Time Out New York data 2009

Palantir

2020.10.29 05:28 Fantastic-Reply Palantir

One of the most mysterious companies of our time. Secret software developer for special services. A company that knows everything about you. So various media called the American software company Palantir Technologies, which works with data analysis. Her clients include the army, police, intelligence agencies, banks, and more recently the US Department of Health, which commissioned Palantir to work on a platform to fight the coronavirus.
How the company deserved the dislike of human rights activists, what services it provides to the American security forces, how the Russian hacker attacks on PayPal influenced its creation and why it is accused of facilitating the tracking of immigrants, we will now figure it out! Palantir provides its products to a wide range of customers, but its main customers are intelligence agencies and government organizations.
Palantir software allows you to compare data from many sources, find relationships between them and visualize them in the form of various diagrams. Human rights activists believe Palantir's cooperation with certain US government agencies may violate human rights.
Founded in 2003, Palantir takes its name from the palantir stones in J.R.R. Tolkien's legendarium. With their help, it was possible to see what was happening or what happened in another place. Palantir is the brainchild of renowned entrepreneur and investor Peter Thiel, so the Lord of the Rings reference is not surprising. He often draws inspiration from the Tolkien universe - the names of at least five companies co-founded by Thiel are taken from Tolkien's writings. Thiel is known as "the PayPal mafia don". It was while working at PayPal that he got the idea to create Palantir. And the Russian hacker contributed to this.
In his book From Zero to One. How to create a startup that will change the future Thiel spoke about the problem that PayPal faced in the mid-2000s - the company could not track a large number of transfers and due to credit card fraud, it was losing more than $ 10 million monthly . Initially, an automatic algorithm for tracking transactions, created by mathematicians, did not work - the scammers quickly adjusted to it and changed their tactics.
Later, PayPal rewrote the program using a hybrid approach - "the computer marked the most suspicious transactions in the user interface, and the human operators already made the final decision whether it was fraudulent or not." "We named this hybrid system Igor, after a Russian internet scammer who boasted that we could never deal with him," Thiel writes. Thanks to the new solution, the first quarter of 2002 was the first profitable quarter in PayPal history. The FBI got interested in the decision and asked permission to use "Igor" for solving financial crimes.
After the sale of PayPal, Thiel continued to think about a solution and shared with his fellow student Alex Karp the idea of a new startup - a symbiosis of humans and algorithms in data analysis to find terrorist networks and financial fraudsters.
Subsequently, this idea will be embodied in the creation of a software company that allows you to extract maximum information from disparate data sources. She will be named Palantir, and Karp will take over as CEO. In addition to Karp, Thiel recruited ex-PayPal engineer Nathan Gettings and two Stanford alumni Joe Lonsdale and Stephen Cohen to create Palantir.
They had to develop an algorithm. Despite the FBI's interest in the Igor solution, government agencies did not immediately notice Palantir, which offered a similar algorithm with an easy-to-use interface. Initially, the development was fully funded by Thiel himself.
Alex Karp, who was tasked with finding funding, was unlucky - dozens of investors turned down the startup. However, soon Palantir nevertheless became interesting - the company received $ 2 million from the venture capital arm of the CIA In-Q-Tel. "The In-Q-Tel investment gave Palantir something more important than money: CIA approval.
As the doors began to open in Washington, Palantir began to attract fans from intelligence and national security organizations, "writes Intelligencer. Subsequently, Palantir's clients included various government agencies, including the FBI, the US Department of Homeland Security, the NSA, the US Air Force and others. Palantir's customers included the Los Angeles Police Department.
Sarah Brayne, a sociology professor at the University of Texas at Austin, has spent over two years studying how Los Angeles cops use the system. The results of her research have not only lifted the curtain on exactly how Palantir works, but also caused many to worry about the consequences. The Palantir database contained standard information about citizens - name, gender, place of study, and the like.
Additional information came into the system from government agencies, for example, from the US Department of Motor Vehicles. It was also populated with data purchased from private companies. The system included not only offenders, but also their contact persons. "I would warn against the thought that if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. This logic is based on the assumption that information [into the system] is being entered without error or prejudice, "Brain said.
Palantir software scans a variety of data sources - financial documents, flight booking information, cell phone data, social media messages - and looks for connections analysts might miss, Bloomberg reported. It then presents the detected connections in easy-to-interpret graphics that look like spider webs.
Reporters reviewed the user manual for the Palantir Gotham app used by law enforcement agencies. According to him, the police could obtain extensive information about a person, having practically no data about him - for example, knowing only the name or number of the car. Some data sources - such as marriage, divorce, birth, and business records - also included data on other people who are associated with the person.
Sarah Brain called this secondary surveillance network. "When the police become interested in someone, they don't just collect phone numbers, business relationships, the suspect's travels, and the like. She also collects information about people associated with him, "writes Vice. A special tool allowed the police to filter, sort, display, analyze and export various data.
Found relationships are visualized using charts, histograms or timelines - the tool selected the best option based on the analyzed data. When a person appeared in the system, a police officer could "subscribe" to him, follows from Brain's study of the interaction of Los Angeles law enforcement officers with Palantir.
For example, a police officer could receive a notification on the phone when the car of a person who interested him was in a "suspicious" area. This was achieved by integrating data from outdoor video surveillance cameras into the Palantir system. "Without public scrutiny or regulation, Palantir has helped LAPD build a vast database of names, addresses, phone numbers, license plates, friendships and romantic relationships – guilty, innocent, and those in between," writes BuzZFeed.
Another customer for Palantir was the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). In 2014, she awarded the firm a $ 41 million contract to build and maintain a tracking system. Human rights activists are convinced that Palantir played a key role in the deportations of illegal migrants. The company insisted that they did not work with the ICE department responsible for the detention of undocumented immigrants and deportation. However, Palantir's assurances have not convinced human rights defenders.
Amnesty International criticized the company's contracts with ICE and said Palantir was "failing to meet its human rights obligations." Particular attention to the collaboration between Palantir and ICE is also riveted because of Peter Thiel's ties with US President Donald Trump, who is known for his anti-immigrant rhetoric. Thiel is perhaps the only Silicon Valley representative to openly support Trump.
Karp, who harshly criticized Trump in 2015, was spotted meeting with him among the leaders of large technology companies immediately after the latter was elected president. Palantir's work with ICE has generated internal resentment among the company's employees. Karp said that cooperation with the authorities will continue. "Silicon Valley says to the average American:“ I'm not going to support your need for defense, "while it sells its developments to countries hostile to America. This is the position of the losers, "Karp said.
This patriotism is almost the fundamental idea of Palantir. The company's filed to go public says it "does not work with clients or governments whose positions or actions are incompatible with the mission to support Western liberal democracy and its strategic allies." The fact that the main clients of Palantir are precisely the US security forces and intelligence services fully reflects the company's commitment to this mission.
As Bloomberg wrote, according to some reports, the Palantir system even helped to eliminate the terrorist Osama bin Laden. The company does not confirm or debunk these rumors. Thiel in his book only stated that "he cannot tell anything about that operation." He noted that with the help of programs created by Palantir, analysts were able to predict "where the Afghan insurgents are planning to set the bombings."
At the same time, Palantir is trying to ease its dependence on government contracts and expand its client base. Commercial clients work with Palantir Foundry, a data integration platform. The financial holding JPMorgan became one of the first corporate clients of the company. However, this collaboration was initially clouded by a scandal. In 2009, Palantir specialists worked with the bank's insider threat detection team, Bloomberg reports.
Palantir software analyzed e-mail, browser history, transcripts of telephone conversations, identifying keywords and behavior patterns of bank employees. For example, the Palantir algorithm alerted JPMorgan's insider team when an employee started arriving late for work, a sign of potential frustration. The workers were shocked that "no one from the bank or Palantir set any restrictions," the newspaper writes. This story ended with the bank's top managers finding out that they too were being followed. "A platform developed for the war on terrorists has been used against ordinary Americans," Bloomberg concludes. To meet its privacy and security commitments, Palantir catalogs and labels system users' data - everything is recorded.
The company is also trying to follow certain "ethical standards" - an ethics hotline called Batphone has been set up for Palantir employees. It allows them to anonymously report to Palantir management about work for a client that they consider unethical. A hotline appeared after the WikiLeaks scandal. In 2011, it became known that one of the employees discussed in emails the possibility of spying on WikiLeaks informers in order to prevent the organization from disclosing documents from Bank of America.
Karp has made a public apology and said Palantir supports the right to free speech and privacy. Karp himself believes that the company can find a balance between protecting privacy and ensuring security. "I didn't sign up for the government to know when I'm smoking a joint or [with whom] I'm having an affair," Karp quotes Forbes.
In his letter, Karp almost directly accused Silicon Valley companies like Facebook and Google of selling personal data and intruding on privacy. "Software projects with our country's defense and intelligence agencies, whose missions are to keep us safe, have become controversial, while companies based on advertising money have become commonplace," Karp writes.
He noted that the Silicon Valley engineering elite may know more about software creation than anyone else, but "don't know more about how society should be organized and what justice requires." But as Intelligencer points out, his argument ignores the fact that Palantir was used to analyze data from social media, including Facebook posts. In 2020, Palantir directly listed its shares on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE).
According to documents disclosed by the US Securities and Exchange Commission, the company had 125 clients in the first half of 2020. Palantir's revenue for this period reached $ 481.2 million. It also follows from the documents that revenue from government contracts increased by 76%, and from commercial contracts - by only 27%. Cumulatively, since June 2019, it has almost halved. Data from Palantir documents filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission At the same time, Palantir has suffered losses every year since its inception, the company itself pointed out in the section on risks. A significant portion of the revenue comes from a limited number of customers. In addition, according to Bloomberg Businessweek,
investors will have little or no influence on management decisions, since Palantir is designed in such a way that Thiel, Karp and third co-founder Stephen Cohen control half of the voting shares through the trust indefinitely." The publication notes that the company can afford it in part because its software is "almost perfect for solving the problems associated with the coronavirus pandemic." At the end of April, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which is responsible for tackling the pandemic in the United States, awarded Palantir a $ 25 million contract.
The company is to oversee HHS Protect's data collection and analysis platform. "The deal was one of more than a hundred that Palantir struck in the early days of the pandemic - 83 of them between March and early April - and this is one of the reasons for the improvement in the company's financial performance this year," Bloomberg Businessweek notes. Against the background of this transaction, several members of Congress at once asked what kind of data HHS Protect would collect and how they would use it, recalling the ICE scandal.
"We have concerns about how the existing Palantir system used to track and arrest immigrants will be supplemented with personal health information from HHS Protect," the letter said. Deploying large-scale citizen tracking systems during a pandemic is a serious concern for human rights defenders. Especially when the companies creating such systems are closely associated with the authorities.
submitted by Fantastic-Reply to conspiracy [link] [comments]


2020.10.27 00:30 Jean_des_Esseintes Deep Dive into Facedrive (FD.V) - Short Thesis, Target $0.43

Quick Data

Current Price: $11.06
Shares Outstanding: 93,729,980
Market Cap: 1.037 billion
TTM Revenue: 0.91 million
Price/Sales: 1140x

Background

Facedrive is a ridesharing company that is designed to incentivize and empower the green and socially responsible consumer through the use of its carbon neutral ridesharing platform. The company was founded in January 2016 by Imran Ali Khan and Junaid Razvi but only became operational in late 2018. In August 2019 Facedrive completed a reverse take-over with High Mountain Resources and listed on the TSX Venture Exchange. Since listing on the TSX-V Facedrive has also completed a number of small acquisitions to expand its offerings both in the rideshare market and other "Facedrive Verticals".

Value Proposition

In its IPO filing statement issued 14 months ago Facedrive outlined a number of growth initiatives including:
As of today Facedrive has only achieved one of these objectives - entering the Ottawa market. In fact Facedrive has yet to expand out of Ontario with its operations limited to the Greater Toronto Area, Ottawa, Hamilton, London, Guelph, Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and Orillia. Since the beginning Facedrive has been incredibly slow in rolling out their app to targeted cities. Despite being founded in January 2016 and receiving a Toronto license in 2017 the app only became operational in late 2018.
As for 3% market penetration Facedrive's gross revenue for the first 6 months of this year was $999 thousand. The rideshare market for Canada this year (adjusted for Covid) is $1.52 billion ( https://www.statista.com/outlook/368/108/ride-hailing-taxi/canada). Since Facedrive only operates in about 20% of Canada's markets, population adjusted, the current addressable market is closer to $300 million. Extrapolating Facedrive's gross revenue out to a full year would result in $2 million of revenue or less than 1% of market penetration.
But what about Covid? In the 2nd Q Lyft and Uber reported decreases in rideshare billings of 69% and 73% respectively. Meanwhile Facedrive's gross revenue dropped from $999 thousand in Q1 to $147 thousand in Q2, a drop of 85%. This signals that their market penetration is actually decreasing quarter over quarter.
Value proposition for riders? Facedrive's green initiative? The company began with the initiative to 1) offer electric vehicles); and 2) counter emissions from gas vehicles through an offset program. As of today there is nothing to differentiate Facedrive's offerings from its competitors as both Uber and Lyft now have electric vehicle options. There is no dedicated fleet of electric vehicles driving for Facedrive. Facedrive did donate $2,105 to Forests Ontario in Q1 2019 but there has been no mention of any offset program contributions since the company went public. The main benefit of rideshare programs is still convenience. For Facedrive to compete with Uber and Lyft they need drivers. At this point there are just not enough drivers to produce reasonable wait times. Reviews of the app consistently complain about wait times of up to half an hour. And with the green initiative not being robust enough to differentiate it from its competitors it is just not worth the time.
Value proposition for drivers? Over the last year Facedrive has paid out anywhere from 75% to 83% to drivers. This is slightly higher than Uber and Lyft which average around 75%. But not enough of an incentive for a driver to use Facedrive exclusively. I expect that pretty much all of the revenue Facedrive generates comes from drivers who use multiple platforms.
Conclusion: Facedrive has consistently failed to meet growth targets. Its current market penetration is less than 1% and possibly decreasing. There is no incentive for either drivers or riders to continue using the app when Uber and Lyft are perfectly suitable.

Facedrive Verticals

After its IPO Facedrive used a combination of cash and shares to acquire stakes in a number of other ventures which they plan to incorporate into their "ecosystem". Buzz words however do not make a company. None of these ventures generate significant revenue or offer much potential for growth so I'll only cover them briefly.

HiRide
This is a carpooling app similar to Poparide except no one uses it and it doesn't generate any revenue. There is also a trivia app HiQ which claims to be a social app that you can enjoy while social distancing (in your carpool?). HiQ claims to have 2 million downloads (Facedrive press releases all of the major milestones) and yet it doesn't rank in the Trivia category for both IOS and Google. I downloaded the app and played for 15 minutes. The app is beyond basic with the most elementary social element. I tired messaging some other players based on similar interests but no one responded. After 15 minutes of answering both outdated and at times repetitive trivia questions I was ranked 794th all time and earned $1. I am also 74th on the weekly list which leads me to believe the app has less than 100 active users. Reading the reviews on Google Play it is a combination of obvious fake reviews (multiple reviews showing up the same day with similar broken English) and people complaining they didn't get their money for answering the trivia questions.

Facedrive Marketplace
This launched in May and generated $7 thousand in revenue. The only products available are apparel from Westbrook Inc. (a content company affiliated with Will Smith). Facedrive partnered with Westbrook last year by purchasing a $1 million convertible note. In return they have the right to sell exclusive Westbrook products to their ridership. Curiously Facedrive failed to disclose at the time of the transaction that Westbrook Inc owned 192,338 shares in Facedrive at the time of its IPO. This is a recurrent theme - I give you shares, you give me shares.

Facedrive Foods + Food Hwy
Facedrive Foods consists of assets purchased out of bankruptcy from Foodora Canada. The cost was $500K. The assets Facedrive received were Foodora's restaurant and customer list. Customers however had to opt in through e-mail in order for their contact details to be released to Facedrive. Facedrive can not use Foodora's name nor did they acquire any of Foodora's technology. The Facedrive Foods app was developed from scratch and going by reviews it is not that good. The restaurants available are mostly second tier chains listed on pretty much all the food apps. On IOS the app is ranked #157 in the food category currently - they have no market penetration.
Food Hwy is probably the closest thing to a real business Facedrive has acquired. It is another food delivery app, quite niche as it caters to the foreign student market. Facedrive paid $9.1 million in cash and shares for Food Hwy. It expects it to generate $10.5 million in revenue in 2020. No mention of profit, growth rate, or its revenue from prior years. Just an expectation.

