The Market Ticker - Cancelled
What 'They' Don't Want Published
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.

2024-02-25 09:16 by Karl Denninger
in Foreign Policy , 431 references
[Comments enabled]  

Oh boy, are we really scraping the barrel here.....

In the US, the best tribute to Navalny would be for Republicans in the House of Representatives to quickly pass the aid that Ukraine desperately needs to keep fighting Russia’s dictator. President Biden, in his remarks on Friday, urged Congress to act fast, saying a failure to supply Ukraine would go down in the pages of history: “We have to help now.”

First off, you evil piece of crap Daniel, Ukraine is indeed full of actual Nazis.  The Azov brigades were and are.... Nazis.  For real.  They're the reason Putin went into Ukraine as they continually, since the 2014 color revolution which we, as the United States fomented and in fact Senator McCain gave a damned speech at Maidan, have been shelling ethnically-Russian people in the eastern part of that land.

Now perhaps you think its perfectly ok for the soldiers under someone's command to shell citizens on your own soil.  I'm sure you'd be happy if our military shelled oh...... MAGA folks in Texas perhaps?  The rest of us who have a hint of intelligence would call that Nazi behavior and we might be interested in putting a stop to it.

Never mind that the actual dictator right now is.... Zelensky.  Who canceled elections, banned any other than his political party and threatens anyone who opposes him politically and democratically with prison?  That's Zelensky.  So shut the fuck up because support for Ukraine's current leadership is support for both a dictator and Nazi.

You can certainly believe Putin is a thug and at the same time believe Zelensky is a Nazi.  Both are clearly corrupt and that should not surprise.  That the land called "Ukraine" has been full of sectarian violence is not a surprise either; it is in fact why the USSR basically let it operate as a more-or-less self-governed space: It was otherwise begging for open revolt all the time, everywhere, and the USSR was interested in the trade aspect of being able to keep that mostly under control (that land does have a huge amount of agricultural output and capacity.)

Never mind that Navalny was accused of attempting to foment a color revolution in Russia and soliciting MI6 to be the funding source for it.  I have no idea if that's true or not, but that's the accusation.  That the actions of those trying to overthrow the government in Belarus had an influence on how this was dealt with is both plausible and not unexpected.  And by the way, Putin has spoken to this publicly.

Is he wrong to do so?  Well, would we step in to prevent Israel, for example, from being overthrown by a color revolution that sought to provide all persons born on that soil, including those in Gaza which they have been occupying for a hell of a long time, absolutely-equal standing before the law?  To remove from said law any preference for Judaism?  You  know, like the United States has in our First Amendment?

You know damn well we would not sit back and let that happen and no matter how you feel about Israel personally that double-standard is exactly where and why I will call you out as a thug if you play that game.

And incidentally, don't think China's not paying attention and doesn't agree with Putin.  They do.

Where did you say we got basically all of our antibiotics (never mind a bunch of other stuff) from again?  Do you really want to go there, America?  We shouldn't have put ourselves in this position but we did, so until you're prepared to do without and pull it all back you really need to sit down and shut the fuck up, eh?

Should we have taken care of this little problem with dependence on China a long time ago?  Yep.  How long have I been talking about it?  A very long time, going back to well before I started this column.  Of course exactly zero of our political actors on either side of the aisle actually have or will do anything about it right up until we get it in the ass, so pardon me while I chortle at the idea that we can simply vote our way out of this problem.  Oh by the way, how about Mexico and fentanyl, which implicates both China and Mexico never mind all our "open border" douchebags right here including one ex-corporate type who just had her own bullshit kill her kid via said fentanyl and which I applaud as now she gets to live in mortal anguish for the rest of what I hope is a very long remaining life.  She deserves it having been a prime instrument in its proximate cause.

But back to Mexico and China: Exactly how many automotive supplier and assembly plants are you going to force back across the border (along with all the pieces coming out of China, including semiconductors, that go into said assemblies and suppliers) by laying punitive tariffs on both for each and every fentanyl death that occurs in the US -- nearly zero of which would happen without the precursors flowing from China into Mexico, being turned into fentanyl there, and then shipped into the United States over our zero-control border.

