After two days of turmoil, the roller-coaster ride that has been this week's stock market is about to take another twist, or turn, or bump, or dive, or rise...
Nobody knows where it's going with the Federal Reserve's FOMC set to announce its first policy directive of the new year at 2:00 pm ET on Wednesday.
Monday's coronavirus-inspired deflation was followed by a miraculous revival on Tuesday, as if somebody had found a sudden cure for the deadly outbreak that has spread across China and been exported - at last count - to at least 15 other countries, including the United State, Canada, France, Germany, Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia, Cambodia, Japan and many others. Being mostly unchecked and having an incubation period of up to 14 days, it's probable that the virus will circle the globe within the next month.
The Dow lost some 450 points on Monday and regained less than half of that on Tuesday. With the virus still highly infectious and the death toll rising to 132, the Fed standing pat on interest rates would seem to be about as consequential as a water hose in a rainstorm.
Beyond the spread of the coronavirus, the other big story in play this week is the impeachment trial of president Trump, being played out in the US Senate. Both sides have presented their cases, though the Republican's defense took less than half the time as that of the Democrats and was more focused on law and reason than the House managers' mangled miasma of mistaken misappropriations.
Where the Democrats sought to emotionalize the proceedings, the president's legal team toned it down, making the case, alternatively, that the articles of impeachment were vague and thus void, or that no crime had been committed, emphasized by professor Alan Dershowitz's impassioned, eloquent, well-researched argument on Monday night that the founders intended impeachment to be narrowly focused, rather than nebulous and amorphous as are the Democrat charges of Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Congress, neither of which are criminal.
Despite the apparent readiness of the Republican side, the media spin spent the week twirling around speculation over a piece of manuscript leaked from former advisor John Bolton's upcoming book, spuriously-timed to intercede in the Senate proceedings. Bolton's claim that he had a personal conversation with Mr. Trump, in which the president explicitly tied the delay of aid to Ukraine with the need for that country to dig into the affairs of Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, concerning their dealings with the corrupt natural gas company Burisma, was all-too-conveniently timed to overshadow the defense team's presentation of facts and legalities.
Thus, instead of examining the case for or against the president based on the best arguments from both sides, the media has attempted to shift the attention of the American public from real arguments to a false paradigm over calling additional witnesses, none of whom would be likely to move the needle in either direction very mch at all.
Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, who said once that he may not have the votes to stop additional witnesses and evidence, has also said that the votes are there to defeat any such motion on Friday, when the issue will come to a vote of some kind, after two days of questions from senators to either side - or both - on Wednesday and Thursday.
If he Democrats succeed in their desire for additional testimony, it would likely extend the trial for weeks if not months, given that some witnesses, including the testimony of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, would likely be subject to executive privilege, a matter that would end up in the hands of the Supreme Court. Arguments for and against the invocation of privilege would likely take weeks to draw up and more weeks to argue before the court could issue a ruling. It's a real can of worms that the Democrats threaten to open.
Cooler heads may prevail in the Senate. Having heard enough to make a reasoned decision, there may come a vote on Friday - if the vote for additional witnesses fails - up or down on the president's guilt or innocence, which would end the trial and allow Senators Klobuchar, Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren enough headway to get back to campaigning in Iowa, where the first primary caucus is set to wrap up on Monday, February 3.
While the Senate plays paddy-cake with the future of the nation and its precedents, the coronavirus will no doubt spread fear, death and potentially-huge economic ramifications around the world. Whatever happens in the Fed decision or the impeachment matter is likely to take a back seat to the carnage a virulent, unchecked, highly-contagious virus can unleash.
At the Close, Tuesday, January 28, 2020:
Dow Jones Industrial Average: 28,722.85, +187.05 (+0.66%)
NASDAQ: 9,269.68, +130.37 (+1.43%)
S&P 500: 3,276.24, +32.61 (+1.01%)
NYSE: 13,877.61, +108.00 (+0.78%)
Showing posts with label John Bolton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Bolton. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 29, 2020
Tuesday, September 17, 2019
Oil and Gas Price Hikes Are a Central Banker Scam
Reiterating what was posted here Sunday in the Weekend Wrap, a recent article by Lance Roberts at Real Investment Advice, brings home the bacon in detail, of how the bottom 80% of all US workers, i.e., earners, is carrying a high debt burden that today cannot even cover basic necessities.
The consumer squeeze is in focus after the attacks on a Saudi oilfield and the Abqaiq refinery, which, according to most sources, will affect five percent of global oil supply. Somehow, cutting off five percent of global supply magically raises oil prices 15 percent.
Without anybody knowing exactly who is behind the attacks, many fingers are being pointed toward Iran, naturally, since the Iranians are fighting a proxy war with Saudi Arabia in Yemen. MoonofAlabama.com has a solid account with photos of how the attack might have been staged, who was behind it and future implications.
From a central banker's perspective, the attack and subsequent rise in the global price of oil could not be more opportune on a number of fronts. First, in desperate need of inflation, the bankers get the gift of core inflation in both PPI and CPI. Second, the rise in the price of oil, translated to gas at the pump and some home heating fuel, will show up in the convoluted GDP calculations, just in time for the third quarter and also adding a boost to the fourth if high prices persist.
Further down the road, high input prices and consumer prices for oil and gas should put the brakes on the economy eventually, putting a dent in discretionary spending which could spark a recession in 2020, just in time for the November US elections. Sure, higher prices and profits are good for some, for a while, but eventually, high gas prices act effectively as a tax on all consumers.
If you happen to be a central banker, this sounds great, doesn't it?
There are also political and financial aspects to the story. The attacks come right on the heels of President Trump's firing of John Bolton, the infamous neocon whose penchant for war with Iran was no secret. Conspiracy theorists believe this was long-ago planned, but Bolton's removal as National Security Advisor to the president was the trigger.