Facedrive Health
Facedrive Health is pretty much an app + wearable bracelet called TraceScan. Through bluetooth technology it can determine if you have come into contact with someone who has tested positive for Covid-19. Ontario already has a contact tracing app that works through bluetooth and can be downloaded onto one's mobile phone (no need for a bracelet). The official Ontario app only has 8% market penetration despite its ease of use. Facedrive is currently running a pilot with Air Canada for their bracelets but the market for these bracelets is so limited when the free Ontario app does a perfectly fine job in 99% of interactions.

Tally Technology
Facedrive invested $3 million in cash and shares in this sports prediction company founded by Russell Wilson. Tally's main asset TraceMe was sold last year to Nike. Nike had no interest in the tech that remains under the Tally umbrella. All the top execs at Tally also left for Nike so it is unclear at this point what potential the remaining assets have. https://www.playtally.com

Steer Holdings
An electric vehicle subscription platform based out of Washington D.C. Another company on the verge of bankruptcy where Facedrive offered up $3.25 million USD worth of shares and in exchange the parent company of Steer purchased $2 million USD worth of shares - I give you shares and you buy some of them back. Again no mention of revenue, profit margins, growth rates or anything in the press release. Just a bunch of buzz words concerning the total addressable market.

Key Management

Does Facedrive have the management in place to successfully take on the behemoths of Uber and Lyft? Or to penetrate fresh verticals and successfully create a socially responsible ecosystem?

Junaid Razvi
Co-Founder and Executive Vice President of Facedrive, Razvi currently owns 8,751,930 shares or 9.3% of Facedrive. Prior to founding Facedrive Mr. Razvi was the CEO of an IT company in the Middle East https://www.panarabia.ae . Not much else is known other than they have a horrible website.

Sayan Navaratnam
Current CEO of Facedrive and owns 32,395,180 shares or 34.75% of Facedrive. He assumed the position of CEO in March 2019 just prior to Facedrive's TSX-V listing application. Mr. Navaratnam at first glance has a respectable resume. He was CEO of A.C. Technical Systems, specializing in security and surveillance systems. From 2014-1019 he was the CEO Connex Telecommunications Corporation. He has an investment arm called the Malar Group which purchased control of both A.C. Technical and Connex. Between 2017 and 2019 Mr. Navaratnam and Malar also took a substantial stake in Facedrive. I suspect Mr. Navaratnam connected with the co-founder Mr. Razvi as they both worked in the IT telecommunications sphere. It appears Malar has an impressive portfolio of companies but most of them are subsidiaries of Connex. Both Mr. Razvi and Mr. Navaratnam are telecommunication and hardware experts who are trying to create a social enterprise digital ecosystem geared towards milennials. They are not millennials.

Heung Hung Lee
Current CFO of Facedrive. Ms. Lee has been working with Mr. Navaratnam since 2004 when she was the CFO of A.C. Technical Systems. She then became the CFO of Connex before taking the position at Facedrive. Ms. Lee has never been employed by a billion dollar corporation let alone been the CFO of one. Perhaps this position is too overwhelming as Facedrive has failed to file their last 2 quarterly financials on time.

Jay Wilgar
Jay Wilgar was appointed the chief strategy officer of Facedrive earlier this year. Formerly he was CEO of Newstrike Brands (cannabis company) and prior to Newstrike he was CEO of both a pharmaceutical and a renewable energy company. He has a history of building companies and selling them at opportune times. However he has no experience in technology and again has never been responsible for growing a billion dollar company.

And that's pretty much it for the brains of the company.

Shady Dealings


Mr. Navaratnam's Cash Cow
Prior to becoming a public company, Mr. Navaratnam was generating significant revenue for his companies by billing Facedrive for his companies' services. Mr. Navaratnam's companies under the Malar Group were responsible for not only developing the Facedrive app, but also providing customer and driver support, leasing office space, and marketing the app. Talk about an ecosystem! Here are some snippets from Facedrive's filings:
As at September 30, 2019, $917,236 (December 31, 2018 - $436,626) was due to Dynalync 2000 Inc., a related company controlled by our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. The amount owing is a result of the related company providing consulting services and product development, and the amount is included in the Company’s trade payable. The total expenses charged to the Company for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 were $1,200,300 (2018 - $397,100), which were included in research and development expenses of $702,300 (2018 - $241,300) and operational support expenses of $505,000 (2018 - $155,700).
Facedrive also engages DependableIT through Dynalync, a related company controlled by Sayanthan Navaratnam, the CEO, director and co-founder of Facedrive, to provide call center services to Facedrive.
Facedrive subleases office space in Richmond Hill, Ontario, Scarborough, Ontario, North York, Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Hamilton, Ontario and Kanata, Ontario from Connex pursuant to a sublease agreement dated April 1, 2019 for $5,000 per month plus applicable taxes.
Since Facedrive has gone public they have moved most of their operations in house and hired their own developers cutting off the related transactions. But what this does show is that Facedrive basically began as a vehicle for its CEO to enrich himself, not only through the issuance of cheap stock (more on that later) but also through Facedrive's expense account.

Stockhouse
There is a group of posters on Stockhouse that just post the same gibberish day in and day out. Their only posts are on rideshare and big tech bullboards. These are not typical Stockhouse pumpers who own shares as they show up at the same time each day and in collaboration each cover a different talking point. No rocket emojis or "to the moon" memes - just buzz terms taken from press releases spun in a positive light. And they don't discuss any other stocks. You can find some of them here https://stockhouse.com/members/shirleyarman https://stockhouse.com/members/tylermathew https://stockhouse.com/members/xavier https://stockhouse.com/members/tianaa https://stockhouse.com/members/richardsondilam
Their grammar and erudition are also very similar to the fake reviews on the app stores.

Stock Promotion
The most egregious example of Facedrive's stock promotion is their agreement with Medtronics Online Solutions. Supposedly this is an arm lengths company and yet Google returns nothing. Pursuant to a Consulting Agreement, Medtronics provided and performed marketing and strategic consulting services for and on behalf of Facedrive. In return Medtronics received $8.2 million worth of stock or 800,000 shares.
Medtronics may be responsible for not only market making services (propping up the share price) but also various paid promotion that Facedrive has been engaged in. An example, https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/The-30-Trillion-Trend-Thats-Bigger-Than-The-Entire-US-Stock-Market.html
You may have also seen Facedrive heavily promoted on Motley Fool as the next Uber or Tesla or whatever is in vogue that week.

Misleading Press Releases
Pretty much all of Facedrive's press releases are misleading or overly promotional in one way or another. Take for example the press release announcing the appointment of Jay Wilgar. The release states,
Mr. Wilgar launched renewable development firm AIM PowerGen Corporation (“AIM”) and built it and successor companies into energy projects worth approximately $2.5 billion before AIM was acquired by global renewable power firm International Power Canada (IPR-GDF Suez) in 2009
AIM was acquired by International Power in 2009 but not for anywhere near $2.5 billion. In fact AIM was acquired for USD $109 million https://www.evwind.es/2009/10/23/international-power-canada-acquires-aim-powergen-from-renewable-energy-generation/1936
Then there are the HiQ press releases, first announcing 250K downloads, then 500K downloads, then 1 million, then 1.5 million, and then 2 million. From the July 14th press release,
The App has ranked Top 10 Trivia App in over 100 countries, and ranked Top 10 App in over 50 countries. Additionally, HiQ has ranked as the Number 1 Trivia App in Bolivia, Ecuador, Egypt, Nepal, and Pakistan.
None of this is true. The app is lucky to have 100 active users. Furthermore there is no AI algorithm involved as is claimed nor is their any matching based on interests even though this would be incredibly easy to program. The suggested friends appears completely random.

True Value of Facedrive


Is it worth $1 billion?
The market, both private and public has never valued the company anywhere near $1 billion. Since 2017 Facedrive has issued stock at the following prices (all issues are split adjusted to correspond with the current share count, and converted to CAD):
2017
2018
2019
The shares issued at $1.58 were issued in connection with the amalgamation agreement (IPO). The shares issued at 39 cents were all shares for debt transactions.
Think about this for a second. 22,480,113 shares or 24% of the outstanding shares were issued at a price of 2 cents! The price today is $11.06. What has changed since these shares were issued other than Facedrive has failed to meet any growth objectives and its market penetration along with brand power has dwindled to pretty much irrelevance.

Why is Facedrive trading at a $1 billion market cap?
As at June 30, 2020, the Company had 85,593,657 Shares subject to contractual lock-up restrictions which will be released on a rolling basis beginning March 16, 2021. 15% of the shares will come out of lock up on March 16, 2021, and for each subsequent 3 months another 15% will become free trading until September 30, 2022 when the final 10% will be released. This leaves only about 8 million shares in the current public float. It does not take much to move the share price in either direction.
Secondly, Facedrive has been promoting the stock in absolute desperation. They have enlisted an army of users to promote the stock on Stockhouse; they have posted fake reviews on both the Apple and Google app stores; they have paid for promotion in various investing publications; they have hired a mysterious marketing company to provide services in exchange for $8.2 million worth of shares. And yet they have done nothing to actually make a dent into their main competitors. Since its listing Facedrive has been more concerned with propping up its share price through stock promotion than it has been promoting its actual business to end users.

But, but intangibles!
There are none. There is no genius at the helm; there is no disruptive tech; there is no vision. Facedrive's best chance for success was to carve out a niche in the sustainable ridesharing market - capture the 1% of people that would be willing to wait 30 minutes for a ride in an EV. Not a billion dollar proposition but maybe something. Instead they opted for an endless dictionary of buzz words and delusions of grandeur.

Conclusion
So what is Facedrive's true value? The core of their operations, the ridesharing app, has made virtually no progress since it was developed in 2017. The ridesharing market is indeed a duopoly, and despite Facedrive's worst efforts to promote itself as an eco-conscious alternative it has failed to resonate with its target audience. If Uber or Lyft would be generous enough to purchase Facedrive's customer base (the tech is worthless to them) they might pay 20x net revenue or $20 million.
Given that management has done nothing to grow the business and its business plan is non-existent at worst and schizophrenic at best, it is hard to ascribe any value beyond what Facedrive has paid for the distressed assets they have purchased this year. So maybe another $15 million here (being extremely generous).
Then there is cash on the balance sheet which as of today given the recent acquisitions and burn rate is maybe $5 million.
So $40 million total. This actually sounds like way too much money for what one is getting but it still only equals 43 cents/share. Facedrive is currently trading at $11.06. Even throwing in another $50 million margin of error would still result in a 90% return from a short position.


submitted by Jean_des_Esseintes to CanadianInvestor [link] [comments]


2020.10.26 14:28 goldenrags No Families, No Children, No Future


Here’s a fascinating article from New York magazine on the massive gender gap between Trump and Biden supporters. It contains this eye-popping claim, buried deep down:
Neither the societal shift away from traditional gender roles nor the downstream cultural consequences of that shift are anywhere near complete. As Rebecca Traister has incisively argued, the growing prevalence of singledom among America’s rising generation of women is one of the most potent forces in contemporary politics. In 2009, for the first time in history, there were more unmarried women in the United States than married ones. And today, young women in the U.S. aren’t just unprecedentedly single; they also appear to be unprecedentedly uninterested in heterosexuality: According to private polling shared with Intelligencer by Democratic data scientist David Shor, roughly 30 percent of American women under 25 identify as LGBT; for women over 60, that figure is less than 5 percent.
David Shor is one of the best data people the Democratic Party people has. Take this seriously.
Has anything like this ever happened to any society, ever? Three out of ten women under the age of 25 consider themselves to be gay or transgender. Five percent, sure. Maybe even eight percent. But thirty? Will they always think that? Maybe not, but these are their prime childbearing years. The US fertility rate is at a 35-year low, and there’s no reason to think it will rise. Some critics blame structural difficulties in the US economy that make it harder for women to choose to have children, but European nations make it vastly easier for mothers, and still cannot get their fertility rates above replacement.
What’s behind this is primarily cultural. We have become an anti-natalist society. And further, we have become a society that no longer values the natural family. We see everywhere disintegration. Yesterday, on the Al Mohler podcast, I talked about going to a conservative Evangelical college a few years back, and hearing from professors there that they feared most of their students would never be able to form stable families, because so many of them had never seen what that’s like.
And now we have 30 percent of Gen Z women claiming to be sexually uninterested in men. There is nothing remotely normal about that number. It is a sign of a deeply decadent culture — that is, a culture that lacks the wherewithal to survive. The most important thing that a generation can do is produce the next generation. No families, no children, no future.
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreheno-families-no-children-no-future-lgbt-30-percent-carle-c-zimmerman/
submitted by goldenrags to atlanticdiscussions [link] [comments]


2020.10.26 03:37 coRvid_ice_elation Covid HAS eliminated the flu! Experts puzzled as influenza cases nosedive by 98% worldwide!!!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-8875201/Has-Covid-killed-flu.html?ito=social-twitter_mailonline&__twitter_impression=true
Wow. This is the same thing that happened in Africa when "AIDs" hit. All the deaths from Starvation, malaria, TB and parasitism virtually disappeared and the ONLY pathogenic C.O.D. (cause of death) morphed into AIDs and Only AIDs. What a Miracle however. COVID has eliminated the normal Flu (actually Pneumonia) deaths that occur in the many thousands each year. Heck! even the 1918 deaths from the so called "Spanish FLU Pandemic" have been conclusively shown by the NIH's own reference articles to actually have due to KNOWN (not novel) Bacterial Pneumonias by a whopping 98 Percent!
(from over 9000 autopsy reports from 1918) so in other words the deaths were NOT from a virus but rather from well known bacterial pathogens causing Pneumonia. (so what was the REAL problem? That's another discussion for another article but keep this in mind)
Now the WHO and CDC have found -- much to their puzzlement -- that incidence of Death from the annual Flu has almost completely disappeared worldwide. (NOTE... They always term it "The FLU" and the deaths are blamed on Flu ...every single year but just like 1918 is almost 100% pneumonia every year...)

It was feared by many to be the perfect winter storm, a nightmare situation that would push our health service over the edge: the 'twin-demic' of flu, which kills about 10,000 Britons every year, and a second deadly wave of Covid-19.
Such was the concern that the Government rolled out the biggest flu vaccination programme in British history.
Thirty million people – 20 per cent more than normal, and now including all over-50s – are eligible for this year's jab.
Take up of the vaccine is already the highest it has ever been in the over-65s and young children, according to the latest reports.
There's just one curious problem: flu, it seems, has all but vanished.
The disappearing act began as Covid-19 rolled in towards the end of our flu season in March. And just how swiftly rates have plummeted can be observed in 'surveillance' data collected by the World Health Organisation (WHO).
Patients aren't routinely tested for flu, even if it's suspected, but a number of 'sentinel' GP surgeries and hospitals do carry out diagnostic screening on those who have symptoms, and this data gives us the most accurate picture of how much flu is in circulation.
And the figures provide a startling insight into what has become a creeping trend across the world.
===
In the Southern Hemisphere, where the flu season happens during our summer months, the WHO data suggests it never took off at all.
In Australia, just 14 positive flu cases were recorded in April, compared with 367 during the same month in 2019 – a 96 per cent drop.
By June, usually the peak of its flu season, there were none. In fact, Australia has not reported a positive case to the WHO since July.
In Chile, just 12 cases of flu were detected between April and October. There were nearly 7,000 during the same period in 2019.
And in South Africa, surveillance tests picked up just two cases at the beginning of the season, which quickly dropped to zero over the following month – overall, a 99 per cent drop compared with the previous year.
In the UK, our flu season is only just beginning. But since Covid-19 began spreading in March, just 767 cases have been reported to the WHO compared with nearly 7,000 from March to October last year.
And while lab-confirmed flu cases last year jumped by ten per cent between September and October, as a new season gets under way this year they've risen by just 0.7 per cent so far.
Of course, this isn't the total number of flu cases.
We know from Office for National Statistics data that hundreds of people have been dying from suspected flu-related pneumonia every week throughout the year – that, and the predicted tough winter ahead, is why experts agree that vaccination is still vital to those eligible. Some flu seasons begin earlier than others.
But our low flu surveillance figure does indicate the spread of flu in the UK, right now, has yet to pick up pace.
Other research by Public Health England has confirmed this. Globally, it is estimated that rates of flu may have plunged by 98 per cent compared with the same time last year.
'This is real,' says Dr David Strain, senior clinical lecturer at the University of Exeter Medical School. 'There's no doubt that we're seeing far fewer incidences of flu.'
So where has flu gone? And what does it mean for our winter?
There are intriguing theories – some more outlandish than others.
There are those who claim flu cases haven't vanished at all, but are instead being recorded as Covid-19. Sceptics say Covid tests are unable to distinguish between coronavirus and flu, but this is simply untrue.