No, you won't do that, right?

Well then perhaps you should shut the fuck up because China doesn't think color revolutions are cool either and correctly identifies that the United States and several of the other "western nations" have repeatedly been involved in same despite them being both illegal under international law AND a direct and flagrant violation of the UN Charter.

So yeah, there's plenty of smoke here, and yeah, Putin may well be a thug.

But let's cut the crap eh?

Being a national leader means sometimes you have to kill people and sometimes (but not always) they deserve it too.  You don't have to like that, but its part of the job, and isn't it interesting that we never did jail Clinton for, as an example, bombing an aspirin factory -- an act that Biden, if you recall, applauded when he was a Senator.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2024-02-24 08:24 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 421 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)
 

2024-02-22 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Musings , 584 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

Ok, I'll weigh in.

The law in question is obscene.  It has stood on the books for 70 years and is known as 63(12) for where it is in New York's legal code.  Trump is not the first person it has been aimed at; it has been used against Juul, Exxon-Mobil and Shkreli, to name three of several other abusive attacks over the last few years.

In short this law is one that Trump knew was there and, one must assume, as he decided to operate there thought was just fine provided it got used on other people and not him.  If you willingly participate in a crooked system you should not be all that surprised when you wake up one morning and find a stick of C-4 up your ass with the detcord going around the door in the corner and some dude is softly chuckling at what he's about to do to you.

The word "fraud" in legal use has a fairly strict definition: Someone must be harmed as a result of your deceptive conduct; they must take an action that they would not have but for your lie and get fucked as a result of it.  But case law for this specific law said otherwise because the statute in question specifically defined itdishonest conduct is enough and nobody has to actually get screwed.

To be clear Trump knew this risk existed and both set up his "empire" and continued to play in NY.  How did he know that?  Because it was the basis of the "Trump University" case that the previous prosecutor used against him!  Remember that case?  I do.

So how's your "Most Stable Genius" look in light of this set of facts, may I ask?

Here's the law in question:

12. Whenever any person shall engage in repeated fraudulent or illegal acts or otherwise demonstrate persistent fraud or illegality in the carrying on, conducting or transaction of business, the attorney general may apply, in the name of the people of the state of New York, to the supreme court of the state of New York, on notice of five days, for an order enjoining the continuance of such business activity or of any fraudulent or illegal acts, directing restitution and damages and, in an appropriate case, cancelling any certificate filed under and by virtue of the provisions of section four hundred forty of the former penal law or section one hundred thirty of the general business law, and the court may award the relief applied for or so much thereof as it may deem proper. The word "fraud" or "fraudulent" as used herein shall include any device, scheme or artifice to defraud and any deception, misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, false pretense, false promise or unconscionable contractual provisions. The term "persistent fraud" or "illegality" as used herein shall include continuance or carrying on of any fraudulent or illegal act or conduct. The term "repeated" as used herein shall include repetition of any separate and distinct fraudulent or illegal act, or conduct which affects more than one person. Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, all monies recovered or obtained under this subdivision by a state agency or state official or employee acting in their official capacity shall be subject to subdivision eleven of section four of the state finance law. 

In connection with any such application, the attorney general is authorized to take proof and make a determination of the relevant facts and to issue subpoenas in accordance with the civil practice law and rules. Such authorization shall not abate or terminate by reason of any action or proceeding brought by the attorney general under this section.

Note the wild-eyed set of definitions here.

No harm is required; deception, false promises, concealment or similar elements of conduct are sufficient.  You don't have to show that someone got fucked, in short, you merely need to show that someone lied and that such conduct occurred more than once even if the acts themselves are unconnected or in different areas or lines of business.

Now think about the breadth of this for a minute.  A car dealer -- every car dealer -- tells you its a great time to buy a car even if they know otherwise.  Literally every F&I office in a car dealership tries to sell you things, such as extended service contracts, that are demonstrably to your detriment in that they are wildly outpriced for what you receive and they conceal that by not fairly disclosing, for example, that they have an 80% margin on that "extended warranty" and almost nobody manages to successfully collect if the car does break down.  Hell, even the "green cap" on tires with $20 nitrogen gas fills are a screw job; the gas, assuming they actually did use it, costs about fifty cents -- which they of course do not disclose.  Similar "deception" is committed by every lender, every single real estate agent and similar every single day.

