walked out of class Monday due to a disagreement as to whether or not a transgender student who was born male should be allowed to use the girls’ locker room.


The school apparently offered Perry a gender neutral bathroom, which he rejected claiming, “I am a girl, I shouldn’t be pushed off to another bathroom.”

This is probably the most interesting aspect of the story.  The school, which was clearly caught in a tough spot, offered a perfectly reasonable compromise to the situation and Lila Perry refused.

The way things are trending right now, the LGBT community doesn’t really care whether or not parents are comfortable with their teenage children being forced to share bathrooms and locker rooms with children of the opposite sex.

Of course they don't care but the fact is as above: These people intend to force you to use locker rooms and bathroom with persons of the opposite sex.

There is a hard, factual, scientific distinction here.  You are either male or female.  Leave out of this the tiny percentage of people who are born with a genetic accident where they have vestigal or (very rarely) functional sets of both genital sets.  Those individuals might have a colorable claim to use either locker room but they are in fact genetic accidents and that's what occasionally happens -- nearly all genetic accidents are detrimental to the propagation of the species and this one is no exception.

Nobody else has such a claim.

You have the absolute right to disagree with your sex but that doesn't change what it is, any more than my "disagreeing" with a rattlesnake having venomous fangs will prevent it from biting me.  If your sex is male then irrespective of your appearance, which incidentally happens to include temporary or permanent changes you make to same no matter how much effort, money or both you expend, you are still male.


We separate bathrooms into sexes for perfectly functional and rational reasons.  Men urinate standing up, most of the time, and can use urinary facilities that consume less space and are more efficient per person needing to take a***** than women.  Unless you're going to put up eastern-style "floor toilets" where everyone squats (including for dropping a deuce) this not only makes perfect sense it also results in the expenditure of less resource (men urinating standing up into a toilet as opposed to a urinal are more prone to "miss" and make a mess, besides the greater space required for stalls as opposed to urinals.)

We separate locker rooms because the act of taking a shower and dressing both involve being nude.  Until and unless you're going to shut up about people walking around sans clothes on a routine, everywhere and all the time basis, and do so first then you have absolutely no place to argue that a girl should be forced to shower in a locker room with a boy.

Mr. Perry is a boy.  He was born with a penis and testicles, and does not have a vagina, uterus or ovaries.  This is a biological fact and disagreeing with facts is the mark of someone who is delusional, psychotic or both.

Now if Mr. Perry doesn't disagree with being a boy but he prefers to dress in effeminate clothing and alter his appearance so as to look more like a girl than a boy that's his choice.  But there is a difference -- a vast difference -- between altering one's appearance to suit your own personal desires and believing you are something that is factually false.

That Mr. Perry prefers an effeminate appearance has exactly nothing to do with which locker room or bathroom he uses.

He is male and thus uses the Men's bathroom and locker room -- period.

Cut the crap.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Main Navigation
MUST-READ Selection:
Why I Find It Hard To Give A F**k

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.