Dr Elisabetta Groppelli, virologist and lecturer in global health at St George's, University of London, explains: 'Flu and Covid-19 are caused by very distinct viruses, and this is clear to see under a microscope.

NOTE:
WHY DO WE KNOW SHE IS A COMPLETE LIAR??? Because they do NOT LOOK AT FLU VIRUS (OR CORONA or COVID under a MICROSCOPE!!! There is ONE. (yes ONE) photo distributed of an Electron Micrograph of what they are REFERRING TO AS COVID from China. Only one. It is utterly contaminated by Microvesicles and cellular debris and VIRUS-LIKE PARTICLES which cannot under any circumstances be IDENTIFIED BECAUSE IT IS CONTAMINATED ....i.e. NOT PURIFIED nor ISOLATED.... no VIREMIA and no isolation nor identification possible. Her words (following) are UTTER HORSESHIT.
There's no chance of mistaking one for the other – the fragment of viral genetic material from the coronavirus looks like a bit of spaghetti, while the flu genetic material we test for looks like eight pieces of penne pasta.'
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING SHE IS SEEING UNDER AN ELECTRON MICROSCOPE. SHE IS LYING.
Another compelling explanation suggests the presence of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19 and has run rampant throughout the world, has somehow 'crowded out' the flu virus.
The theory has gained traction on Twitter, and there is some scientific backing for the phenomenon.
When an individual is infected with one virus, they are less likely to be infected by another during that time due to something called 'viral interference'.

Virus expert Professor James Stewart, at the University of Liverpool, says: 'Immune system cells come in and help destroy the first infection, and if another virus comes along that same response will fight it off.'
Dr Groppelli adds: 'Viruses are parasites. Once they enter a cell, they don't want other viruses to compete with. So the virus already in the body will effectively kick the other parasite out.'
On a population level, it means if enough people have one virus, others will have nowhere to go and cannot spread.
A study by researchers at the US Centre for Disease Control concludes it is at least possible that this has happened in some regions, and that coronavirus could effectively 'muscle out' influenza in the body's respiratory system.
Viral interference may well have been the reason 2009's swine flu pandemic never took hold in the way many feared it would.
Yale University academics recently suggested the high presence of rhinovirus – the common cold – in the autumn of that year may have 'blocked infection' of the deadly H1N1 virus. At the time, the UK Government planned for a worst-case scenario of 65,000 deaths. In the end, 392 died.
The Yale study found human cells already infected with the cold virus were significantly less likely to become infected with H1N1. So could that happen again this year?
Public Health England studied samples taken from about 20,000 people during the first four months of this year, as coronavirus took hold, and found those who had flu were 58 per cent less likely to also have coronavirus.
This may be more to do with behaviour when you have a virus – staying in bed, or not going out – which means you're less likely to come into contact with another virus, Prof James Stewart explains.
Yet the study also theorised 'possible pathogenic competition' between the two, because co-infection – people with flu and Covid-19 at the same time – was strikingly rare.
A Chinese study on two previous coronavirus outbreaks, SARS and MERS, has also shown the same effect. Infection with another virus, such as flu, protects to some degree against a coronavirus infection.
But what isn't clear, and hasn't been tested, is what happens the other way around. Can a coronavirus infection, with or without symptoms, elbow-out flu? Dr Groppelli says: 'The only thing we can say is that, right now, before winter hits, is it's a bit too early to tell.'
Most scientists agree there was not enough Covid-19 in circulation in March to explain the dramatic drop in flu cases. And the same holds true as we approach winter.
Random testing suggests that, in May, between five and six per cent of people in the UK had corona antibodies, rising to 17.5 per cent in worst-hit London, according to Public Health England.
Now cases are rising again, by 90,000 a day, according to the Chief Scientific Adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance.
But Dr Ellen Foxman, who authored the Yale viral interference study, says: 'One virus can only disrupt the spread of another if enough people have them.
'When we're talking about common colds, the rates are astronomically high, and many people are asymptomatic.
'But for Covid, at present we think only 15 to 20 per cent of people in hard-hit places like New York have been exposed. Most places will be a lot lower than that.
'That's not enough for Covid to prevent flu by interference and certainly not enough to account for the huge drops in flu we've seen in the statistics.'
Viral interference, typically, would also not have caused such a sudden drop in flu cases, adds Dr Strain.
Instead, scientists overwhelmingly agree the decline is far more likely to be linked to interventions – social distancing, hand-washing, lockdowns and school and shop closures.
'If coronavirus interfered with anything, it was our behaviour,' says Dr Foxman.
Both viruses spread in the same way: through infected droplets. But people with Covid are thought to be more contagious, and for longer, that those with flu.
One measure of this is the much talked about reproduction, or R number – the number of people that one infected person will pass on a virus to, on average.
Covid-19 has a reproduction number of about three, if no action is taken to stop it spreading. It means one person would be expected to give it to three others.
Some viruses are more contagious, for instance measles, which has an R number of roughly 15. Flu, on the other hand, has an R number of just over one.
The incubation period for flu is also lower. After being infected with flu, it typically causes illness within two days, compared with five days on average for Covid-19.
That means it's far more likely that individuals will be going about their business while unknowingly infecting others with Covid-19 than they will if they come down with flu.
It means, Dr Strain says, that even small mitigation measures will have a far greater, and speedier, effect on flu transmission.
'All of the studies on face masks and social distancing are based on preventing flu transmission and have shown huge reductions,' he adds. 'So it's no surprise it worked.'
Australian officials claim their low flu numbers can be partly attributed to their vaccination programme, which the Government boosted by 50 per cent, ordering 18 million vaccines rather than its usual 12 million.
Australia's huge geography – 32 times the size of the UK with people more dispersed – combined with strict Covid lockdown measures also played a role.
'The total number of coronavirus cases in Australia was around 27,500 in a population of nearly 25 million,' says Dr Strain. 'So the idea Covid is crowding out flu – when rates are low and there's a high degree of compliance to lockdown measures – becomes nonsensical.'
However, there are potentially unintended consequences. As other, milder viruses, such as the flu or common cold, stop circulating as freely, some believe we could have less protection against the more dangerous coronavirus
Dr Foxman says: 'Common colds probably shore up our defences against other viruses. If we completely shut down transmission of these with lockdown measures, and then open things up again, will we see bigger peaks of coronavirus and other viruses?
'I'm strongly in favour of mitigation measures, but it's a big experiment. I'll be watching closely.'
The other question is whether we can actually trust the flu data at all – most officials say global figures are not robust this year as coronavirus surveillance took priority in laboratories.
Fewer people have also been having appointments for flu-like symptoms during the pandemic, so fewer suspected cases are recorded.
Public Health England confirmed that flu testing has been lower this year. However the body also say that available data does show that overall flu activity is 'low'.
There is also the danger that, in the absence of testing flu cases in this country and elsewhere, flu cases could be mistaken for Covid-19.
The picture for flu is therefore 'muddied', Prof Stewart says.
What happens as we move into flu season is still unknown. Some point out flu deaths might be reduced because many of the vulnerable and elderly have already succumbed to coronavirus. But flu remains a very real risk.
Prof Stewart says: 'We need to maintain or increase flu vaccination as there will be flu circulating, and if the vulnerable are co-infected then the consequences could be much worse.'
submitted by coRvid_ice_elation to u/coRvid_ice_elation [link] [comments]


2020.10.23 02:36 ammodotcom Gun Background Checks: How the State Came To Decide Who Can and Cannot Buy a Firearm

Gun Background Checks: How the State Came To Decide Who Can and Cannot Buy a Firearm

https://preview.redd.it/5uukyytmpqu51.jpg?width=1000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=88429fa516f4d7772009b0a72d444e82a8c3410a
Prior to 1968, most adults in the United States could purchase a firearm without state interference. Guns were available in local retail stores, as well as mail-order catalogs, and as long as you hadn’t been convicted of a felony and you had the funds, there weren’t any questions asked.
Things are different now. Depending on where in America you are and what type of gun you want to buy, there’s a good chance you’ll need to pass a NICS-mandated background check to complete your purchase.
Although many people hold a strong opinion for and against gun background checks, they’ve proven to be an integral part of the state's gun control apparatus – and they don’t appear to be leaving anytime soon.
Since background checks are such a requirement for today’s gun enthusiasts, it’s important for gun owners (and those who may someday be gun owners) to understand everything they can, including how the current system works and how it came to be.

The History of Gun Background Checks in the U.S.

The history of background checks for gun purchases reaches back to the first restrictions placed on individuals trying to purchase firearms. Here in the U.S., this occured after the Civil War, when several southern states adopted “Black Codes,” which replaced the prior slave codes and worked to suppress the freedoms of black Americans. Among other restrictions, the Black Codes forbade African-Americans from owning firearms.
The Federal Firearms Act of 1938 began restricting the sales of firearms, requiring those in the business of selling firearms to purchase a Federal Firearms License (FFL) and maintain a list of persons who purchased firearms, including their name and address. The Firearms Act of 1938 also listed convicted felons as the first prohibited persons – who are not allowed, by law, to own, purchase, or possess firearms.
And then something happened that would forever change American history. Six days before Thanksgiving, on November 22, 1963, President John F. Kennedy was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas using a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle that was chambered in 6.5x52mm Carcano and fitted with a telescopic sight, which he'd purchased from a mail-order catalog.
The 1963 Kennedy assassination was followed by additional high-profile assassinations over the next 5 years:
February 21st, 1965: Malcolm X was assassinated by three members of the Nation of Islam who bull-rushed him on-stage during a speech in Harlem with a 12-gauge sawed-off shotgun and handguns chambered in .45 ACP and 9mm. X had publicly broken away from the Nation of Islam and was openly critical of its leader, Elijah Muhammad.
April 4th, 1968: Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated by escaped convict James Earl Ray using a .30-06 caliber rifle in Memphis. The prior year Ray had broken out of the Missouri State Penitentiary by hiding in a bread delivery truck. Ray was a notorious escape artist and career criminal who used an alias when purchasing the rifle.
(After the assassination, investigators launched a sixty-five day manhunt for King’s assassin that led them across two continents and four countries which culminated in Ray's arrest at London's Heathrow airport where he was caught traveling on a forged Canadian passport. A decade later in 1979, Ray again broke out of jail - this time escaping from Tennessee’s most notorious maximum security prison, Brushy Mountain State Penitentiary, where he was serving a life sentence for King's assassination.)
June 5th, 1968: Two months after King's assassination in Memphis, Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy (JFK's younger brother) was assassinated by Palestinian-born Sirhan Bishara Sirhan in Los Angeles using a revolver chambered in .22. Earlier that day, Kennedy had won the South Dakota and California presidential primaries. Sirhan claimed to be part of an occult organization called the Rosicrucians.
The cumulative effect of these assassinations - along with the emergence of the Black Panthers, who'd started hanging out at government buildings armed to the teeth - led to the Gun Control Act of 1968, which was specifically intended to keep “firearms out of the hands of those not legally entitled to possess them because of age, criminal background, or incompetence.”
Through the Gun Control Act of 1968, the federal government placed restrictions on the sale of firearms across state lines and expanded the prohibited persons who were not allowed to purchase or possess firearms. Under the new law, gun purchases became illegal for those who were:
  • Convicted of a non-business-related felony
  • Found to be mentally incompetent
  • Users of illegal substances
To determine this information, those who wished to purchase a firearm from an FFL had to complete a questionnaire of yes/no questions such as “Are you a convicted felon?” and “Are you a fugitive from justice?” Although these questions needed to be answered, they did not require verification from the gun seller.
In 1972, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) was formed as a way to help control the illegal sales and use of firearms.
In March of 1981, the assassination attempt of President Ronald Reagan led to further gun legislation with the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, which amended the Gun Control Act of 1968 to now require background checks for the purchase of firearms from a retailer. The Brady Act, as it’s known today, also led to the development of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), which launched in 1998, and is the current law on background checks for gun purchases in the U.S.

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) was mandated by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, and was launched by the FBI on November 30, 1998. The NICS is used by FFLs to check the eligibility of those who wish to purchase firearms.
Located at the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services Division in Clarksburg, West Virginia, the NICS is currently used by 30 states and five districts, as well as the District of Columbia, to check the backgrounds of those who wish to purchase firearms. Those states that opt not to use the NICS have their own point of contact (POC) to complete background checks.
The NICS applies a person’s identifying characteristics, including name and date of birth, to its own index, as well as the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database and the Interstate Identification Index. These systems compare the intended purchaser’s demographic information against the national databases to see if they match someone deemed a prohibited person. Prohibited persons include those who are or were:
  • Convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a year or more
  • Fugitives from justice
  • A user of or addicted to a controlled substance
  • Adjudicated as a mental defective or been committed to a mental health institution
  • Illegal aliens
  • Aliens admitted to the U.S. under a nonimmigrant visa
  • Discharged from the U.S. Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions
  • Renounced their citizenship to the U.S.
  • Subject to a court order that restrains their interactions with an intimate partner or child
  • Convicted of domestic violence
Since its conception, NICS has completed over 300 million background checks and has issued more than 1.3 million denials. The NICS is available 17 hours a day, seven days a week, except for Christmas Day.

How Do Background Checks Work?

When you visit a gun store and attempt to purchase a firearm, you must complete a Firearm Transaction Record, or ATF Form 4473 – which requires the intended purchaser’s name, address, and birthdate. The form also requires a government-issued photo ID and asks questions regarding the individual’s appearance, including height and weight.
Once the form’s completed, the gun seller can either call the 1-800 number for NICS or use the online system to run the background check. In over 90 percent of the cases, the results are almost immediate, with the system either approving, delaying, or denying the purchase within minutes.
With an approval, the sale can immediately proceed as planned with you purchasing the firearm. If there is a delay, the NICS and FBI investigate the inquiry over the next three days. If the FFL does not hear anything within that time period or if a determination cannot be made, then the retailer can, but does not have to, continue with the firearm transfer. When this occurs, it’s often referred to as a “default proceed” sale.
When a denial is made, which occurs in only about 2 percent of background checks, the retailer is unable to sell or transfer the firearm to the individual in question. You must submit a request to the NICS to receive the reason for your denial, the most common of which is a history of a felony conviction.
If you believe you were given an erroneous denial, you can appeal the decision by completing a Voluntary Appeal File (VAF), which can be done online or by mailing your request to the FBI. Along with the VAF application, you will also need to be fingerprinted to move forward with the appeal process.

When is a Background Check Needed to Purchase a Gun?

A background check is necessary any time you purchase a gun from a retail provider, which is defined as someone conducting business in the sale of firearms. These sellers must have a Federal Firearms License (FFL) and are legally mandated to complete a background check for every firearm sold to a non-licensed individual.
It doesn’t matter if you purchase the firearm in a brick-and-mortar store, a gun show, online, or through a magazine – if the seller is a retailer provider (i.e. has an FFL), then the background check must occur.

When is a Background Check Not Needed to Purchase a Gun?

Under federal law, any adult can sell a personally owned firearm to another adult in the same state as long as you know, to the best of your ability, that they’re allowed to own a firearm.
Private sellers aren’t required to ask for identification, they don’t have to complete any forms, nor keep any records of the transaction. What’s more, federal law does not mandate a background check to purchase a firearm from a private seller. This includes buying a gun from a relative, a neighbor, or a friend.
Although federal law does not demand a background check for the private sale of firearms, some states do require a background check.
If you inherit or are gifted a firearm, you don’t need a background check.

Do Gun Background Checks Differ By State?