There's also the upcoming IPO of Saudi Aramco to consider. Initially, following the attack, the Saudis hinted that they would delay their long-awaited IPO, but now, a day beyond, they say they will forge ahead as planned. At issue is valuation. The Saudis believe the company should be worth $2 trillion at IPO, while the consensus among bankers handling the deal have the figure closer to $1.5 trillion. A lasting boost in the price of oil would naturally add to the valuation, bringing it closer to the level desired by the Saudis, who, after all, have control of the flow of oil, but not the price.
With no culprit positively identified, the entire affair looks to be highly organized - from the accuracy of the missiles and/or drones employed in the attack to the coordinated record trading in the oil futures pits - and the work of people or nations with an agenda. While this may appear far fetched to some, the power of the globalist banking cartel is well-known and could be pulling all the strings behind the scenes. It is not outside the realm of possibility that deep state globalists staged the attacks and price surge. It's also possible the the attacks were completely faked, just to get the price of oil higher.
There has been a glut of global oil supply since the US embarked on its fracking and shale output, becoming the world leader a few years ago. Russia is also pumping like mad, as are most of the OPEC nations. The amount of oil on world markets is so large that even small disruptions should not affect price - which has been falling for over a year - very much, but, in this case, it did.
While there isn't much the general population as a whole can do about higher gas prices outside of mass protests (a likelihood in Europe), there are a few actions the average motorist can take.
Most of all, don't buy into the media hype over gas prices, recession or any other narrative (like climate change) that the media water-carriers throw at you.
At the Close, Monday, September 16, 2019:
Dow Jones Industrial Average: 27,076.82, -142.70 (-0.52%)
NASDAQ: 8,156.40, +2.86 (+0.04%)
S&P 500: 2,994.17, -3.79 (-0.13%)
NYSE Composite: 13,107.98, -16.36 (-0.12%)
The consumer squeeze is in focus after the attacks on a Saudi oilfield and the Abqaiq refinery, which, according to most sources, will affect five percent of global oil supply. Somehow, cutting off five percent of global supply magically raises oil prices 15 percent.
Without anybody knowing exactly who is behind the attacks, many fingers are being pointed toward Iran, naturally, since the Iranians are fighting a proxy war with Saudi Arabia in Yemen. MoonofAlabama.com has a solid account with photos of how the attack might have been staged, who was behind it and future implications.
From a central banker's perspective, the attack and subsequent rise in the global price of oil could not be more opportune on a number of fronts. First, in desperate need of inflation, the bankers get the gift of core inflation in both PPI and CPI. Second, the rise in the price of oil, translated to gas at the pump and some home heating fuel, will show up in the convoluted GDP calculations, just in time for the third quarter and also adding a boost to the fourth if high prices persist.
Further down the road, high input prices and consumer prices for oil and gas should put the brakes on the economy eventually, putting a dent in discretionary spending which could spark a recession in 2020, just in time for the November US elections. Sure, higher prices and profits are good for some, for a while, but eventually, high gas prices act effectively as a tax on all consumers.
If you happen to be a central banker, this sounds great, doesn't it?
There are also political and financial aspects to the story. The attacks come right on the heels of President Trump's firing of John Bolton, the infamous neocon whose penchant for war with Iran was no secret. Conspiracy theorists believe this was long-ago planned, but Bolton's removal as National Security Advisor to the president was the trigger.
There's also the upcoming IPO of Saudi Aramco to consider. Initially, following the attack, the Saudis hinted that they would delay their long-awaited IPO, but now, a day beyond, they say they will forge ahead as planned. At issue is valuation. The Saudis believe the company should be worth $2 trillion at IPO, while the consensus among bankers handling the deal have the figure closer to $1.5 trillion. A lasting boost in the price of oil would naturally add to the valuation, bringing it closer to the level desired by the Saudis, who, after all, have control of the flow of oil, but not the price.
With no culprit positively identified, the entire affair looks to be highly organized - from the accuracy of the missiles and/or drones employed in the attack to the coordinated record trading in the oil futures pits - and the work of people or nations with an agenda. While this may appear far fetched to some, the power of the globalist banking cartel is well-known and could be pulling all the strings behind the scenes. It is not outside the realm of possibility that deep state globalists staged the attacks and price surge. It's also possible the the attacks were completely faked, just to get the price of oil higher.
There has been a glut of global oil supply since the US embarked on its fracking and shale output, becoming the world leader a few years ago. Russia is also pumping like mad, as are most of the OPEC nations. The amount of oil on world markets is so large that even small disruptions should not affect price - which has been falling for over a year - very much, but, in this case, it did.
While there isn't much the general population as a whole can do about higher gas prices outside of mass protests (a likelihood in Europe), there are a few actions the average motorist can take.
- Plan driving trips - organize your schedule to include multiple stops, thus reducing the amount of gas used rather than making individual trips for each task
- Seek lower prices - use online resources like GasBuddy.com to find the lowest prices in your area.
- Ride-sharing - organize with neighbors, friends and co-workers to share rides heading in similar directions.
- Drive smarter - slower speeds, properly inflated tires, and good driving habits can significantly reduce your fuel usage.
- Avoid wasted trips - deciding whether or not a trip is an absolute necessity can cut your overall fuel consumption considerably.
Most of all, don't buy into the media hype over gas prices, recession or any other narrative (like climate change) that the media water-carriers throw at you.
At the Close, Monday, September 16, 2019:
Dow Jones Industrial Average: 27,076.82, -142.70 (-0.52%)
NASDAQ: 8,156.40, +2.86 (+0.04%)
S&P 500: 2,994.17, -3.79 (-0.13%)
NYSE Composite: 13,107.98, -16.36 (-0.12%)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
