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.


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 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.

2023-01-22 11:30 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 1092 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

Clott Adams has apparently recanted -- well, sort of.

Note the quote though: "The anti-vaxxers clearly won."

Naw, he hasn't recanted.  He's still calling the ones who "won" by pejoratives, intentionally-so.

I argue that he's just pissed off that he may be fucked and there's nothing he can do about it, that the VSAFE data which the CDC deliberately refused to release until they were sued (showing a seven percent serious adverse event rate, which incidentally matches roughly with what Rasmussen polled at and therefore can't be called "doctored") only catches the immediate bad things, so it therefore must understate the harms by some amount since that which hasn't happened yet is obviously unknowable and the premise of having a one-in-14 or worse Sword of Damocles hanging over your head tends to produce a crap-ton of anxiety and is certainly not implicated in promoting deep, restorative sleep.

One who goes to the gallows while calling the person who caught him by pejorative labels instead of contritely admitting "I did an evil thing, those who caught me did a righteous thing, for my evil act I deserve just punishment and accept it humbly, realizing that all I have left is to supplicate myself before St. Peter" deserve nothing but permanent derision.

They're not admitting anything except that they were caught and are pissed off that they were caught and thus can no longer hide behind obfuscation and bullshit.

Wake me up when any of these people actually exhibit something that could reasonably be called contrition.  I have an entire list of said people who were formerly in my orbit that I wouldn't spit on if they were on fire.


Scott could have instead apologized for the "anti-vaxxer" pejorative and publicly listed every person who he blocked for same while unblocking them and asking (but not expecting) forgiveness.  I know very few people who refused the jab and viewed their decision as anything other than a risk:benefit calculation which, by the own determination and metric, fell on the "more risk than benefit" side.  As it turned out by the data even from the coroner in NYC or the CDC themselves only the very old AND seriously morbid -- their risk of death from infection was approximately five percent -- had any possibility of benefit outweighing harm.

Calling someone a name because their calculation differs from yours when neither of you can conclusively prove your calculation is correct for any individual case is malicious -- every time, without exception, period.

Indeed such a question is always objectively reasonable given that drug companies have repeatedly been caught gaming said trials, have paid billions in fines yet not one of said persons has ever gone to prison or been executed for it and thus as soon as you find such statistical holes, never mind a mechanism of serious harm you're crazy to believe anything they tell you in regard to that until and unless that risk has been run to the ground.  This very same BS was run with Vioxx (killed 60,000 and was ultimately withdrawn) and Gardisil (only protected against one of the HPV strains, has a potential to cause Guillain-Barre that can cripple or kill, the disease is sexually transmitted thus in virtually every case is a consequence of a consensual adult act never mind pushing it on boys when it carried zero benefit in reducing their risk of cervical cancer for obvious reasons yet they too might get hit with serious systemic harm.)

Said mechanism of serious potential harm was known before the shots were rolled out and was intentionally swept under the rug.  That the original three month trials in the fall of 2020 had more deaths in the treatment than the placebo arm was known and again intentionally swept under the rug as "not statistically meaningful."  That this was intentionally ignored instead of being publicly and widely exposed and debated including the mechanism by which severe and fatal harm could occur was proved in the early summer of 2021 when said study was peer-reviewed before mandates and that the specific mechanism of said potential harm was known in December of 2020 and intentionally buried was also clear at that point because said study was published as a pre-print at that time.

I wrote on it at the time and it cemented for me what was up until that point a clear and obvious fact: You can't know what takes time to show up until the time passes, and the reason it takes 10+ years to qualify these sort of therapies in an honest system is that you can't know what will happen in 10 years until ten years passes unless you possess a time machine.

The entire reason that attempting to use "vaccination" (even if it does work, and in this case time has proved it doesn't) against an emerging pathogen is stupid is that it is not possible to qualify the countermeasure in terms of both positive and negative effect over time.  You therefore are demanding that the public accept unknown and unknowable risks in trade for an unknown and unknowable degree of protection over an unknown period of time.