Thirty states, five districts, and D.C. all rely solely on the NICS for gun background checks. The following 13 states use their own full point of contact (POC) data system for gun background checks and do not use the FBI’s system:
Some states, namely Maryland, New Hampshire, Washington, and Wisconsin, use NICS for long guns, but a state program for background checks on handguns. Iowa, Nebraska, and North Carolina use NICS, but have a partial POC for background checks in relation to handgun permits.
Many of these states have added their own provisions to their background checks, on top of what federal law mandates. In most cases, they also include looking at state and local records to determine if the person in question should or should not be allowed to own a firearm.
Some states have implemented universal background checks via an FFL, even during a private gun sale. While Maryland and Pennsylvania require background checks for all handgun transfers, regardless of retail or private sale, the following states require a background check for all firearm transfers:
In addition, some states require permits to purchase firearms. Hawaii, Illinois, and Massachusetts require a permit for all gun purchases, while Iowa, Michigan, Nebraska, and North Carolina require a permit for purchasing a handgun. These permits often require their own background check as well.
It should be noted that although these laws exist in Nebraska, they’re not currently being enforced, but are expected to be by January of 2020.

But Isn’t There a Gun Show Loophole?

There is no gun show loophole when it comes to background checks for gun purchases. The law clearly states that if you purchase a firearm from a person with an FFL, a background check must occur. If you purchase a gun from a private seller, you don’t need a background check. These same two principles apply whether you’re at a gun show or not.
So if you purchase a firearm from a gun seller with an FFL at a gun show, you will need to complete Form 4473 and have a background check. Under federal law, if you purchase a gun from a private seller at a gun show, you don’t need to have a background check. Your state laws may differ.
Of the average 4,000 gun shows in the U.S. each year, it’s estimated that 50 to 75 percent of vendors have an FFL, and therefore require purchasers of firearms to complete background checks. But that doesn’t mean that 25 to 50 percent of vendors are private sellers of firearms – many of these are vendors that sell gun paraphernalia. Gun shows are filled with vendors who sell everything from t-shirts and ball caps to holsters and concealed carry gear, and it’s these sellers that make up the majority of the remaining non-licensed vendors.
Are there private gun sellers at gun shows? Absolutely. But the idea that criminals are flocking to gun shows to illegally purchase firearms is untrue. In a report by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, only 0.7 percent of convicted criminals purchased their firearms at gun shows.

Have Background Checks Stopped Gun Violence and Crimes?

The research on the effectiveness of background checks to stop gun violence shows conflicting evidence. In an October 2018 published study completed by U.S. Davis and Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, in the 10 years following California’s comprehensive background checks, the number of gun homicides and suicides were not impacted. In a similar study published in July of the same year, gun violence did not increase with the repeal of comprehensive background checks.
Yet other studies show that background checks do reduce violence. A 2015 study found that requiring Connecticut handgun owners to go through a background check led to a 40-percent decline in gun homicides and suicides over a 10-year period.
This contradicting research shows that the problem of criminals getting their hands on guns can’t be stopped by mere background checks. According to the Department of Justice Special Report on Firearm Violence, 77 percent of state prisoners associated with firearm crimes received their firearm through:
  • Theft
  • Black market
  • Drug dealer
  • On the street
  • Family or friends
Not one of these criminals would have been affected by background checks, universal or otherwise. After all, most criminals don’t feel obligated to use legal means to obtain their firearms since they've either broken laws previously or plan to do so.
Beyond theft and the black market, criminals also use straw purchases, which are illegal, to get their hands on firearms. Straw purchasers are people who can pass a background check and intentionally purchase firearms for criminals. The San Bernardino terrorists used a straw purchaser to get the firearms they used to kill 14 people in the 2015 mass shooting.
Background checks for gun purchases often become a talking point after these types of events, but those who partake in this terroristic activity often don’t have criminal histories that would flag a background check. For instance, the Virginia Tech madman legally purchased a gun at a Virginia-based FFL and passed his background check before using it to shoot fellow students.
And then there’s the fact that sometimes the background check system fails. NICS is not a 100-percent absolute system, and time has shown that gun background checks can only be as reliable as the records they contain. Devin Kelley, the Texas Church madman, was prohibited by law to own or purchase a firearm because of a domestic violence conviction while in the Air Force. Yet Kelley purchased four firearms between 2014 and 2017, completing Form 4473 and being approved each time by NICS.
In this case, the Air Force failed to report the court martial to the FBI’s National Crime Information Center, which the NICS relies on for information. So, again, the system is only as good as the information it contains.
(It's also worth pointing out that Kelley's murderous rampage was stopped by a private citizen, a plumber named Stephen Willeford, who legally owned an AR-15. Kelley was shot in the leg and torso by Willeford, stopping him from murdering more people inside that church before the police could arrive.)
And whereas sometimes the system on which gun background checks rely is incomplete, in other instances it produces false positives. In other words, law-abiding citizens get incorrectly matched by NICS, or their respective state-level POC data system, with criminals who have similar names. And if that happens to you, then you could be denied your right to own a gun because of a bureaucratic error. Estimates from the Crime Prevention Research Center pointed to 93 percent of initial NICS denials turning out as false positives in 2009, with similar estimates in 2010. (The Obama administration quit reporting these statistics after 2010.) Yes, individuals can appeal this denial and restore their gun rights, but dealing with bureacracy can be an expensive hassle.
The myriad of issues with NICS is why the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), a trade association representing the firearms industry, launched FixNICS.org in 2013. It is also why the NSSF publishes a yearly ranking of the states based on the number of mental health records they provide relative to their population – to encourage the states to comply with existing federal law, and submit any and all records establishing an individual as a prohibited person to the FBI's databases. Their goal is to improve the existing system for everyone so that gun background checks are more accurate and complete.
Whether you like them or not, background checks are here to stay for gun owners and gun purchasers – but they are not the saving grace that some make them out to be. Background checks for gun purchases can only do so much and are not the permanent solution to keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and keeping Americans safe from gun violence. More concerning is that they give the state an ever-growing list of private citizens who own guns, and such a list has historically been used for subsequent gun confiscation attempts.
Gun Background Checks: How the State Came To Decide Who Can and Cannot Buy a Firearm originally appeared in The Resistance Library at Ammo.com.
submitted by ammodotcom to secondamendment [link] [comments]


2020.10.19 16:00 MarkDMill Great deals for 10/19, including MacBook Air, Powerline USB-C cables, GoodReader, ProCam, & more

I looked through over 550 deals and curated over $490 in savings for you. Good job if I do say so myself! If I've saved you money, would you kick back a portion and support this site with a pledge on Patreon? Not only do you keep deals coming, but you'll unlock some great perks for yourself!
Amazon Tech Deals for 10/19 ⠀ - Today's Amazon tech deals include:
submitted by MarkDMill to MDMDeals [link] [comments]


2020.10.17 19:31 coRvid_ice_elation Massive Lawsuit Launches Against the Lockdowns

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

NOTE TO SELF- The video for this is saved offline at => 22_7 C\Users\User_Admin\dwhelper and is called: Coronavirus Fraud Scandal - The Biggest Fight Has Just Begun)
The Video ref above - by Dr. Reiner Fuellmich5 is long, (see orig. link at bottom) but I strongly recommend listening to it in its entirety. Fuellmich has been a consumer protection trial lawyer in California and Germany6 for 26 years and is one of four founding members of the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee (Außerparlamentarischer Corona Untersuchungsausschuss7),8,9 launched July 10, 2020.
The other three founding members, all lawyers, are Viviane Fischer, Antonia Fischer and Justus P. Hoffmann, Ph.D.10 Fuellmich is heading up the committee's corona crisis tort case. All meetings are live-streamed and available on the Committee's YouTube channel11 (at least for now).
According to Fuellmich, an international class-action lawsuit will be filed against those responsible for implementing the economically devastating lockdowns around the world, as well as using fraudulent testing to engineer the appearance of a dangerous pandemic.
This includes everyone from local policy makers all the way to the World Health Organization and drug companies. He claims more than 50 other countries will be following suit.
"I have been practicing law primarily as a trial lawyer against fraudulent corporations such as Deutsche bank, formerly one of the world's largest and most respected banks, today one of the most toxic criminal organizations in the world;
VW, one of the world's largest and most respected car manufacturers, today notorious for its giant diesel fraud; and Cunard and Niagara the world's largest shipping company. We're suing them in a multi-million-dollar bribery case," Fuellmich says.
"All the above-mentioned cases of corruption and fraud committed by the German corporations pale in comparison in view of the extent of the damage that the corona crisis has caused and continues to cause. This corona crisis, according to all we know today, must be renamed a corona scandal; and those responsible for it must be criminally prosecuted and sued for civil damages."

Exposing Corrupt Agendas

Fuellmich stresses that, on a political level, all-out efforts must be made to ensure "that no one will ever again be in a position of such power as to be able to defraud humanity, or to attempt to manipulate us with their corrupt agendas."
To that end, the Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee will be working with an international network of lawyers to argue the most massive tort case ever — a case Fuellmich describes as "probably the greatest crime against humanity ever committed."
As explained by Fuellmich, crimes against humanity, first defined during the Nuremberg trials following World War II, are today regulated in Section 7 of the International Criminal Code. The three questions the committee seeks to answer through judicial means are:
1.Is there a COVID-19 pandemic or is there only a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test pandemic?
Specifically, does a positive PCR test result mean that the individual is infected with SARS-CoV-2 and has COVID-19, or does it mean absolutely nothing in connection with the COVID-19 infection?
2.Do pandemic response measures such as lockdowns, mask mandates, social distancing and quarantine regulations serve to protect the world's population from COVID-19, or do these measures serve only to make people panic?
Are these measures intended to sow "panic in order to make people believe, without asking any questions, that their lives are in danger, so that the pharmaceutical and tech industries can generate huge profits from the sale of PCR tests, antigen and antibody tests and vaccines, as well as the harvesting of our genetic fingerprints?"
3.Is it true that the German government was massively lobbied — more so than any other country — by the chief protagonists of this COVID-19 pandemic?
According to Fuellmich, Germany "is known as a particularly disciplined country and was therefore to become a role model for the rest of the world for its strict and, of course, successful adherence" to pandemic measures.
Answers to these questions are urgently needed, he says, because SARS-CoV-2, which is touted as one of the most serious threats to life in modern history, "has not caused any excess mortality anywhere in the world."
Pandemic measures, on the other hand, have "caused the loss of innumerable human lives, and have destroyed the economic existence of countless companies and individuals worldwide," Fuellmich says.
He points out that in Australia, residents are now thrown into prison if they do not comply with mask rules, and in the Philippines, people can be shot dead if they defy lockdown orders or don't wear a mask.12,13 During the first week of April 2020, Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte announced he would "not hesitate" to kill anyone challenging his pandemic restrictions:14,15
"I will not hesitate. My orders are to the police and military, as well as village officials, if there is any trouble, or occasions where there's violence and your lives are in danger, shoot them dead.
Is that understood? Dead. Instead of causing trouble, I will bury you. Do not intimidate the government. Do not challenge the government. You will lose," Duterte said.
This hardly seems to be a strategy aimed at preserving life. Fuellmich goes on to present "the facts as they present themselves," based on expert testimony collected by the committee so far.

The German Congress on Global Health

According to Fuellmich, in May 2019, and again in early 2020, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) of Germany held a congress on global health. In addition to political leaders, including Mr. Tedros Adhanom, head of the WHO, and German health officials, speeches were also given by chief lobbyists of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Wellcome Trust.
"Less than a year later these very people called the shots in the proclamation of the worldwide corona pandemic, made sure that mass PCR tests were used to prove mass infections with COVID-19 all over the world, and are now pushing for vaccines to be invented and sold worldwide," Fuellmich says.
"These infections, or rather the positive test results that the PCR tests delivered, in turn became the justification for worldwide lockdowns, social distancing and mandatory face masks."
He also points out that the very definition of "pandemic" was altered 12 years ago. Originally, a pandemic was defined as a disease that spread worldwide, resulting in widespread serious illness and deaths. Twelve years ago, the definition was changed to reflect a disease that spreads worldwide only. "Many serious illnesses and many deaths were not required anymore, to announce a pandemic," he says.

The Swine Flu Pandemic That Wasn't

This change to the definition of a pandemic is what allowed the WHO to declare the swine flu a pandemic in June 2009,16 which resulted in the sale of many millions of dollars of fast-tracked swine flu vaccines. Within months, cases of disability and death from the H1N1 vaccine were reported in various parts of the world.
In the aftermath, the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) questioned the WHO's handling of the pandemic. In June 2010, PACE concluded "the handling of the pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO), EU health agencies and national governments led to a 'waste of large sums of public money, and unjustified scares and fears about the health risks faced by the European public.'"17
Specifically, PACE concluded there was "overwhelming evidence that the seriousness of the pandemic was vastly overrated by WHO," and that the drug industry had influenced the organization's decision-making.
A joint investigation by the British Medical Journal and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism (BIJ) also uncovered serious conflicts of interest between the WHO — which promoted the global vaccination agenda — and the drug companies that created those vaccines.18 As noted by Fuellmich:
"These vaccines proved to be completely unnecessary because the swine flu eventually turned out to be a mild flu and never became the horrific plague that the pharmaceutical industry and its affiliated universities kept announcing it would turn into, with millions of deaths certain to happen, if people didn't get vaccinated.
These vaccines also led to serious health problems: about 700 children in Europe fell incurably ill with narcolepsy and are now forever severely disabled. The vaccines bought with millions of taxpayers' money had to be destroyed, with even more taxpayers' money."

The Virologist Responsible for Germany's Lockdown Orders

One of the characters that drummed up panic in 2009 with his doomsday prophesies was German virologist Christian Drosten, head of the Institute of Virology at the University of Bonn Medical Centre, best known for developing the first diagnostic test for SARS in 2003. He also developed a diagnostic test for the swine flu.19
Drosten spoke at the 2019 CDU congress on global health, and according to Fuellmich, when it came time to decide on a response for COVID-19, the German government relied on the opinion of Drosten alone.
"In an outrageous violation of the universally accepted principle audiator at ultra parse, which means that one must also hear the other side, the only person they listened to was Mr. Drosten, that is, the very person whose horrific panic-inducing prognosis had proved to be catastrophically false 12 years earlier," Fuellmich says.
Meanwhile, many "highly renowned scientists" painted a completely different picture of the COVID-19 pandemic. Among them, professor John Ioannidis of Stanford University in California; professor Michael Levitt, a biophysicist at Stanford University and Nobel prize winner for chemistry; German professors Karin Mulling, Sucharit Bhakdi, Klud Wittkowski and Stefan Homburg.
Dr. Mike Yeadon, former vice president and scientific director of Pfizer, is also on this list. Yeadon recently went on record stating "there is no science to suggest a second wave should happen," and that false positive results from unreliable PCR tests are being used to "manufacture a 'second wave' based on 'new cases.'"20
"They assumed, and still do assume, that there was no disease that went beyond the gravity of the seasonal flu; that the population had already acquired cross or T-cell immunity against this allegedly new virus; and that there was therefore no reason for any special measures and certainly not for vaccinations," Fuellmich says.
He also quotes21 from a scientific paper published in September 2020 by Yeadon and colleagues, in which they state:
"We're basing our government policy, our economic policy and the policy of restricting fundamental rights presumably on completely wrong data and assumptions about the coronavirus. If it weren't for the test results that are constantly reported in the media, the pandemic would be over, because nothing really happened."

Situational Analysis

Commenting on "the current, actual situation regarding the virus's danger; the complete uselessness of PCR tests for the detection of infections; and the lockdowns based on nonexistent infections," Fuellmich states:
"We know that the health care systems were never in danger of becoming overwhelmed by COVID-19. On the contrary, many hospitals remain empty to this day and some are now facing bankruptcy. The hospital ship Comfort which anchored in New York at the time, and could have accommodated a thousand patients, never accommodated more than some 20 patients.
Nowhere was there any excess mortality. Studies carried out by Professor Ioannidis and others have shown that the mortality of corona is equivalent to that of the seasonal flu; even the pictures from Bergamo and New York that were used to demonstrate to the world that panic was in order proved to be deliberately misleading.
Then, the so-called 'panic paper' was leaked which was written by the German Department of the Interior. Its classified content shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that in fact the population was deliberately driven to panic by politicians and mainstream media.
The accompanying irresponsible statements of the head of the RKI, remember the CDC, Mr. Wieler who repeatedly and excitedly announced that the corona measures must be followed unconditionally by the population, without them asking any question shows that he followed the script verbatim.
In his public statements, he kept announcing that the situation was very grave and threatening although the figures compiled by his own institute proved the exact opposite. Among other things, the panic paper calls for children to be made to feel responsible, and I quote, 'for the painful tortured death of their parents and grandparents if they do not follow the corona rules.'"
Fuellmich goes on to cite data showing that in Bergamo, Italy, 94% of deaths were not the result of COVID-19 infection spreading wild but, rather, the consequence of the government's decision to transfer sick patients from hospitals to nursing homes, where they spread infection — colds, flu and SARS-CoV-2 — among the old and frail.
This was also done by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo,22 in direct violation of federal guidelines,23 as well as in Minnesota, Ohio,24 Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Michigan and California.25 Fuellmich also points out the routine malpractice that occurred in some New York hospitals, where all suspected COVID-19 patients were placed on mechanical ventilation, which turned out to be a death sentence.
"Again, to clarify, COVID-19 … is a dangerous disease, just like the seasonal flu is a dangerous disease, and of course COVID-19, just like the seasonal flu, may sometimes take a severe clinical course and will sometimes kill patients," Fuellmich says.
"However, as autopsies have shown, which were carried out in Germany, in particular by the forensic scientist Professor Klaus Püschel in Hamburg, the fatalities he examined had almost all been caused by serious pre-existing conditions and almost all of the people who had died, had died at a very old age, just like in Italy, meaning they had lived beyond their average life expectancy.
In this context, the following should also be mentioned: the German RKI, that is again the equivalent of the CDC, had initially, strangely enough, recommended that no autopsies be performed and there are numerous credible reports that doctors and hospitals worldwide had been paid money for declaring a deceased person a victim of COVID-19 rather than writing down the true cause of death on the death certificate, for example a heart attack or a gunshot wound.
Without the autopsies, we would never know that the overwhelming majority of the alleged COVID-19 victims had died of completely different diseases but not of COVID-19."