Even if the target of such "deceptions" is not harmed at the pure discretion of the NY AG ("may apply") that entity can be destroyed and the fruits of every element of same is, at said person's discretion, forfeit.

Trump probably liked this element of NY Law.  I'm sure a lot of other people do; it is a cudgel that can be wielded by the rich and powerful at will who have outsize political influence.  Unlike virtually every other law citing "fraud" which requires the target to get screwed in some form or fashion that is not the case here.  This "law" has stood on the books for seventy years and not only has Trump not done anything about it nor has his family line which was also all through NY and by the way neither has anyone else.

May I remind you that both the Juul and the Exxon-Mobil cases were filed while Trump was President and had a very clear bully pulpit to use in this regard, if not his entire Department of Justice?

Oh, you want to do business with people in NY and subject yourself to NY's jurisdiction given this fact?

Are you really that fucking stupid?

Orange Jesus was, even with clear proof that this law was being applied politically while he was President, and he got his asshole split wide open.  Awwwwwwwww...

Do stupid things, win stupid prizes -- now let me know when you're willing to cut off all business with any entity that has Nexus in NY State -- and until you are sit down and shut the fuck up because you are doing business there with clients and customers knowing that mere advertising, which always is full of "puffery", say much less anything ordinary in the realm of salesmanship, subjects you to forfeiture of every single fucking penny you make in sales to or within that state, plus interest.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2024-02-21 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Musings , 459 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

Watch this video (I can't embed it as Youslob has deemed it "18 over" because it involves violence.)

I know, its 25 minutes, which is far more than most American's attention span.  Not watching this video may well get you either killed or bankrupted, so if you wish to argue that you don't have time for it, that's fine -- I will toast your death because now you've had an explicit warning and ignored it so you deserve to get buttfucked and when you do get buttfucked I'm going to laugh at your bankruptcy or worse.

Do I have your attention yet?

Good.

At what point does the lady cop in that video know there's a problem and do the wrong thing that got her friend killed and she nearly-so -- and why?

I'm gonna make your scroll down.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

At 9:50 into the video, all the way up to 14:30ish, or for roughly five minutes, it is clear that an asymmetric information situation exists of some sort.  Neither of the cops knows what it is but that it exists is absolutely clear to both of them at that point.

The worst-case situation for the driver assuming no such asymmetric information is that he's going to get busted for DUI (in fact Shelby mentions exactly this on the radio; she suspects a DUI but for weed, not alcohol) which for the driver is a serious pain in the ass, might get him jail time but isn't a life-ending event and isn't a felony either unless its a subsequent offense -- a fact Shelby knows, if in fact it is, since she called in his ID.  Fighting over it (e.g. resisting arrest) on the other hand is a felony and while the driver does sound like he might be intoxicated and he was swerving still, it ought to be clear to the driver at the point Shelby tells him another cop is coming he's not talking his way out of the stop.

The only reason to resist in this situation is that there is an unknown-to-the-deputy's set of facts -- but is known to the driver -- that means the driver is going to jail for something more-serious than a DUI if and when he gets out of the vehicle.

Shelby has five minutes of time after it should be apparent to her that this is the case.

What is the correct action for her to take?

She should have upgraded the situation from a traffic stop to a felony stop; you get back to your vehicle, either behind the door as partial concealment or in the vehicle where you have the engine block as hard cover and once your partner arrives you order the driver out of the vehicle, hands first out the windows, through the loudspeaker with enough distance between you (and your lights on his vehicle and the door partly blinding him) so that he cannot get a clean shot at you.  You remain in such a covered position until he has his hands where you can clearly see them and you can get to him, with your sidearm out and at low ready, before he can try anything (e.g. he is prone on the ground, face down, with his hands stretched out above his head.)  If you do that and he pulls or points a gun you have the clear drop on him and you shoot him.

