The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets
Logging in or registering will improve your experience here
Main Navigation
MUST-READ Selection(s):
Don't Do It Lennar -- Talk To Me Instead

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.

2018-05-23 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 70 references
[Comments enabled]  

Gee, fraud isn't a business model eh?  It sure is a public union model.

Here's how the math breaks down. Thompson, like all firefighters in Los Angeles, works 2,912 hours every year. With a base salary of $92,000, that comes to an hourly rate of $31.60. That means Thompson would earn overtime pay at a rate of $47.40 per hour—that's one and a half times the base rate. But earning $302,000 at a rate of $47.40 per hour would require working more than 6,370 hours. Add that to the 2,912 hours he worked as a salaried employee, and you get more than 9,280 hours worked, despite the fact that there are only 8,760 hours in a year.

So he not only worked more hours than there are, he didn't sleep either.


Pull the other one.

Where are the damned handcuffs?

We can love our firefighters, but these deals are destroying localities.

That's not a "deal", it's fraud.

And I don't love fraudsters -- I want to see them all locked up -- or hung by the neck until dead, in their skivvies, with all of their "fortune" confiscated and returned to those from whom they stole.

I don't give a crap if they're firefighters or cops -- run a scam like this, die broke hanging from a rope.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2018-05-22 12:19 by Karl Denninger
in POTD , 54 references


Ok, ok, maybe the lava isn't quite this dramatic.


Email today to hang this on your wall tomorrow!

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2018-05-22 09:58 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 222 references
[Comments enabled]  


At least one additional government "informant" attempted to infiltrate the Trump campaign under President Barack Obama, former Trump campaign aide Michael Caputo revealed exclusively on Fox News' "The Ingraham Angle" Monday night.

"Let me tell you something that I know for a fact," Caputo told host Laura Ingraham. "This informant, this person that they tried to plant into the campaign -- and even into the administration, if you believe Axios -- he's not the only person who came at the campaign. And the FBI is not the only Obama agency who came at the campaign.

This is what you get when you allow Eric Holder to run guns to Mexican drug lords -- and he doesn't go to prison.

It's what you get when your "black Jesus" can literally ship pallets of cash to Iran -- without a bit of Congressional consultation or approval.

It's what you get when over 8 years we run a clean double in federal debt, which lifts the stock market (of course) but builds a welfare state that utterly nobody will or does take on.

And this isn't about Democrats, Republicans, Whites, Blacks, Yellows, Greens (Martians, for those who can't figure out the slur-of-the-day) or anything of the sort.

It's about Pajama Boys and Girls who refuse to pick up a pitchfork and torch, get bought off for a few bucks, allow an entire industry to screw them blind (health "care") for decades and nearly quintuple its size in the "economy", along with excusing whatever felony someone wants to commit so long as they have the right political party letter next to their name.

I remember Nixon's resignation like it happened yesterday.  I was ten -- literally by a few days.  I also remember the election campaign prior to it.  Nixon, Nixon is our man.  Throw McGovern in the garbage can! was the rallying cry on the grade school playground just a few months before and grade-school age kids who weren't "on board", and this was in a decidedly blue, union state even then were subjected to assaults on said playground that would be considered felonies if committed by adults.  And by the way, the number of suspensions or expulsions for such felony assaults, say much less teacher intervention to stop it?  Zero.  So cut the crap about our political system having gotten "more poisonous" in recent years as I lived this.

Yet despite "support" that strong -- support that reached all the way down to the first four grades of school Nixon's political support and ability to survive as President went to zero within months.

So where's your pitchfork folks?  Your torch?  I'm stunned at all the Pajama Boys and Girls who shake their fists about "gun control" and which bathroom you can use while outright Nazi and Stalinist tactics are ignored instead of resulting in an immediate political revolt -- at minimum.

The Constitution is toilet paper if you will not protect and defend it by whatever means are necessary and there's no reason for any politician to give a damn if you don't and won't force them to do so.

And don't run this "MAGA" horse**** either; Trump could fire every one of them and refuse to have anything to do with Congress, vetoing every single thing they send to his desk until this crap stops.

He has not and reason why is simple: He just wants control of it so he can use it himself!

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2018-05-21 12:50 by Karl Denninger
in POTD , 93 references



Email today to hang this one-of-a-kind piece on your wall!

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2018-05-21 09:17 by Karl Denninger
in Social Issues , 272 references
[Comments enabled]  

Social policy changes have a real impact.