Lockdowns Were and Are Unnecessary

Based on the expert testimony collected so far by Fuellmich and his colleagues, lockdowns were unnecessary, and any claim to the contrary is wrong. The three reasons for this are:
  1. Lockdowns were imposed at a time when the virus was already in retreat and infection rates were starting to decline
  2. Scientific evidence shows a majority of people already have built-in protection against the virus due to cross-reactive T cell immunity from exposure to cold and flu viruses26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35
  3. The PCR test — which is being used as a gauge of infection rates and a justification for restrictive measures — "do not give any indication of an infection with any virus let alone an infection with SARS-CoV-2"
To the politicians, who believe those corrupt people, these facts are hereby offered as a lifeline, that can help you readjust your course of action and start the long overdue public scientific discussion and not go down with those charlatans and criminals. ~ Dr. Reiner Fuellmich

The PCR Test Fraud

First of all, the PCR test have not been approved for diagnostic purposes. Its inventor, Kary Mullis, has repeatedly yet unsuccessfully stressed that this test should not be used as a diagnostic tool. As noted by Fuellmich:
"[PCR tests] are simply incapable of diagnosing any disease ... A positive PCR test result does not mean that an infection is present. If someone tests positive, it does not mean that they're infected with anything, let alone with the contagious SARS-CoV-2 virus. Even the United States CDC … agrees with this and I quote directly from page 38 of one of its publications on the coronavirus and the PCR tests dated July 13 2020:36
The PCR swabs take one or two sequences of a molecule that are invisible to the human eye and therefore need to be amplified in many cycles to make it visible. Everything over 35 cycles is … considered completely unreliable and scientifically unjustifiable.
However, the Drosten test as well as the WHO recommended tests … are set to 45 cycles. Can that be because of the desire to produce as many positive results as possible and thereby provide the basis for the false assumption that a large number of infections have been detected?"
Equally important is the fact that PCR tests cannot distinguish between inactive viruses and "live" or reproductive ones. As a result, they may pick up dead debris or inactive viral particles that pose no risk whatsoever to the patient and others. What's more, the test can pick up the presence of other coronaviruses, so a positive result may simply indicate that you've recuperated from a common cold in the past.
"Even Drosten himself declared in an interview with a German business magazine in 2014 … that these PCR tests are so highly sensitive that even very healthy and non-infectious people may test positive," Fuellmich notes.
"In my view, it is completely implausible that [Drosten] forgot in 2020 what he knew about the PCR tests and told the business magazine in 2014. In short, this test cannot detect any infection, contrary to all false claims stating that it can.
An infection, a so-called hot infection, requires that the virus … penetrates into the cells, replicates there and causes symptoms such as headaches or a sore throat. Only then is a person really infected, in the sense of a hot infection; because only then is a person contagious, that is, able to infect others.
Until then it is completely harmless for both the host and all other people that the host comes into contact with … A number of highly respected scientists worldwide assume that there has never been a corona pandemic but only a PCR test pandemic …
Dr. Yeadon, in agreement with the professors of immunology, Camera from Germany, Capel from the Netherlands and Cahill from Ireland as well as a microbiologist, Dr. Harvey from Austria, all of whom testified before the German corona committee, explicitly points out that a positive test does not mean that an intact virus has been found."
In the September 20, 2020 article37 "Lies, Damned Lies and Health Statistics — The Deadly Danger of False Positives," Yeadon details the problems with basing our pandemic response on positive PCR tests.
In summary, the PCR test simply measures the presence of partial DNA sequences that are present in a virus, but it cannot tell us whether that virus is active or inactive. Chances are, if you have no symptoms, a positive test simply means it has detected inactive viral DNA in your body. This would also mean that you are not contagious.

Collateral Damage

While mortality statistics during the pandemic have been within the norms of any given year,38,39 meaning the pandemic has not resulted in an excess number of deaths or a death toll higher than normal, the collateral damage from pandemic response measures is nearly incalculable. Public health, both physical and mental, as well as the global economy, have all suffered tremendous blows.
Fuellmich cites yet another leaked document written by a German official in the Department of the Interior, dubbed "the False Alarm paper,"40,41 which concludes that there's no evidence to suggest SARS-CoV-2 posed a serious health risk for the population, at least the danger is no greater than that of many other viruses, while pandemic measures have "manifold" and "grave" consequences.
"This, he concludes, will lead to very high claims for damages, which the government will be held responsible for. This has now become reality but the paper's author was suspended," Fuellmich says.
"More and more scientists, but also lawyers, recognize that as a result of the deliberate panic-mongering and the corona measures enabled by this panic, democracy is in great danger of being replaced by fascist totalitarian models …
According to psychologists and psychotherapists who testified before the corona committee, children are traumatized en masse, with the worst psychological consequences yet to be expected in the medium and long term.
In Germany alone, 500,000 to 800,000 bankruptcies are expected in the fall to strike small and medium-sized businesses which form the backbone of the economy. This will result in incalculable tax losses and incalculably high and long-term social security money transfers for, among other things, unemployment benefits."

Legal Consequences

In closing, Fuellmich reviews the legal consequences that are currently underway. This includes looking at the constitutionality of the measures. He notes:
"Very recently, a judge, Torsten Schleife … declared publicly that the German judiciary, just like the general public has been so panic-stricken that it was no longer able to administer justice properly. He says that the courts of law, and I quote:
'Have all too quickly waved through coercive measures which for millions of people all over Germany represent massive suspensions of their constitutional rights.' He points out that German citizens, again I quote:
'Are currently experiencing the most serious encroachment on their constitutional rights since the founding of the Federal Republic of Germany in 1949. In order to contain the corona pandemic federal and state governments have intervened,' he says, 'massively and in part threatening the very existence of the country, as it is guaranteed by the constitutional rights of the people.'"
Then there are the issues of fraud, intentional infliction of damage and crimes against humanity. According to Fuellmich, there's evidence showing a range of falsehoods and misrepresentations of facts have purposely been circulated, such that, based on the rules of criminal law, "it can only be assessed as fraud," and "based on the rules of civil tort law, this translates into intentional infliction of damage."
"The German professor of civil law, Martin Schwab, supports this finding in public interviews in a comprehensive legal opinion of around 180 pages. He has familiarized himself with the subject matter like no other legal scholar has done thus far and in particular has provided a detailed account of the complete failure of the mainstream media to report on the true facts of this so-called pandemic," Fuellmich says.
"Under the rules of civil tort law, all those who have been harmed by these PCR tests, PCR tests induced lockdowns are entitled to receive full compensation for their losses. In particular, there is a duty to compensate, that is, a duty to pay damages, for the loss of profits suffered by companies and self-employed persons as a result of the lockdown, and other measures.
In the meantime, however, the anti-corona measures have caused and continue to cause such devastating damage to the world's population's health and economy that the crimes committed by Messrs Drosten, Wieler and the WHO must be legally qualified as actual crimes against humanity, as defined in Section 7 of the International Criminal Code."
To address these grievances, the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee is prepared to file a class-action lawsuit — a legal remedy available in the U.S. and Canada — against the responsible parties.
"It should be emphasized that nobody must join the class action, but every injured party can join the class action," Fuellmich explains. "The advantage of the class action is that only one trial is needed, namely, to try the complaint of a representative plaintiff who is affected in a manner typical of everyone else in the class."
Such a lawsuit would also open the door to pretrial discovery, which requires all relevant evidence to be presented to the other party. Destruction or withholding evidence has serious consequences, as "the party withholding or … destroying evidence loses the case under these evidence rules."
In Germany, a group of tort lawyers have already started the process of disseminating information and legal forms, and estimating damages among German plaintiffs. Fuellmich concludes his announcement explaining how the lawsuit will proceed from here:
"Initially, this group of lawyers had considered to also collect and manage the claims for damages of other non-German plaintiffs but this proved to be unmanageable.
However, through an international lawyers' network, which is growing larger by the day, the German group of attorneys provides to all of their colleagues, in all other countries, free of charge, all relevant information, including expert opinions and testimonies of experts showing that the PCR tests cannot detect infections and they also provide them with all relevant information as to how they can prepare and bundle the claims for damages of their clients so that they too can assert their clients claims for damages either in their home countries, courts of law, or within the framework of the class action as explained above …
To the politicians, who believe those corrupt people, these facts are hereby offered as a lifeline, that can help you readjust your course of action and start the long overdue public scientific discussion and not go down with those charlatans and criminals."
==== Sources =====

https:*//*articles.m .com/sites/articles/archive/2020/10/17/coronavirus-fraud-biggest-crime-against-humanity.aspx
submitted by coRvid_ice_elation to u/coRvid_ice_elation [link] [comments]


2020.10.15 00:01 Older_and_Wiser_Now What do Joe Biden, Barack Obama, and Edward Snowden have to do with George Orwell?

Originally published on caucus99percent.com; that version contains embedded graphics and videos
 
Americans face a grave threat today that has the potential to turn the United States into a hellish dystopia, similar to the one in George Orwell's novel, “Nineteen Eighty-Four.” Our grand experiment in democracy is under attack by those who seek to pervert it and enslave “we the people”. In some ways, we have arrived at this moment through certain accidents of history; however, the fact remains that we would not be facing this threat today if our leaders, including Barack Obama, had been faithful to the oaths they swear in front of all the world when they take office.
 
Link to image of Big Brother
 
Most of us have watched politicians put their hands on a Bible and solemnly swear that they will “defend and protect the Constitution”; but what do those words actually mean? As children we are taught that all laws must meet the requirements specified in the Constitution; if they don't, they are deemed to be "unconstitutional", and will be struck down by the Judiciary. However, we are not taught that such laws CAN be passed by Congress, and IF they are passed they will be enforced as the law of the land until such time as they are challenged in court and struck down. I submit to you that "The Patriot Act," which was passed after the September 11 attacks, and signed by George W. Bush on October 26, 2001, is just such a law; it violates an especially precious part of the Constitution known as the Bill of Rights, put there by the founders as a safeguard to protect "we the people" from tyranny. In particular, it violates the Fourth Amendment:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
 
Our government has been routinely spying upon innocent Americans without probably cause because an unconstitutional law, the Patriot Act, was passed by Congress in 2001 and extended by that body ever since. The situation is nothing short of Orwellian. Politicians on both sides of the aisle share guilt in this matter. Bush originally signed the bill into law; however, Barack Obama signed legislation called the USA Freedom Act to renew and extend its powers. And 2020 presidential candidate Joe Biden actually brags that he WROTE legislation in 1994 upon which the Patriot Act was modeled.
 
Link to video of Joe Biden bragging about his contributions to the Patriot Act
 

Why Should I Care About the Fourth Amendment?

The founding fathers had much experience living in a world where British agents had the power to enter their home at any time with no notice and without any reason. Not only were such "visits" annoying as heck, the agents were basically looking to find some kind of excuse to levy a tax or charge them with a crime
During the Colonial era, the King of England looked at the American colonies as simply a financial investment. Britain passed numerous revenue collection bills aimed at generating as much money from the colonists as possible. Obviously, the colonists resented this act by the King and began smuggling operations in order to circumvent the custom taxes imposed by the British Crown.
In response, King George began the use of the conveniently worded “writs of assistance.” These were legal search warrants that were extremely broad and general in scope. British agents could obtain a writ of assistance to search any property they believed might contain contraband goods. They could actually enter someone’s property or home with no notice and without any reason. Agents could interrogate anyone about their use of customed goods and force cooperation of any person. These types of searches and seizures became an egregious affront to the people of the colonies.
TODAY, the NSA has (unlawful) access to every single email that you have ever written or received. If you ever organize to protest any law, or change any aspect of government, or even attend such a gathering, the government knows about it. The potential for abuse of this information is astounding.
In addition, we live in an age when behemoths like Google, Facebook, and Amazon, are amassing tremendous amounts of personal information about each and every soul who uses their services; these companies were harmless infants when the Patriot Act first became law. Silicon Valley is now working on technology to perform facial recognition; innocents think it's great to identify the name of that person in their photo who they cannot remember; will it be great when that same technology is used to provide evidence of our whereabouts because we just happened to be included in some stranger's snapshot?
Silicon Valley is known for preferring Democratic candidates over Republican ones. Google's Eric Schmidt played a key role on Hillary Clinton's 2020 campaign. Lucrative government contracts are awarded to hi-tech companies ... what happens to "we the people" when NSA data is merged with other data from these companies to create a master spy database about all American citizens?
What might Orwell have to say about a government spying on it's citizens?
In the year 1984, civilisation has been damaged by war, civil conflict, and revolution. Airstrip One (formerly known as Great Britain) is a province of Oceania, one of the three totalitarian super-states that rule the world. It is ruled by the "Party" under the ideology of "Ingsoc" (a Newspeak shortening of "English Socialism") and the mysterious leader Big Brother, who has an intense cult of personality. The Party brutally purges out anyone who does not fully conform to their regime using the Thought Police and constant surveillance through Telescreens (two-way televisions), cameras, and hidden microphones. Those who fall out of favour with the Party become "unpersons", disappearing with all evidence of their existence destroyed.
“Nineteen Eighty-Four” was supposed to be a work of fiction, not a recipe to be followed by American politicians on both sides of the aisle. The book is horrifying.
 
Link to image of Mark Zuckerberg w/caption "Big Brother is Watching You"
 

How Did We Get Into This Mess?