While making such a proposed countermeasure available with all the data on the table for individual assessment upon each person's individual circumstance is a rational thing to do in the face of an emergent biological threat to advocate that others do so, to promote it, to obfuscate any of the possible alternatives, to in any way suppress anecdotes or data on the harms or otherwise try to sway others is a serious moral, ethical and in fact damn well ought to be a criminal violation and, if it results in deaths (and in this case it did) you should hang for it particularly when you are proved wrong and refuse to apologize.


View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2023-01-21 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Musings , 260 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

Yes, I know, if you like Biden you won't listen to this.

If you voted for him you will deliberately ignore it.

But, if you voted for Joe Biden, and like him as President, you damn well ought to listen to this.

The facts related to Richard Nixon are facts.  How Ford wound up as President, and the chain of "random events" that led to that, are also facts.  I've known them all for decades -- but I didn't take a government educator's American Government class in High School and these facts were part of the curriculum that I learned.  They almost-certainly were not part of the curriculum you were taught, and if you went to a government school I guarantee exactly zero of this was ever brought up, except that Agnew was forced to resign after being indicted.

How does this relate to what is going on now?  That's an open question but the question you ought to demand be answered is why the media and the rest of DC has never answered for what happened with Richard Nixon, who the Watergate Burglar's actually worked for, and how Gerald Ford, who nobody voted for, wound up as President of the United States.

I remind you that essentially Ford's first action was to pardon Nixon, thereby prohibiting Nixon from being charged and able to defend himself in open, public court with any of these facts, making damn sure the public knew them all.

Isn't that convenient?

PS: Oh, this just started -- or even just got much worse eh?  When was Nixon elected to office?  Uh huh.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2023-01-20 17:03 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 1530 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

Let's start: It sucks that Hamlin is probably long-term, permanently fucked.  But it is likely that he is, and the glad-handing face people have been playing is a lie.  That lie has now at least in part been admitted to by no less than the Associated Press.

Damar still requires oxygen and is having his heart monitored regularly to ensure there are no setbacks or after effects,” Jordon Rooney said. “Though he is able to visit the team’s facility, Damar is not in position to travel often, and requires additional rest to help his body heal.”

So he was not "discharged and is recovering normally."

Three weeks after his cardiac arrest live on national TV, the cause of which has not been disclosed but we know factually it was not Commotio Cordis as he had a pulse when the team medics got to him and lost it afterward (incidentally we know that reporting has to be true because otherwise nine minutes would have passed without circulation and he'd be dead) where is disclosure of what caused the heart attack?

And why does he still require supplemental oxygen; room air is, by this report, not enough.  Never mind that it appears they don't believe his heart rhythm is stable either.

Don't give me any bullshit about how they don't know.  A healthy young man who is that size of an investment to the both the NFL and the Bills, and has gone through a rigorous physical exam prior to being signed isn't going to go into the hospital with a near-fatal heart attack that had it happened in his house he would have been dead with near-100% certainty, come back out and nobody knows why it happened.

That's utter and complete crap and if you believe that you're a blind, vapid NPC.

Now if this was ordinary Joe I'd say heh, its his business.  But no -- Hamlin has been paraded around as some sort of hero and the NFL altered the games and the outcomes of the remaining contests in the playoffs -- to the benefit of some, and the detriment of others.  That makes this whole thing public, which incidentally is part of the deal when you become an NFL player and said prowess in the field and strutting around for the camera is why they pay the players all that money.  As such it's also reasonable to expect that when said player does a thud on the field and the league not only cancels the game, something they have not done before or since even for really serious injuries where people have been carried off on backboards, we damn well ought to have an answer as to what happened.

Especially when the obvious potential cause is not only on every fan's mind it is also on every other player's mind.

Needing supplemental oxygen at three weeks post-event for a young man in excellent physical condition is not a sign that there is no permanent damage and he is on the road to a full recovery.  Quite to the contrary; it is fairly good evidence that he's not coming back to football, ever, and may never be able to engage in any sort of strenuous activity again.

Proof?  No, but pretty damn good evidence.

In the meantime you're still not willing to face reality, are you?

One in 5,000 to one in 50,000 you say is what the CDC claims to be the risk of myocarditis and associated injury?  "Very rare", right?