It takes time, but it's real.  It's not "fake news", and demographics are, ultimately, destiny.

So I read this article with some bemusement.

Americans and Europeans are abandoning parenthood at an alarming rate, profoundly changing the nature of our societies, our politics and our cultures.

Last year, women in the U.S. had children at the lowest rate ever recorded. There were just 60.2 births for every 1,000 girls and women ages 15 to 44 in our country. As a result, there were fewer births in America last year – 3.85 million babies – than at any time since 1987. This was a 2 percent drop from 2016.

What's even worse is the demographic split between those women who have children and those who choose not to.  There's a roughly 50% difference in birth rate between families with incomes under $10,000 and those over $200,000, and a 25% difference between those who pay no income tax and those who pay any amount.

For 30+ years the "answer" from the crazies on both the left and right is immigration.  But not just any immigration -- immigrants from turd-world ****holes that like to make lots of babies.

Never once will either side of the aisle discuss why the deterioration in birth rate is occurring.

There is no singular answer but there are plenty of good reasons, all of which follow the general societal rule that whatever you punish through policy you will get less of, and whatever you reward you will get more of.  Our government also does its level damned best to ignore biology in the name of "diversity" and not only "tolerance" but forced acceptance.

Women and men are different.  Denying this is to deny scientific fact.  It requires nine months of choice for a woman to give birth to a child but only nine seconds for a man to sire one.  Women have always been the gatekeepers for consensual sexual congress that has the potential to produce children and always shall be because they possess a uterus and men do not.

If you want a robust birth rate that is at least sufficient to maintain a population, spread reasonably-evenly across the bell-curve of innate ability (e.g. intelligence) you must account for this difference through social structure so both men and women have good cause to not only produce said children but do so in productive households such that the outcome is children who grow into productive, independent adults.

Indeed your social structure should provide incentives for those productive household structures and disincentives for those proven to be unproductive.

But there is not only zero recognition of this fact there is outright hostility to it.

The social structures of 100 years ago were not perfect by any means and there were plenty of abuses contained within them.  But we didn't fix the abuses -- we trashed the structures instead in the name of "tolerance" and "choice."

If you want productive couples to form and produce children in stable family households then you have to account for the differences in biological contributions and adjust for them through social structure.

Today it is literally impossible for a man to decide he wants a family and find a woman to construct a social microcosm with called a "family" that gives him a reasonable assurance that (1) he can be and remain an integral, daily participant in having and raising said children and (2) he, his paramour and said children can have a reasonable place to live with the full-time contribution of one of the two adults to the raising of said children on a personal basis.

It is also impossible for a women who wants a family in most cases to do so under those same terms as well.  Said woman has zero means of constructing a social microcosm odds-on to do that in 90+% of the cases beginning with the destruction of the ability of a one-income household to make it work for most people in most areas of the country.

In short it is flat-out impossible in many if not most parts of the country for most couples to have and raise children on one income.  It is further flat-out impossible to put together a social structure that provides strong incentives for said two-parent, one-income home to remain that way through the childhood of those kids.

Marriage is called a contract but it is not.  It used to be, both socially and legally, but that hasn't been true for decades.

That some people continue to believe in traditions is why we have any sort of family structure remaining at all.  Yet many of those people find themselves with zero incentive to be reasonable say much less nice because if things go sideways and they don't get their way all the time they can make life intolerable for the other party and not lose if the other person walks out!

So what incentive is there to not do that?

Further, the greater your intelligence and the less you are steeped in said traditions the more likely you will figure this out before you produce kids rather than later on, and even if not if you have that happen to you after the first child shows up the odds of you doing it again drop to near-zero!

Well there you go and yet nobody will discuss this in the media nor in social circles because as soon as you bring any of this up your a "racist", you're a misogynist, etc.  The only exception is those who argue that it's about "the lack of God" in our country but that's a horsecrap chimera; people choose their religion (or lack thereof) and thus you had better find a better excuse (and solution) or the death of said society is assured.

My parents generation are all dying; it happens to every one of us eventually.  They were the last generation that dealt with the former social structure as the primary, and solidly positive choice, during their child-bearing years.  The erosion didn't happen overnight and neither did the drop in birth rate.

But unless there's a major change in the offing now in said social structures -- and that requires that people cut the crap with the name-calling and deal with reality and how to fix it within the next couple of generations we're ****ed, and not just here but across Europe as well because it will only be the imported crazies with no skills who will continue to pop out kids like rabbits and those children will be just as nuts as their parents are.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)