If you're wrong -- there is no asymmetric information in his possession -- and he's just confused due to intoxication you've lost nothing.  Yeah, he gets inconvenienced because he had to put his hands out the window, open the door from the outside latch, crawl out hands first and get on the ground face-down.  Whoopie do-do.  You still find the weed or run your impairment test once he's out of the vehicle and you can see his hands, if he's intoxicated you can arrest and stuff him for that and if you find something smokable perhaps its marijuana and perhaps not (I note that in Tennessee weed isn't legal but Delta 8 and 10 are and both smell exactly the same as marijuana) so all the odor gives the cop is probable cause for a roadside impairment test which means you have to get out of the car -- and, probably, enough probable cause for a search of the vehicle.  If there's nothing well then there's nothing -- he goes home and he's pissed off about it but he prompted that response by refusing to exit the car.

That he's refusing means there is a decent, if not high probability, that he knows something that you as a deputy do not.  If you're Shelby you might think the most-likely possibility given the smell is that he has marijuana in the car, but again there are a dozen perfectly-legal Delta 8 and 10 shops all up and down Route 66 here and he drove past several of them so if that's what he's got its not against the law.  Being impaired, however, is illegal whether the drug in question is legal or not.

But in this case the asymmetric information he has and the deputy does not is that he has a gun and since he's a convicted felon if you find the gun he goes to jail right now and faces a felony charge in the State, with the potential for a federal felony charge.  He knows this and she doesn't -- and that's why he refused to get out, because he knew damn well that if he got out of the car it was 100% certain he was going to get busted with it.

When someone is behaving in a fashion that makes no sense given the information you have and assume is shared between the two of you the odds are extremely high the other actor(s) know something very important that you do not.

Want me to go somewhere else that will make you uncomfortable?  Shelby plays the feelings game with the dude who claims she's pulled him over because he's black.  If you put feelings before facts you are likely to get seriously screwed or even die.

Now those other actors may be delusional and that there are a lot of them doesn't change that possibility.  Take the fairly-recent espousing that "The fed will cut rates many times!" by a huge number of people -- and thus you should buy stocks, buy a house because you will be able to rapidly refinance to a lower rate, etc.  I have pointed out several times why I believe that's crap and now, with the most-recent CPI and PPI data, it looks like I'm right.  The number of people believing something doesn't add or subtract anything from its validity.  Look at how many people were scared out of their damned wits by Covid despite this table from the CDC on the risk of dying from the disease:

 

For those under 69, by the CDC's own data, the risk of dying was just 5 in 1,000 (!!) and for those under 50 your risk was 2 in 10,000 or better.  For children under 19 the risk was three in one hundred thousand, meaning that if every one of the 60 million kids in America had been infected the number of deaths would have been about 1,800.  For reference roughly double that many people die of drowning every year in the United States, about one fourth of them kids.

Well?

Where's the crossover between the risk of dying from the disease and the jabs?  I'll tell where I know the odds don't make sense today and clearly did not even in 2020 when the above was published by the CDC -- in those under 49.  Maybe for those over 50 but then again perhaps not since we seem to keep having people die downstream at a wildly-accelerated rate after being jabbed and its not slowing down.  But to give these shots on a mass-basis in the entire population?  You're out of your fucking mind if you took that shit unless you had asymmetric information about your personal risk specifically.

The only difference between these scenarios is the amount of time required for the consequences to become evident.

The deputy above got shot in the leg and her partner was shot dead because neither of them recognized that the behavior of that driver made no sense unless he had asymmetric information they did not.  Rather than act prudently given roughly five minutes of warning they instead continued on the original assumption that this was just a dude that might be intoxicated a bit and one of them paid for that stupidity with their life and the other received a nasty hole in her leg.

Yes, that was stupid and the first and most important lesson is to call things what they are.  I hope Shelby, if she stays on the force over in Blount County, learned something from this about asymmetric information and when it is clear the person you are interacting with likely has it and you don't then you back off until you are reasonably sure you're not going to get drilled.

Now look at the market around you today -- in stocks, real estate and elsewhere.  Does it actually make sense that everything will be ok or is the person who has to be on the other side of the transaction -- that is, the seller -- likely have asymmetric information you do not?