That's funny: There's apparently a study out of Puerto Rico showing high double-digit rates of objective cardiac damage.  And another one out of Thailand.  And another out of our military showing, once again, high double-digit rates of objective markers of cardiac injury.  The first and third are not public (gee, I wonder why) but the second one is.

So "best case" is nearly 30% of the people who got the shots are screwed to at least some degree and two other studies had almost-identical results, one in the general population and the second among young, very healthy individuals -- members of the military, both approaching or at a 70% risk of objective cardiac harm.

When two unrelated groups of people run two studies on the same thing across two different populations who are wildly different in their medical history and personal health, in two different places, looking for a common element that came from something both groups did and they get nearly the identical result if you don't instantly sit up at full attention you're crazy.

How 'ya feeling America?  That's just one side effect, you know, and we're well-aware that there are a bunch of others that have been reported too.

SEVEN OUT OF TEN?  THIRTY TO SEVENTY PERCENT?  Yeah, I'm sure the amount of damage varies widely but cardiac damage does not heal in virtually every case.  That damage is permanent.  You're stuck with it for life and whatever it brings, whether the damage manifests as a small limitation in your physical exercise capacity or results, now or down the road, in cardiac arrest.

How do you like those odds and how do you feel about the con job that, it certainly appears, was run on you?   Would you have taken the jabs if you had knowledge of any, say much less all three, of those studies?  How about Trump still taking credit for "warp speed" which, I remind you, deliberately short-circuited the ordinary and expected testing that we've used for decades to qualify medications so you didn't know about them as they hadn't been run and published yet.

What do you say to those of us who warned that without running down what was a plausible mechanism of harm that could lead to exactly this outcome, with said warnings issued before the mass-jabbing actually got under way and in fact original pre-prints dated back into December of 2020 before basically anyone had received them -- and who were poo-pooed, called conspiracy theorists, ostracized, it was claimed we should be held down and forcibly jabbed, many argued for us to be imprisoned, many were fired from their jobs, denied entry into sporting events, restaurants, and concert venues and some of us were even assaulted despite published evidence that the potential for said risk was there.

Would you like to read my article from 2021 before mandates were imposed?  Here it is, just so you can't say "nobody told us."  I sure as Hell did and so did others -- in the first half of 2021.

Oh, and about all those ads that have run for the last two years on every television station, all the radio stations, all the social media, the blackballing of all of us who raised the alarm (indeed I still have a "search block" on my handle on Twitter) and indeed even your local grocery store was probably running ads for these damned things -- at least here they were (Kroger) right up until this week when they magically disappeared from my local store.  I have not seen or heard one warning about adverse effects in one of these ads.

Where's the "You were right, we were wrong, we were stupid to listen to {insert whoever}, we apologize and if we are fucked its our fault and sole personal responsibility for listening to that bullshit and it will remain our fault if we don't force accountability, both civil and criminal, against those who misled not just America but the entire world."

Yeah, that's what I thought.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2023-01-20 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 660 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

Oh boy....

The study itself: Instead, the mRNA, but not the adenovirus-based vaccines induced long-term IgG4 responses – the IgG subclass with inhibitory effector functions. 

I already wrote on this when the first paper showed up.  But Alex highlighted a really ugly element of this one -- one of the editors:

Edited by:

Shikha Shrivastava, Pfizer, United States

The paper was received on 10 August last year, which means Pfizer knew about this at least back to that time and likely well-before.

Yet nobody has said a thing officially about this, never mind that IgG4 is implicated in all sorts of bad things, the least of which is causing your body to ignore the antagonist in question (in this case, the virus) allowing it to range freely through your body instead of attacking and destroying it.

That would tend to make the jabs useless and in fact we're seeing that in the data from Cleveland Clinic; the more jabs the more likely you are to be infected.  This is an entirely reasonable explanation as to why.

But it doesn't end there.

Since we know the spike protein is directly harmful without the rest of the virus its quite clear that allowing that to happen (that is, for your immune system to not destroy the virus but rather to let it run around your system uninhibited) has serious potential to cause cumulative, slow harm until it finally nails you.  Since we know that one of the primary areas of such harm (from the original Salk paper in December of 2020) is the endothelium, that is the lining of every blood vessel in the body a reasonable expectation from this would be materially-elevated rates of embolisms, strokes and heart attacks, since any disruption to the endothelial layer in those areas can produce that sort of catastrophic outcome.