In her book, "The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism," Naomi Klein puts forth the idea that citizens become distracted during national emergencies, which makes it easier to exploit them via policies that would otherwise be rejected by the general population.
“in moments of crisis, people are willing to hand over a great deal of power to anyone who claims to have a magic cure—whether the crisis is a financial meltdown or, as the Bush administration would later show, a terrorist attack.” - Naomi Klein
September 11, 2001 marks the day that two aircraft crashed into New York City's Twin Towers, causing them to collapse and kill thousands. The Patriot Act was signed into law the next month, as part of Bush's newly launched "war on terror".
In general, the act included three main provisions:
  • expanded abilities of law enforcement to surveil, including by tapping domestic and international phones;
  • eased interagency communication to allow federal agencies to more effectively use all available resources in counterterrorism efforts; and
  • increased penalties for terrorism crimes and an expanded list of activities which would qualify someone to be charged with terrorism.
Guess what else happened DAYS after the Patriot Act was signed into law? Bill Binney retired from the US National Security Agency (NSA) after more than 30 years of service, and holding the title of technical director for the World Geopolitical and Military Analysis Reporting Group. Why did he retire? In his words:
Well, I couldn't be an accessory to the violation of the constitutional rights of everybody in the country. I couldn't be an accessory to that, or an accessory to other crimes being committed, like exposing all this data to the FBI. It was acquired without a warrant, you know. And this is the kind of data that they would use to arrest people, which they did. So I couldn't be a party to that. That's just a total violation of our justice process.
Binney's story is fascinating. The NSA had been seeking out terrorists prior to 9/11. Binney had developed a project called ThinThread to monitor communications in a way that focused on meta-data, and also scrupulously omitted data involving normal US citizens. The solution was up and running in November 2000, and ready to fully deploy in January 2001. He needed about $10 million to deploy. Unfortunately, the director of the NSA, Michael Hayden, made a successful appeal at that time to Congress for $4 billion (with a "b") in order to develop a different project called Trailblazer. ThinThread was actually operational and passing tests with flying colors, however the NSA cancelled it because they wanted to keep the $4 billion from Congress. ThinThread made Trailblazer look like a waste of money (which it was). Binney maintains that ThinThread would have detected and prevented the 9/11 attacks, and is furious that it was cancelled.
But there is more ... on the day of the attacks, Binney tried to enter the NSA building, but could not because the building had been closed to everyone. The next day, he was only able to enter by posing as a janitor. He overheard a conversation.
They were in there talking about trying to get things going. But the whole idea at that point changed now, because from Vice President Cheney's 10th anniversary of his 9/11 interview, he said that they, at that time, that Hayden and [CIA Director George] Tenet were talking about what could NSA do further than what they're already doing, and Hayden said he couldn't do it under the current restrictions of the law, so they had to have some exemptions. They took the proposal to expand that, do away with the protections, no encryption of any data about U.S. citizens and collect everything, all U.S. citizens' data as well.
They took that proposal to Vice President Cheney, and he took it to Bush, and everybody all agreed to it. To do that in secret with only -- they didn't even inform the FISA Court. They only informed four people, the chairman and the senior ranking member of both the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. Those were the only four who knew about it until, I think, 2004. ...
Let me share one last bit from the Frontline inverview
... Is there optimism that Obama is coming in, that maybe all of this is going to go away? And what is the rude awakening?
Well, we had hoped that, of course, that he would have done something, because he's a constitutional lawyer, that he would have started to change this and be open about it and make these corrections in the path that NSA was taking.
But instead he went the other way, and he was starting to indict people, like he tried to indict us. And the first turn of it was the report in July that came out from those IG reports under his administration. He was in in 2009; this was July 2009. And they said, well, all they need is more oversight and more monitoring of the programs to make sure they don't violate anybody's rights. Well, they were already doing it [violating people's rights] simply by collecting the data, and he knew that as a constitutional lawyer.
All that said to us was that all this stuff that he was saying before election was simply false. I mean, he was just feeding people a line to get them to vote for him, that's all, because he turned around and did exactly the opposite.
 

What Else Happened During Obama's Presidency? The Tale of Edward Snowden

Edward Snowden chose to follow in the footsteps of Bill Binney in 2013 when he became a whistleblower himself. He revealed that the government was spying on all of us via the NSA. From Glenn Greenwald's original reporting:
Snowden will go down in history as one of America's most consequential whistleblowers, alongside Daniel Ellsberg and Bradley Manning. He is responsible for handing over material from one of the world's most secretive organisations – the NSA.
In a note accompanying the first set of documents he provided, he wrote: "I understand that I will be made to suffer for my actions," but "I will be satisfied if the federation of secret law, unequal pardon and irresistible executive powers that rule the world that I love are revealed even for an instant."
snip
Having watched the Obama administration prosecute whistleblowers at a historically unprecedented rate, he fully expects the US government to attempt to use all its weight to punish him. "I am not afraid," he said calmly, "because this is the choice I've made."
snip
He left the CIA in 2009 in order to take his first job working for a private contractor that assigned him to a functioning NSA facility, stationed on a military base in Japan. It was then, he said, that he "watched as Obama advanced the very policies that I thought would be reined in", and as a result, "I got hardened."
The primary lesson from this experience was that "you can't wait around for someone else to act. I had been looking for leaders, but I realised that leadership is about being the first to act."
As one of his final acts, Obama refused to give Snowden a pardon before he left office.
“I can't pardon somebody who hasn't gone before a court and presented themselves, so that's not something that I would comment on at this point,” Obama said in an interview published Friday with German magazine Der Spiegel and public broadcaster ARD.
When Gerald Ford issued a pardon for Richard Nixon over the crimes of Watergate, had Nixon presented himself before a court? No. Indeed, Obama COULD have similarly pardoned Snowden; it is a odd that a constitutional lawyer would be confused on this point. Obama was merely playing politics, saying words to confuse the public.
 

Final Thoughts

There have been some recent developments on the part of the NSA and in the courts. Per the NYT in early 2019,
WASHINGTON — The National Security Agency has quietly shut down a system that analyzes logs of Americans’ domestic calls and texts, according to a senior Republican congressional aide, halting a program that has touched off disputes about privacy and the rule of law since the Sept. 11 attacks.
The agency has not used the system in months, and the Trump administration might not ask Congress to renew its legal authority, which is set to expire at the end of the year, according to the aide, Luke Murry, the House minority leader’s national security adviser.
I am not sure that I trust this reporting, but regardless, the issue that needs to be addressed is revocation of any unconstitutional laws that empower the NSA to run such a program. Expiration dates were included on Bush's Patriot Act and Obama's USA Freedom Act, however, an effort to extend these powers once again is currently in Congress: H.R.6172 - USA FREEDOM Reauthorization Act of 2020. The NYT reporter Charlie Savage was obviously misinformed when he wrote
"In a raw assertion of executive power, President George W. Bush’s administration started the program as part of its intense pursuit for Qaeda conspirators in the weeks after the 2001 terrorist attacks, and a court later secretly blessed it."
WTF? How could Savage get this bit so very wrong? Congress GAVE Bush the power to start such a program when they passed the Patriot Act. Joe Biden was a co-sponsor in the Senate. Bernie Sanders voted NAY in the House.
And think of poor Edward Snowden. Imagine living in exile for exposing a program that the government has discontinued? That makes no sense at all. Snowden is a hero for actually attempting to defend and protect the Constitution, unlike Joe Biden and Barack Obama.
More recently, The NSA phone-spying program exposed by Edward Snowden didn't stop a single terrorist attack, federal judge finds
The National Security Administration's sweeping program to snoop on Americans' phone records was illegal and possibly unconstitutional — and there's no evidence it led to the arrests of any terrorism suspects — a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.
snip
In other words, there is zero evidence the NSA's phone-records program stopped a terrorist attack, contradicting the public statements of US intelligence officials following Snowden's revelation, Judge Marsha Berzon said in the ruling.
snip
Berzon's ruling — which repeatedly mentioned Snowden's role in exposing the NSA practice — emphasized that the NSA broke the law in its surveillance of millions of Americans.  
Politicians who advocate for unconstitutional laws are apparently not subject to any kind of criminal penalties whatsoever. Think about that for a moment. Passing a law that violates the Constitution, and/or signing such a bill into law as a sitting president ... shouldn't that be considered one of the gravest sins in our country?
With a hand on a Bible, a President swears that they will “defend and protect the Constitution”. Bush made that oath. So did Obama. And Biden may very well take that oath very soon. Where has been their defense of the Fourth Amendment?
To KNOWINGLY pass or sign an UNCONSTITUTIONAL law that infringes on the rights of "we the people" ... isn't that akin to treason itself?
Our forefathers shed their blood for this country in order to free us from an oppressive and unjust king. Thomas Jefferson wrote
“Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government”.
I submit to you that as a country we are walking down a dangerous road that will lead to misery for the masses, and deserved violence and bloodshed against usurpers who rule using laws that violate our precious Constitution.
I refuse to vote for a man who BRAGS that he wrote the Patriot Act. As Bill Binney said about it, "That's just a total violation of our justice process." #NeverBiden
submitted by Older_and_Wiser_Now to WayOfTheBern [link] [comments]


2020.10.10 14:22 FunnySquashOwO A Case against Child Labor Prohibition

Halima is an 11‐​year‐​old girl who clips loose threads off of Hanes underwear in a Bangladeshi factory.1 She works about eight hours a day, six days per week. She has to process 150 pairs of underwear an hour. At work she feels “very tired and exhausted,” and sometimes falls asleep standing up. She makes 53 cents a day for her efforts. Make no mistake, it is a rough life.
Any decent person's heart would go out to Halima and other child employees like her. Unfortunately, all too often, people's emotional reaction lead them to advocate policies that will harm the very children they intend to help. Provisions against child labor are part of the International Labor Organization's core labor standards. Anti-sweatshop groups almost universally condemn child labor and call for laws prohibiting child employment or boycotting products made with child labor.
In my recent book, Out of Poverty: Sweatshops in the Global Economy, I argue that much of what the anti-sweatshop movement agitates for would harm workers and that the process of economic development, in which sweatshops play an important role, is the best way to raise wages and improve working conditions. Child labor, although the most emotionally charged aspect of sweatshops, is not an exception to this analysis.
We should desire to see an end to child labor, but it has to come through a process that generates better opportunities for the children—not from legislative mandates that prevent children and their families from taking the best option available to them. Children work because their families are desperately poor, and the meager addition to the family income they can contribute is often necessary for survival. Banning child labor through trade regulations or governmental prohibitions often simply forces the children into less-desirable alternatives. When U.S. activists started pressuring Bangladesh into eliminating child labor, the results were disastrous.
Effects of Child Labor Bans In 1993 Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) introduced the Child Labor Deterrence Act, which would have banned imports from countries employing children. In response, that fall Bangladeshi garment companies let go approximately 50,000 children. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, "It is widely thought that most of them have found employment in other garment factories, in smaller, unregistered subcontracting garment workshops, or in other sectors."2 That makes the introduction of the bill seem simply ineffective. The Department of Labor is sugarcoating the situation. Paul Krugman summarizes what happened more bluntly: "The direct result was that Bangladeshi textile factories stopped employing children. But did the children go back to school? Did they return to happy homes? Not according to Oxfam, which found that the displaced child workers ended up in even worse jobs, or on the streets—and that a significant number were forced into prostitution."3 Based on the information they have, families tend to choose the best available job for their children. Taking that option away does not eliminate the necessity of work; it forces them to take a less-desirable job. As repulsive as a child working in a sweatshop may be, it is not nearly as repulsive as a child forced into prostitution through the actions of unthinking Western activists.
The Bangladesh story is a dramatic one, but it illustrates the general point that when children lose factory jobs they find less desirable jobs to replace the jobs they lost. In countries where sweatshops locate, child labor is often the norm, and most of the children work in less remunerative sectors with fewer opportunities for advancement than manufacturing, such as agriculture or domestic services.
In 2003 the World Bank measured the percentage of children aged 10 to 14 that were working in most countries.4 As Table 1 shows, child labor is not uncommon. Rates of child labor range from a high of nearly 27 percent of children in Bangladesh to a low of 3.3 percent in Costa Rica.5
The World Bank also collects data on the economic sectors in which children are employed. Figure 1 presents the distribution of employment of economically active children between the ages of 7 and 14 by sector.6
In seven of the nine countries for which data exists, most children were employed in agriculture, often by a wide margin.7 In the two exceptions, Costa Rica and the Dominican Republic, the leading sector employing children was service. India had the highest proportion of children employed in manufacturing, and there it was a little over 14 percent. Protests against sweatshops that use child labor implicitly assume that ending child labor in sweatshops by taking away the option to work in a factory will, on net, reduce child labor. Evidence on child labor in countries that have sweatshops indicates that is wrong. It is not a few "bad apple" firms exploiting children in factories. Child labor is common. Employment in agriculture is not necessarily safer, either. A 1997 child labor survey showed that 12 percent of children working in agriculture reported injuries, compared with 9 percent of those who worked in manufacturing.8
Child Labor and Economic Development The thought of Third World children toiling in factories to produce garments for us in the developed world to wear is appalling, at least in part because child labor is virtually nonexistent in the United States and the rest of the more developed world.9 Virtually nowhere in the developed world do kids toil long hours every week in a factory in a manner that prevents them from obtaining schooling.
Children typically worked throughout human history, either long hours in agriculture or in factories once the industrial revolution emerged. The question is, why don't kids work today? Rich countries do have laws against child labor, but so do many poor countries. In Costa Rica the legal working age is 15, but an ILO survey found 43 percent of working children were under the legal age.10 Similarly, in the United States, Massachusetts passed the first restriction on child labor in 1842. However, that law and other states' laws affected child labor nationally very little.11 By one estimate, more than 25 percent of males between the ages of 10 and 15 participated in the labor force in 1900.12 Another study of both boys and girls in that age group estimated that more than 18 percent of them were employed in 1900.13 Economist Carolyn Moehling also found little evidence that minimum-age laws for manufacturing implemented between 1880 and 1910 contributed to the decline in child labor.14
Similarly, economists Claudia Goldin and Larry Katz examined the period between 1910 and 1939 and found that child labor laws and compulsory school-attendance laws could explain at most 5 percent of the increase in high school enrollment.15 The United States did not enact a national law limiting child labor until the Fair Labor Standards Act was passed in 1938. By that time, the U.S. average per capita income was more than $10,200 (in 2010 dollars).
Furthermore, child labor was defined much more narrowly when today's wealthy countries first prohibited it. Massachusetts's law limited children who were under 12 years old to no more than 10 hours of work per day. Belgium (1886) and France (1847) prohibited only children under the age of 12 from working. Germany (1891) set the minimum working age at 13.16 England, which passed its first enforceable child labor law in 1833, merely set the minimum age for textile work at nine years old. When these countries were developing, they simply did not put in place the type of restrictions on child labor that activists demand for Third World countries today. Binding legal restrictions came only after child labor had mostly disappeared.
The main reason children do not work in wealthy countries is precisely because they are wealthy. The relationship between child labor and income is striking. Using the same World Bank data on child labor participation rates we can observe how child labor varies with per capita income. Figure 2 divides countries into five groups based on their level of per capita income adjusted for purchasing power parity. In the richest two fifths of countries, all of whose incomes exceed $12,000 in 2010 dollars, child labor is virtually nonexistent.
It is only when countries have an income less than $11,000 per year that we start to observe children in the labor force. But even here, rates of child labor remain relatively low through both the third and fourth quintiles. It is the poorest countries where rates of child labor explode. More than 30 percent of children work in the fifth of countries with incomes ranging from $600 to $2,000 per year. Economists Eric Edmonds and Nina Pavcnik econometrically estimate that 73 percent of the variation of child labor rates can be explained by variation in GDP per capita.17
Of course, correlation is not causation. But in the case of child labor and wealth, the most intuitive interpretation is that increased wealth leads to reduced child labor. After all, all countries were once poor; in the countries that became rich, child labor disappeared. Few would contend that child labor disappeared in the United States or Great Britain prior to economic growth taking place—children populated their factories much as they do in the Third World today. A little introspection, or for that matter our moral indignation at Third World child labor, reveals that most of us desire that children, especially our own, do not work. Thus, as we become richer and can afford to allow children to have leisure and education, we choose to.
Conclusion The thought of children laboring in sweatshops is repulsive. But that does not mean we can simply think with our hearts and not our heads. Families who send their children to work in sweatshops do so because they are poor and it is the best available alternative open to them. The vast majority of children employed in countries with sweatshops work in lower-productivity sectors than manufacturing. Passing trade sanctions or other laws that take away the option of children working in sweatshops only limits their options further and throws them into worse alternatives. Luckily, as families escape poverty, child labor declines. As countries become rich, child labor virtually disappears. The answer for how to cure child labor lies in the process of economic growth—a process in which sweatshops play an important role.
Notes
  1. National Labor Committee, "Child Labor: 11 year-old Halima Sews Clothing for Hanes," 2006. A video of this interview with Halima is available at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTIfY9SmJdA.
  2. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of International Labor Affairs, 1994 Child Labor Report, Bangladesh, http://www.dol.gov/ilab/media/reports/iclp/sweat/bangladesh.htm
  3. Paul Krugman, "Reckonings; Hearts and Heads," New York Times (April 22, 2001), p. 17. Similarly, UNICEF, The State of the World's Children (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), http://www.unicef.org/sowc97/, reports that many of these children turned to prostitution.
  4. World Bank, World Development Indicators, CD-ROM (Washington: World Bank, 2005).
  5. Mauritius is excluded from Table 1 because it is an outlier that is not representative of the general situation as I explain in Out of Poverty.
  6. For each country, an average was taken for all years between 2000 and 2009 for which data are available.
  7. The World Bank database does not include data for Vietnam, but Eric V. Edmonds and Nina Pavcnik, "Child Labor in the Global Economy," Journal of Economic Perspectives 19, no. 1 (Winter 2005): 204, report that 92 percent of children working in Vietnam in 1998 worked in agriculture.
  8. Kebebew Asshagrie, Statistics on Working Children and Hazardous Child Labour in Brief, Geneva: International Labor Organization (1997).
  9. The International Labor Organization (ILO) estimates that 18 percent of children aged 5 to 14 are economically active worldwide. Of these, it estimates that 94 percent of them are in low-income countries, and only 2 percent are in what it classifies as developed countries. ILO, Every Child Counts: New Global Estimates on Child Labour, Geneva: ILO (2002).
  10. International Labor Organization, Summary of the Results of the Child and Adolescent Labour Survey in Costa Rica, Geneva: ILO (2002), http://www.ilo.org/ipec/ChildlabourstatisticsSIMPOC/Questionnairessurveysandreports/lang--en/index.htm.
  11. The remainder of this paragraph and the next draws on research found in Joshua C. Hall and Peter T. Leeson, "Good for the Goose, Bad for the Gander: International Labor Standards and Comparative Development," Journal of Labor Research 28, no. 4 (September 2007): 658–76.
  12. Robert Whaples, "Child Labor in the United States," in EH.Net Encyclopedia, ed. R. Whaples, retrieved from http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/whaples.childlabor.
  13. Samuel Lindsay, "Child Labor in the United States," American Economic Association 8, (February 1907): 256–259.
  14. Carolyn Moehling, "State Child Labor Laws and the Decline in Child Labor," Explorations in Economic History 36, no. 1 (1999): 72–105.
  15. Claudia Goldin and Larry Katz, "Mass Secondary Schooling and the State: The Role of State Compulsion and the High School Movement," NBER Working Paper No. 10075 (2003).
  16. France and Prussia both had earlier laws prohibiting child labor, but they were not enforceable. See Hall and Leeson (2007).
  17. Edmonds and Pavcnik, (2005): 210.
submitted by FunnySquashOwO to copypasta [link] [comments]


2020.10.09 15:09 rightwingnews /u/Omnipiro on Why do Republicans not believe in global warming?