If you believe the bullshitters out there today, just as in 1999 and 2007, never mind 1929 and before while you might not wind up holding the bag you're about as likely as that Deputy to have it all be ok when you are presented with evidence that the other guy has asymmetric information and you don't retreat back to your car and upgrade the "DUI" to a felony stop.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2024-02-20 07:06 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 517 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

Read this injunction (granted) in favor of Kennedy and against Biden .et.al. along with the various social media sites:

The Kennedy Plaintiffs likewise seek a Preliminary Injunction against the White House Defendants, the Surgeon General Defendants, the CDC Defendants, the NIAID Defendants, the FBI Defendants, the CISA Defendants, and the State Department Defendants. In their Complaint,22 the Kennedy Plaintiffs allege the Defendants violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution by (1) systematically and repeatedly using destructive, coercive threats to force social-media companies to censor protected speech and/or (2) entering into collusive partnerships with social-media companies and working jointly with those companies to censor protected speech.

Kennedy won the injunction; that is, the court was convinced he's going to win and further, if the government continues they will do irreparable harm (that which has already happened of course cannot be undone.)

Now here's the problem -- the bell cannot be un-rung but the severity of the issue is very real, current, and unfortunately unaddressed if the government ignores the order -- which it might do.  Note that a lawsuit, which is the limit of a private entity's capacity of enforcement, only recovers money or issues an order to obey in some fashion -- there is no means of compulsion available other than to attempt to seize money.  If the government refuses to abide said ruling what are your options and by the way, what about all the people who get killed in the meantime as a result of the original acts?

This is not speculative.  Hawaii has recently thumbed its nose at the Supreme Courtclaiming that the decision of the Supreme Court when it comes to the Second Amendment is void in their State.  In other words they do not recognize the Constitution and explicitly disavow what the Supremes decided in that situation.  Again this is not speculative, it has already occurred.  May I remind you that if Hawaii can do this then any other state can do so with any other federal decision or law.

How about 15 USC Chapter 1, specifically as it relates to various business interests most-importantly the medical and pharmaceutical industry?  This is not just a federal issue; virtually every state has parallel laws on their books too.  Tennessee's version is in Title 47 Chapter 25 Sections 101-104 on the criminal side and, besides leveling felony criminal penalties against every person who conspires to violate same it also states the following in section 104:

(a) Any corporation chartered under the laws of the state which violates any of the provisions of either § 47-25-101 or § 47-25-102 shall thereby forfeit its charter and its franchise, and its corporate existence shall thereupon cease.
(b) Every foreign corporation which commits such a violation is denied the right to do, and is prohibited from doing, business in this state.
(c) It is the duty of the attorney general and reporter to enforce this section.

Yet I cannot find one prosecution against any of the medical providers or pharmaceutical firms irrespective of who held office and when, or which party they adhere to.  The fact that they differentially price based on how you pay and collude in doing so thus restraining trade and fixing prices is a per-se violation both of 15 USC Chapter 1 federally and TCA 47-25-101 and 102.

How about veterinary practices or dentists?  The purchasing of same by private-equity firms in a given area which then results in them all raising prices is also a clear violation.  How many criminal charges have been brought?  Zero.  How many charters have been revoked?  Zero.  Why is it that said hospitals all ran the same protocols and did so to the ruin (literally; said people left in a BOX) of nearly 9 out of 10 people who went into our county hospital with covid over a six month period in the back half of 2022 and not only was nobody charged with manslaughter nobody had their ticket punched with a felony nor was a single corporate charter revoked.

Who do I vote for to fix this when both political parties are perfectly fine with a ninety percent death rate while said hospital rakes in the "bonus money" from CMS for each and every person who gets said protocol despite the clear proof that it does not work and you might as well stay home, pay nothing, they would thus get nothing and it can't be worse if they turned you away in that situation because dead is dead.  There really is no series of facts that better proves that you were simply exploited for money through collusive force than having tens of thousands of dollars "made" when the outcome is in virtually every case the worst possible outcome -- you die.  There was, without question, zero benefit to the persons that had this inflicted upon them since they are in fact all dead.