That doesn't appear to be happening, right?  Oh wait -- it does.

Is this proof that the jabs are potentiating these outcomes?  No, its not.

But is it a reasonable hypothesis that should have been investigated and run to the ground before we stabbed 150+ million Americans (never mind all those in other countries) with this crap?

Uh..... yeah.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2023-01-18 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Other Voices , 363 references
[Comments enabled]  

And again, over the transom come the fish.... courtesy of Ishmael -- Ed.


Who are you?

If you are coming off of a three day bender and reality is fuzzy, find a wallet and dig until you find a driver's license with the picture that looks somewhat familiar.  After that much booze for that long, the image is a mirror.  Congratulations!  Mystery solved.

For everyone else the question is both more fundamental and abstract.  It is not one that needs an answer every day.  People live, love, work, and revel without a thought towards how actions define them.

This is not a bad thing.  As I stated in a previous guest Ticker, too much introspection and navelgazing leads to stagnation.  In the same way that writing a plan is not the same as executing it, pondering what and why other than as a way to learn lessons for the future is dangerous.  It’s not just a waste of time, it’s that people mistake planning for action.  In reality, nothing has been done.

But since we are moving on to the Thud! phase of the Coof Wars, it’s time for everyone to evaluate how to fight.  As I opined earlier, almost none of us have the option of sitting Thud! out.  The clot shot damage is simply too widespread to avoid.  Whether it’s yours, a loved one, or a coworker, poor health will affect you.  

Many will fight by caring for a sick loved one.  God bless you!

Others will fight by vacationing in place harder, or checking out from the corporate world altogether.

One or two will fight directly Jeremy style.  You’ll hear about these folks on the evening news in shocked tones:  Some doctor's head explodes on the way to his car or a pharmacist's house burns down.  As horrifying as these acts are, these individuals made their death, or the death of someone they loved, very personal. If these things will happen, it will be in the Thud! phase.

Another marker of a new phase are new allies.  This isn’t a purely conscious decision.  The Thud! phase means new stakes. Normally, any battle plan involves a line which once crossed means the fight is on.  This is not the case here.

What are the stakes?  For some it’s life-and-death.  Cancer, cardiovascular, and autoimmune diseases are exploding.  For others, it’s how to financially and emotionally support the sick. Or finding a new job.  And in a few cases, it’s pure revenge.

Here’s a harsh fact about any line in the sand: it’s already been drawn and violated.  The shots have been had, the side effects are evident.  No amount of smug demands for forgiveness mitigate chemo induced nausea. The only decision each person has to make is if they will fight and how.

This is why the question “who are you?” was important enough to repeat multiple times. 

Everybody needs friends and allies.  Since almost no one has the option of sitting Thud! out, there are plenty of people to choose from.  Who they are boils down to two questions: Who am I? and how do I find my own?

Both of these questions are answered with principles. What are your principles? Find people that share your principles.  Each of us needs support, and we must support our own.

How do I find my own?

I watched a debate in the comments on a recent Ticker about fake vaccine cards.  Some people were all for them, anything to stick it to The System.  Others were neutral on it.  A few denounced it as dishonest and scummy.  Some stated a fake vaccine card was a lie and they would not associate with liars.

Everyone who commented stated their principles. They may not have expressed it in such a way, yet anyone reading knew who “their people” were.

The first step is identifying your own principles.  Lying to yourself about what they are makes you a terrible ally and friend for everybody.  There are a wide variety of principles people hold. The point of the rest of this guest Ticker is not how anyone else should live their lives, the examples illustrate how principles guide behaviors.

Let’s take a hypothetical person who made a fake vaccine card.  While we can never know what is in an individual’s heart, from the outside we can infer a few things about their principles: survival, comfort, and freedom are three possible values they live their lives by.

Contrast with someone who opposed fake vaccine cards:  honesty, justice, and integrity might be some of their core principles.

As I stated before, this guest Ticker is not admonishing one side or the other.  It’s simply illustrating that people’s principles can conflict or align.

Who are you?

Find your people, you will need each other in the coming decade.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)