67: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975
1969: Everyone Will Disappear In a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989 (1969)
1970: Ice Age By 2000
1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980
1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030
1972: New Ice Age By 2070
1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast
1974: Another Ice Age?
1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life (data and graph)
1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent
1980: Acid Rain Kills Life In Lakes (additional link)
1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend (additional link)
1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s
1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs
1988: Maldive Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they’re not)
1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000
1989: New York City’s West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it’s not)
2000: Children Won’t Know what Snow Is
2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don’t Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy
2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024
2008: Arctic will Be Ice Free by 2018
2008: Climate Genius Al Gore Predicts Ice-Free Arctic by 2013
2009: Climate Genius Prince Charles Says we Have 96 Months to Save World
2009: UK Prime Minister Says 50 Days to ‘Save The Planet From Catastrophe’
2009: Climate Genius Al Gore Moves 2013 Prediction of Ice-Free Arctic to 2014
2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2015 (additional link)
2014: Only 500 Days Before ‘Climate Chaos’
1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide
1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources
1966: Oil Gone in Ten Years
1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years
1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 1990s
1980: Peak Oil In 2000
1996: Peak Oil in 2020
2002: Peak Oil in 2010
2006: Super Hurricanes!
2005 : Manhattan Underwater by 2015
1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985
1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable
1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish
1970s: Killer Bees!
1975: The Cooling World and a Drastic Decline in Food Production
1969: Worldwide Plague, Overwhelming Pollution, Ecological Catastrophe, Virtual Collapse of UK by End of 20th Century
1972: Pending Depletion and Shortages of Gold, Tin, Oil, Natural Gas, Copper, Aluminum
1970: Oceans Dead in a Decade, US Water Rationing by 1974, Food Rationing by 1980
1988: World’s Leading Climate Expert Predicts Lower Manhattan Underwater by 2018
2005: Fifty Million Climate Refugees by the Year 2020
2000: Snowfalls Are Now a Thing of the Past
1989: UN Warns That Entire Nations Wiped Off the Face of the Earth by 2000 From Global Warming
2011: Washington Post Predicted Cherry Blossoms Blooming in Winter
I don't expect all these to be read, You can note the year that these articles are published and when the predictions take place. These predictions are always about 20 to 30 years ahead of time. And they are always pushed about 20 to 30 years further whenever we get to that time. For example the article about New York being underwater by 2019 was written in 1989, it's about time bad data gets called out you can't just make claims, have them be debunked multiple times over decades, and continue to claim that you have credibility on the issue. That's not how science works.
Other things to note in here are certain buzzwords that are not really relevant anymore because it became pretty obvious they were never going to happen. Acid rain, ozone layer, running out of oil, The Earth becoming a solid ball of ice, mass famines, this is all stuff that has scared people for decades, And nothing really comes out of it except more useless government organizations that cram down more useless regulations on the people.
from Omnipiro on Why do Republicans not believe in global warming?
submitted by rightwingnews to DebateRightists [link] [comments]


2020.10.08 14:19 billypennsballs WaPo Fact Check of Pence/Harris Debate

In the vice-presidential debate, Vice President Pence took a number of flimsy claims out of the Trump playbook, although he often delivered them more deftly. Sen. Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.) also stretched the truth at times. Here is a roundup of 15 suspect claims that were made. As is our practice, we do not award Pinocchios when we do a roundup of facts in debates.
“When Joe Biden was vice president of the United States, not 7½ million people contracted the swine flu; 60 million Americans contracted the swine flu. If the swine flu had been as lethal as the coronavirus in 2009 when Joe Biden was vice president, we would have lost 2 million American lives.”
— Pence
This is a silly apples-and-oranges comparison. Because the swine flu was not nearly as lethal as the novel coronavirus, there was not nearly as much need to halt its spread. Even with 60 million infections, there were an estimated 12,500 deaths. (Note: That was an after-the-fact report, based on statistical modeling of excess mortality. The death toll at the time was much lower.)
A New York Times assessment in 2010 noted that some flaws in the system were discovered, but overall the Obama administration was praised for its response — in part because it turned out that the pandemic was not as severe as it once had appeared. The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology in August 2009 had forecast 30,000 to 90,000 deaths, and the final death toll was much less than that.
When Joe Biden was vice president, we lost 200,000 manufacturing jobs.”
— Pence
Pence’s statistic depends on some sleight of hand. Barack Obama took office in the midst of the Great Recession, and thus so many jobs were being lost every month that it makes a difference on whether you start counting the start of the term in January or February.
A president takes the oath of office on Jan. 20. But for the Current Employment Statistics (CES) survey, employers report data to the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the pay period that includes the 12th of the month — before the new president takes office. So February, not January, would actually cover the first pay period after the new president took charge.
The BLS says there is no right answer for when to start counting. Pence starts with January. But if you start counting in February, as many economists recommend, Obama over eight years actually had a modest gain in manufacturing jobs — 4,000.
At The Fact Checker, we are dubious about the practice of measuring job growth by presidential term. Presidents do not create jobs; companies and consumers do. This huge difference in a two-term presidency because of a one-month shift simply shows how mindless and arbitrary this game can be.
“[We] secured 4 trillion dollars in the Congress of the United States to give direct payments to families, saved 50 million jobs through the Paycheck Protection Program.”
— Pence
This “50 million jobs” claim is a dubious number cooked up by the Trump administration. In fact, officials told Reuters that the number referred not to jobs saved, but the total number of workers reported by businesses approved for a loan under the program.
“The PPP likely did not save 51 million jobs, or anywhere close to it,” Reuters concluded after interviews with economists and an analysis of the program’s data. “Half a dozen economists put the number of jobs saved by the initiative at only a fraction of 51 million — ranging between one million and 14 million.”
Moreover, The Washington Post dug into the data behind the 51-million figure, collected by the Small Business Administration, and found “half a dozen businesses that said they had fewer employees than the SBA reported the businesses had retained. Bankers also said employment figures for hundreds of businesses had been incorrectly reported by the SBA.” For instance, Fire Protection Systems, a sprinkler system installer in Kent, Wash., retained more than 500 jobs using its PPP funds, according to the data. But the company says it has only 20 employees.
“The president said it was a hoax.”
— Harris
Harris is taking comments from President Trump out of context. Trump, at his Feb. 28 campaign rally in North Charleston, S.C., said, “This is their new hoax.”
The full quote shows Trump is criticizing Democratic talking points and the media’s coverage of his administration’s response to the coronavirus. He does not say that the virus itself is a hoax.
Moreover, at a news conference Feb. 29 with members of the coronavirus task force, Trump was asked about the “hoax” comment. He clarified: “ ‘Hoax’ referring to the action that [Democrats] take to try and pin this on somebody, because we’ve done such a good job. The hoax is on them, not — I’m not talking about what’s happening here [the virus]; I’m talking what they’re doing. That’s the hoax. … But the way they refer to it — because these people have done such an incredible job, and I don’t like it when they are criticizing these people. And that’s the hoax. That’s what I’m talking about.”
Granted, Trump and members of his administration have played down the spread of the virus and falsely touted the strength of their response, as our numerous fact checks have pointed out.
“He [Trump] suspended all travel from China, the second-largest economy in the world. Now … Joe Biden … opposed that decision. He said it was xenophobic and hysterical.”
— Pence
Trump did not suspend all travel from China. He barred non-U.S. citizens from traveling from China, but there were 11 exceptions, and Hong Kong and Macao were not included. U.S. citizens and permanent residents could still travel from China but were subject to screening and a possible 14-day quarantine. Some flights were immediately suspended, but others continued for weeks, at the discretion of the airlines. Many other countries imposed similar bans ahead of the United States, some even tougher.
Some analysts at the time predicted that Trump’s action would be ineffective at preventing the virus from taking hold in the United States.
“All of the evidence we have indicates that travel restrictions and quarantines directed at individual countries are unlikely to keep the virus out of our borders,” Jennifer Nuzzo, associate professor and senior scholar at Johns Hopkins University’s Center for Health Security, said at a congressional hearing Feb. 5.
“We don’t have a travel ban; we have a travel Band-Aid right now,” said Ron Klain, the Ebola “czar” during the Obama administration, at the same hearing. He added that monitoring everyone carefully “is the only practical thing we can do.”
The New York Times calculated in April that at least 430,000 people arrived in the United States on direct flights from China since Jan. 1, including nearly 40,000 in the two months after Trump imposed restrictions. Moreover, screening proceedings of travelers from China have been uneven and inconsistent, the Times said.
Pence points to a comment by former vice president Joe Biden — “This is no time for Donald Trump’s record of hysteria and xenophobia … and fearmongering to lead the way instead of science” — but Biden says that did not refer to the travel restrictions. He made no mention of the travel restrictions at the time he made the comment. He later said he supported the restrictions.
In any case, the virus was already spreading through the United States, and there is little evidence the travel restrictions on China saved lives, especially because the Trump administration did not rapidly set up an effective testing regimen, as did many other countries.
“They left the strategic national stockpile empty. They left an empty and hollow plan.”
— Pence
This is a false claim consistently made by the Trump administration. First, the coronavirus pandemic emerged in the past year, so if the Strategic National Stockpile was truly empty, some responsibility should rest with Trump. In a statement, the Department of Health and Human Services said that “in January 2017 the total number of ventilators in the SNS inventory immediately available for use would not have been much different than what the SNS had immediately available for use in March 2020.”
Second, the SNS was not empty. The administration eventually admitted that there were nearly 17,000 ventilators available when the pandemic emerged. That was more than enough to deal with the crisis in the spring.
Ventilators are expensive to procure and to maintain in emergency-ready condition, which is one reason the SNS was not overflowing with ventilators (Another 2,425 ventilators were in maintenance as of March, HHS says, though the New York Times reported in April that 2,109 were unavailable because the government had let a maintenance contract lapse.)
As for a “empty and hollow plan,” that is a matter of opinion. The Obama administration left behind a National Security Council staff playbook on fighting pandemics. The color-coded document lists dozens of pointed and detailed questions that top policymakers should be asking themselves if a novel virus suddenly emerges overseas. Some elements certainly could have been helpful, but the Trump White House dismissed it as having little value.
“They [Obama] created within the White House an office that basically was responsible for monitoring pandemics… They [Trump] got rid of it.”
— Harris
Harris is probably making too much of an issue about organizational charts.
After grappling with the 2014 Ebola epidemic, Obama in 2016 established a Directorate for Global Health Security and Biodefense at the National Security Council. A directorate has its own staff, and it is headed by someone who generally reports to the national security adviser.
The structure survived during the early part of Trump’s presidency, when the office was headed by Rear Adm. Timothy Ziemer. But, after John Bolton became Trump’s third national security adviser, he decided the organizational chart was a mess and led to too many conflicts. He also thought the staff was too large, having swollen to 430 people, including staffers in the pipeline.
Bolton fired Tom Bossert, the homeland security adviser, realigning the post to report directly to him. He eliminated a number of deputy national security advisers so there was just one. And he folded the global health directorate into a new one that focused on counterproliferation and biodefense. Bolton thought there was obvious overlap between arms control and nonproliferation, weapons-of-mass-destruction terrorism, and global health and biodefense, believing the epidemiology of a biological health emergency is very similar to a bioterrorism attack.
One key issue during such reorganizations is whether policy expertise is maintained. Luciana Borio, the previous director for medical and biodefense preparedness, is a practicing medical doctor and has an extensive background in medical health preparedness. She was replaced by someone with a background mostly in North Korea policy.
But whether having a separate office on pandemics in the White House would have made the administration react more swiftly to the emerging coronavirus threat is questionable. “There isn’t any organizational chart in the U.S. government that makes any difference in the Trump administration,” a former administration official told the Fact Checker. “Trump is more likely to say to Jared [Kushner], ‘What do you think we should do?’ That’s the big problem.”
“It was an outdoor event which all of our scientists regularly and routinely advise.”
— Pence
The Sept. 26 Rose Garden event announcing Judge Amy Coney Barrett as Trump’s Supreme Court nominee is believed to have turned into a superspreader event for covid-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus. Pence falsely suggests it was all outdoors, but there was an indoor component, during which participants posed for photos without wearing masks.
Even the outdoor event had problems, as people were closely seated together and most did not wear masks.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued guidelines that state: “CDC recommends that people wear masks in public settings and when around people who don’t live in your household, especially when other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain.”
In other words, people should wear masks when in public or when surrounded by people they do not live with. That clearly did not happen at the Barrett announcement.
“Joe Biden has been a cheerleader for Communist China through, over the last several decades.”
— Pence
Pence is trying to rewrite history here, because Trump is vulnerable for his lackadaisical approach to the coronavirus pandemic. For weeks in the early stages of the crisis, Trump repeated assurances that China had the virus under control — at a time when he was most concerned about keeping intact a trade deal with Beijing. (Former national security adviser John Bolton has alleged that Trump pressed Chinese President Xi Jinping to buy enough products to ensure his reelection.)
For years, U.S. policy toward China was to help manage its rise and have it become — in the words of Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick under President George W. Bush — “a responsible stakeholder” in the international system. Zoellick established a “strategic dialogue” between senior officials in the two countries that continued into the Obama administration. Eventually, it became a “strategic and economic dialogue,” led by the secretary of state and treasury secretary but also including the vice president.
The record of those meetings provides the Trump campaign with an array of Biden quotes on China that it chose to attack Biden in ads. In 2011, for instance, Biden published an opinion article, titled “China’s rise isn’t our demise,” that reflects U.S. policy at the time. “I remain convinced that a successful China can make our country more prosperous, not less,” Biden wrote.
Still, the Obama administration tried to hedge its bets by forming the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a free-trade agreement with 11 other nations that was designed to be a geopolitical instrument that would halt China’s rise and weaken its diplomatic clout. The TPP had many critics — including eventually Hillary Clinton, the 2016 Democratic nominee — and Trump pulled out of it to pursue a unilateral deal with China. He has had limited success, however, achieving only a first-stage deal that fell short of his original goals.
“And, of course, we’ve all seen the avalanche, what you put the country through for the better part of three years until it was found that there was no obstruction, no collusion. Case closed.”
— Pence
Pence claims that Democrats orchestrated a coup of sorts that hampered most of Trump’s first term. But it was Rod J. Rosenstein, then a Trump appointee at the Justice Department, who signed the order appointing a special counsel in 2017 to look into possible illegal coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia.
The FBI was already looking into the Trump campaign’s multiple contacts with Russia, but the investigation kicked into high gear after Trump took office because he fired then-FBI Director James B. Comey, That’s when Rosenstein appointed Robert S. Mueller III to be special counsel.
And Mueller, contrary to Pence’s claim, documented 10 instances in which Trump possibly obstructed justice. In at least four of those cases (Trump’s attempt to remove Mueller, Trump’s attempt to curtail the investigation, Trump’s instructions to then-White House counsel Donald McGahn to deny the attempt to remove Mueller, and Trump’s remarks raising the possibility of a pardon for former campaign chairman Paul Manafort), Trump appears to have met all the elements of an obstruction offense under federal law, according to Mueller’s report.
Mueller declined to say whether these episodes were criminal, vaguely suggested that Congress might consider impeachment, referred to a Justice Department policy that bars the indictment of a sitting president, and proffered a list of other reasons why he couldn’t state his views as to Trump’s conduct.
“If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state,” the report says, adding that, “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”
Attorney General William P. Barr and Rosenstein reviewed Mueller’s report and concluded that no crime was committed. But Mueller did not exonerate Trump, as Pence seemed to suggest.
On the separate question of coordination between Trump’s campaign and Russians, the Mueller report concluded that the Trump campaign welcomed Russia’s help and sought to exploit it, but there was not enough evidence to bring charges that members of the campaign conspired with Russian government operatives.
“Joe Biden and Kamala Harris consistently talk about mandates, not just mandates with the coronavirus, but a government takeover of health. ... Green New Deal, all government control.”
— Pence
The Trump campaign for months has claimed falsely that Biden’s campaign platform is a mirror image of Sen. Bernie Sanders’s (I-Vt.). That’s simply false. Keep in mind: Biden prevailed in the Democratic primary by running as a moderate alternative to Sanders’s far-reaching liberal platform.
Biden has never supported the Green New Deal, which is a nonbinding resolution from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and other Democrats that calls for cutting carbon emissions to net-zero over 10 years while making steep investments in green infrastructure.
Harris was an original co-sponsor of the Green New Deal resolution in the Senate, as Pence said later in the debate, and has since introduced more climate legislation with Ocasio-Cortez.
But Biden’s climate plan is more limited, calling for net-zero emissions “no later than 2050,” and proposing fewer green investments. The Biden campaign has not budged from this position after tapping Harris to join the ticket.
Similarly, on health care, Biden has suggested nothing like Sanders’s Medicare-for-all proposal.
“If your insurance company isn’t doing right by you, you should have another, better choice,” Biden’s website says. “Whether you’re covered through your employer, buying your insurance on your own, or going without coverage altogether, the Biden Plan will give you the choice to purchase a public health insurance option like Medicare. As in Medicare, the Biden public option will reduce costs for patients by negotiating lower prices from hospitals and other health-care providers. It also will better coordinate among all of a patient’s doctors to improve the efficacy and quality of their care, and cover primary care without any co-payments. And it will bring relief to small businesses struggling to afford coverage for their employees.”
Sanders proposed a much more ambitious plan, Medicare-for-all, or universal health care with the government acting as the single payer, that Biden does not support.
“They want to abolish fossil fuels and ban fracking, which would cost hundreds of thousands of American jobs all across the heartland.”
— Pence
False. Biden has said he would not issue new permits for fracking on federal lands but would allow existing operations to continue. That position has earned him detractors among climate activist groups.
During her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, Harris supported a total ban on fracking. But Biden’s position has not budged, not in the primary when Republicans claimed it had and not now.
Fracking, short for “hydraulic fracturing,” is a drilling technique that uses high-pressure water and chemical blasts to access natural gas and oil reserves underground. The technique has facilitated a boom in U.S. energy production over the past decade, but it has been controversial, the target of climate-change activists and many Democrats.
The issue is important to Pennsylvania because underneath about two-thirds of the state is the Marcellus shale formation — which also covers parts of New York, Ohio, West Virginia and Maryland.
“Senator Harris is denying the fact that they’re going to raise taxes on every American.”
— Pence
Biden would raise taxes by a substantial amount, but not on every American, no matter how you slice it.
Among his key proposals, Biden says he would restore the top individual tax rate from 37 to 39.6 percent, raise the corporate tax rate from 21 to 28 percent, set minimum corporate taxes for domestic and foreign income, boost the tax on capital gains by labeling it as ordinary income and reintroduce limits on itemized deductions. As Harris noted, he has vowed not to raise taxes on anyone making less than $400,000 a year.
Five respected organizations have calculated the impact of Biden’s tax proposals: the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center (TPC), the Tax Foundation, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and the Penn Wharton Budget Model. They broadly agree that the Biden plan would raise between $3.5 trillion and $4 trillion over 10 years — and that such a tax increase would moderately reduce the anticipated size of the U.S. economy in the coming decade.
The tax analyses also broadly agree that virtually all of that revenue would be gathered from the very wealthy or from corporations, with about half of the money coming from the top 0.1 percent, and three-quarters from the top 1 percent of households.
But when you dig into the distributional tables produced by these groups, you see they estimate that some of the burden from the tax increases would fall on people making less than $400,000. The amounts are relatively small, according to Penn Wharton — an average of $15 for the bottom quintile, $90 for the second quintile, $180 for the middle quintile and $360 for the fourth quintile. But those numbers are in the tables, so some Republicans have claimed (incorrectly) that 80 percent of Americans would face higher taxes.
Tax experts say that is because of technical reasons related to the corporate tax increase as the tax models assume corporations adjust to a higher tax by reducing investment returns or cutting workers’ wages.
The Penn Wharton model has a handy feature that allows you to see the impact of the Biden tax plan without the corporate tax increase. When you click that option, the average tax change suddenly drops to zero for the bottom 90 percent of households. Even households between 90 and 95 percent would face only an average tax increase of $5. Nearly 97 percent of the tax increase would be paid by the top 1 percent.
“President Trump and I have a plan to improve health care and protect preexisting conditions for every American.”
— Pence
Yes, they have a plan. The plan is to kill those legal protections through a lawsuit pending before the Supreme Court and replace them with a plan that Trump has been promising for years and never delivered.
Before Obama and Democrats enacted the Affordable Care Act in 2010, insurance companies could and did deny coverage to people with preexisting conditions, such as cancer or lesser ailments.
The ACA prohibited this practice by mandating that insurance companies sell plans to anyone who wants them and by requiring that people in similar age groups and geographic regions pay similar costs. This is known as the coverage guarantee for patients with preexisting conditions.
The Trump administration filed a brief on June 25 asking the Supreme Court to strike down the entire ACA, including its coverage guarantee. Trump has issued a brief executive order saying he supports coverage for patients with preexisting conditions, but experts, Republicans and Democrats say what’s needed is a law.
“Literally in the midst of a public health pandemic, where more than 210,000 people have died,” Harris said during the debate, “Donald Trump is in court right now trying to get rid of the Affordable Care Act, and I’ve said it before and it bears repeating, this means that there will be no more protections for people with preexisting conditions.”
When moderator Susan Page asked Pence to explain how the Trump administration would protect people with preexisting conditions, Pence falsely claimed that Biden and Harris support abortion “up to the moment of birth” and did not mention anything related to preexisting conditions.
“Joe Biden and Kamala Harris support taxpayer funding of abortion all the way up to the moment of birth, late-term abortion.”
— Pence
Neither Biden nor Harris supports “late-term abortion and infanticide.” They do not support funding abortion “up to the moment of birth.”
Biden supports abortion rights and says he would codify in statute the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Roe v. Wade and related precedents, which generally limit abortions to the first 20 to 24 weeks of gestation.
Most abortions are performed in the earlier stages of pregnancy. About 1 percent happen after the fetus reaches the point of viability. Trump and antiabortion advocates have claimed for months that Biden supports abortion “up until the moment of birth,” a claim we have awarded Three Pinocchios.
They argue that some laws and court decisions have opened loopholes that allow abortions to the very end of a pregnancy. Experts have told us abortions up to the moment of birth, what could be described as infanticide, are not happening in the United States.
Some Democrats support abortion rights, but that doesn’t mean they support “extreme late-term abortions,” experts told us. “That’s like saying everyone who ‘supports’ the Second Amendment ‘supports’ school shootings,” said Katie L. Watson, a professor at Northwestern University’s Feinberg School of Medicine.
The Supreme Court’s rulings in Roe and Planned Parenthood v. Casey say states may ban abortion after the fetus reaches viability, the point at which it can sustain life, which happens at or near the end of the second trimester. States with such bans must allow an exception “to preserve the life or health of the mother.”
These rulings don’t force states to ban abortions. Some states don’t have gestational-age restrictions, although most do. According to the Guttmacher Institute, 43 states have laws restricting abortion after the fetus reaches a certain gestational age.
Asked whether he supported restrictions, a Biden campaign representative previously told The Post that “Biden believes in the standard laid out by Roe and Casey.”
submitted by billypennsballs to Foxhidesinfo [link] [comments]