Virtually every thing wrong with our society today can be traced to violations of 15 USC Chapter 1 and the concurrent state statutes on the same point.  The severity of said state laws varies significantly; Tennessee goes further than most with the charter revocation clause while Florida is a bit "squishy", for example.  But Federal law on this point is clear: It is a felony, it calls for 10 years in prison for each and every person who is involved, you cannot hide behind a corporate shield as the liability is personal, and the law applies if you merely attempt these acts; you do not have to succeed.  Said discriminatory conduct is further codified when it comes to physical "things" (e.g. drugs included -- any physical thing) where discrimination in price occurs for purchasers of like kind and quantity.  That is, if you pay $20 for a drug and the next guy is charged $100 because his insurance is different that's against the law.  In addition it is explicitly stated in the statute that the law applies if a firm does this across national boundaries; yes, the entire business model of doing that is illegal and has been for over 100 years.  The medical and pharmaceutical industry have challenged these laws twice at the Supreme Court, attempting to cite McCarran-Ferguson (which immunizes certain insurance functions from anti-trust) in the cases Royal Drug and Maricopa County, decided in the late 1970s and early 1980s respectively, and lost both times.

That is, for forty years now it has been the settled law of the United States that the entire billing scheme in the US medical and pharmaceutical industry is felonious.  Yet whether the people in power have been Democrats or Republicans none of them have brought said criminal charges and enforced said law.  You, as a person, cannot bring criminal charges and the people in power, irrespective of party, have all refused for more than four decades to do so despite the Supreme Court ruling that in fact the law does apply to this conduct.

Virtually every "merchant" in said system is breaking the law.

Donald Trump had three platform planks promising to take on parts -- but not all -- of this problem.  They disappeared within seconds of his victory being called in 2016.  I watched the edit on his platform page happen while drinking a beer and watching election returns at a bar in Pensacola that night.  Those planks were never seen again.

The medical system is of course not the only place where this problem applies.  What do you think all the tourism-heavy places are doing when it comes to non-immigrant labor?  I have posted articles about this as well.  Nobody in such a market can survive without doing that once people begin to do this because all the competitors are and their cost of labor is so much lower they'll put the other guy out of business.  The same applies to farms; how can you sell strawberries from your farm paying Americans a legal wage with all taxes withheld when the other guys are all using illegal immigrants that are making half as much money with no taxes taken out?  You are forced to either do the same thing or you will go out of business.

"Customer service" is now being nearly-all outsourced to people doing the same thing; they're all "hiring" people through 1099 job-shops but in fact set the time and working conditions (which makes them employees under Federal Wage and Hour Laws along with IRS regulations) and many of them are outsourcing the labor outside the United States.  If you wish to employ all American workers as employees your cost of labor will be double theirs and your business will fail.

This isn't price-fixing and restraint of trade?  The hell it isn't and yet when it comes to labor this also violates federal labor law too but once again nobody goes to jail for it -- except for the little bar owner who gets caught shaving someone's hourly time-clock and he is then hammered.

Oh incidentally between the impact of this on CMS and the illegal immigrants and their costs the entire federal budget deficit and then some is accounted for.  That's right -- every bit of the debt accumulation over the last couple of decades has occurred due to these practices, it has all gone to these corporate and other "business" actors and both political parties have refused to put a stop to it.  Literally all of the inflation that has occurred is directly due to these acts.

All of it.

And all of it -- every last bit -- is not only illegal it is a felony, not a civil matter, that both political parties refuse to prosecute and as a result the harm from said felonies is forced upon you, the citizens of this nation.  That's right, all of our deficit spending at present is the result of actors committing felonies that neither state or federal prosecutors will bring charges upon and throw said persons in prison.

Every single penny of said deficit spending and thus the debt from it is in fact an illegal derivative of said felony conduct.  The implications of that ought to keep you up at night.

Explain in the comments below, if you wish to take a crack at it, how we solve this in a peaceful and democratic manner -- because if we don't solve it, and start solving it right now, we are facing an economic and society-wide disaster worse than the Long Depression of the late 1800s.

PS: After I penned this but before it posted we had three pieces hit the wire.  One NVidia, Capitol One/Discover, and an actual anti-trust action involving Pfizer.  Zero criminal charges.  WHO DO I VOTE FOR THAT WILL SOLVE THIS?

View this entry with comments (opens new window)