2020.10.07 21:59 JBL_0 How an American businessman used private jets to traffic $1B worth of drugs for the Sinaloa Cartel across USA

How an American businessman used private jets to traffic $1B worth of drugs for the Sinaloa Cartel across USA
He trafficked across the country using small airports and exploiting some security blindspots
BETH WARREN LOUISVILLE COURIER JOURNAL 8:46 pm EDT October 3, 2020
Robert Carlson, a California businessman who dreamed of becoming the cocaine king of the skies, used private jets to funnel a billion dollars' worth of cartel drugs through smaller airports across the country — exploiting a security blind spot.
He did it over and over again, profiting off a rarely policed mode of transportation. And when he was finally busted in 2017 in Lexington, it wasn't because of the X-ray scanner or drug-sniffing dog. That level of security at private and secondary airports just isn't there.
Instead, an informant tipped off federal agents and blew up one of the nation's largest airborne domestic smuggling rings — one in which Carlson moved drugs for three years for the Sinaloa Cartel.
A closer look at Carlson's case — provided through federal court transcripts and interviews with prosecutors and agents — exposes gaping holes in security at the majority of the nation's more than 2,500 general aviation airports, where there are no Transportation Security Administration checkpoints.
Kenneth Martinson, a retired Homeland Security Investigations agent who is considered one of the godfathers of plane smuggling cases, said the task of policing private planes "does fall through the cracks."
"The next time you look up and see one, wonder to yourself: 'Where’s it going? Where’d it come from, and what’s on board?'
"There’s a good chance it could be illicit narcotics.”
TSA — created after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks — focuses on securing flights at the nation's 440 major airports that host commercial fleets such as Delta and American Airlines. If TSA agents find drugs during screenings of passengers or luggage, they alert police.
These security measures don't exist at the majority of the secondary airports, which host much of the nation's 200,000 general aviation aircraft — more than half of the world's private planes.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Dmitriy Slavin explained the risks to the Eastern Kentucky judge overseeing Carlson's case.
"Nobody is scanning your luggage," he said. "You get on, you fly over, you get off. You move your drugs. That is a huge problem because it's so easy, and it's very difficult to stop, just because of the nature of these small airports."
In just a four-month period in 2017, Carlson moved $60 million in drug profits out of Atlanta to California, said Thor Whitmore, an Atlanta-based Homeland Security Investigations special agent.
"And that's just out of Atlanta," he said. "The Carlson case was a big eye-opener."
Agents say the majority of drugs spread across the country are hidden on trucks or tucked into packages sent through the mail, so law enforcement officials focus their efforts on policing major highways and screening mail. They also concentrate on drug searches at Mexico border crossings.
It's impossible to quantify the volume of drugs on board private planes that are never searched.
The Drug Enforcement Administration cautioned in its 2019 National Drug Threat Assessment that, with cocaine "more and more, traffickers are utilizing private airplanes and secondary airports" that have less security. The DEA also warned that traffickers use personal planes to fly marijuana produced in states where it's legal to states where it's not.
Hiding drugs on jets isn't new. Agents noticed the trend as far back as the 1970s.
The Carlson private plane drug ring is one of the largest of its kind since the 1980s, when the crime was depicted on the popular TV show "Miami Vice," said Whitmore, a federal agent for 27 years.
After the 1990s, traffickers shifted toward moving drugs on land to avoid police crackdowns on aircraft. But during the past few years, police began to notice an increase in private aircraft drug cases.
Despite a continuation of the deadliest drug epidemic in the nation's history, there still hasn't been a significant push to prevent the spread of drugs using private planes.

Experts cite two main reasons: a lack of security resources and an ask-no-questions culture enjoyed by the jet set.
A debate underway for decades centers on how to increase security to screen for bombs, drugs or other contraband, while maintaining the privacy and convenience expected by elite travelers.
Congress' think tank, the Congressional Research Service, noted in 2009 that discussions about imposing restrictions have been "highly contentious."
"That’s what attracts people to either owning their own aircraft or chartering a private plane, to avoid that scrutiny because it’s a hassle," Whitmore said. "They don’t stand in a long line and get frisked."
Some members of Congress are themselves pilots, and others frequently use private jets.
And pilots and the general aviation community have a strong lobby, including the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, or AOPA, the world’s largest aviation organization, with 330,000 members. It stresses freedom over restrictions.
"The AOPA is the NRA of flying," Martinson said. "They’re a powerful voice, and they are heard."
The 'Loco gringo'Robert Walter Carlson, Jr., 50, is an extreme example of how a criminal can easily find and capitalize on security weaknesses at secondary airports across the nation.
He was driven by greed.
Carlson had an $8 million mansion, drove a red Ferrari and socialized with Hollywood’s A-list. He claimed to have once befriended neighbor and legendary actor Dick Van Dyke.
But his job as a computer networking specialist couldn't sustain his luxury lifestyle.
So he cooked up a scheme in 2014 to cart Northern California marijuana on private planes, according to federal records reviewed by The Courier Journal. He met a Mexican drug smuggler associated with the Sinaloa Cartel, one of Mexico's most powerful cartel empires.
Carlson realized he could make more money and lessen the risk of getting caught by moving cocaine instead of a suitcases full of pot, which is bulky and smelly. So he asked the cartel associate to vouch for him and introduce him to cartel leaders in Mexico.
Carlson arrived at a four-star hotel in Guadalajara in early 2016 and was greeted by a man who appeared to be a police officer on the cartel's payroll. The man said Carlson wouldn't be harmed but had to be blindfolded.
The cartel was looking for new opportunities to move cocaine and other drugs after repeated police stings on U.S. highways like Interstate 10, a major drug corridor that stretches from California to Florida. Cartels like to team with U.S. citizens, especially a "gringo" who could blend in with other wealthy passengers on private jets.
Carlson boasted that he could be the "FedEx of the white skies," promising a network of private pilots who could offer a faster turn-around time to deliver cocaine and fly back to California with drug profits. By land, it often took weeks. Carlson could do it in two days.
Carlson also could lessen the risks of a drug bust. If the cartel sent drugs from Mexico on a private jet, it would have to clear a U.S. customs search. Carlson could avoid that scrutiny by picking up cartel drugs driven across the border to California and then making only domestic flights.

Sinaloa members and Carlson celebrated their billion-dollar partnership over tacos and bottled Coca-Colas in a tiny restaurant in Los Mochis, a coastal city in the cartel-controlled state of Sinaloa.
Back in the U.S., Carlson hurriedly built his network. He partnered with Katharine Matthews, a Hollywood socialite who partied in the same social circles with pop stars like Katy Perry and Justin Bieber, actor Leonardo DiCaprio and rapper Snoop Dogg.
Carlson recruited others wanting quick cash, including several pilots, a model, a chef and an Army combat veteran, records show.
Carlson knew there was a sharp contrast in the scrutiny for those flying private compared with passengers stepping foot on a commercial flight. There's no photo ID required, no ticket confirmation, no pat-downs in security lines. And there's no baggage screening.
On a small private aircraft, passengers typically don't even have to give their names. Even if pilots fill out a manifest, they don't have to ask to see identification to verify passengers are giving their real names.
And, on a private plane, the pilot can refuse to allow law enforcement on board — something Carlson knew and exploited.
To further lessen the risks of getting caught, Carlson offered to pay a dozen pilots extra to fly the drugs across the country. Only one said no. Carlson looked for those who complained of money problems. He stayed away from "law nerds" who followed rules.
Carlson also forked out hush money to ground crews that fueled planes and unloaded luggage.
Along with owning various planes, Carlson used chartered jets, too. Sometimes, he made drug runs unbeknownst to the plane owners and pilots.
Carlson and his team made drug deliveries at noncommercial airports in Atlanta; New York City; Bessemer, Alabama; and Charlotte, North Carolina.
Michael Romagnoli, a group supervisor for Homeland Security Investigations in Northern Kentucky, led the Carlson probe and discovered how the drug ring flourished for so long using secondary airports.
"It's not a security lapse," he said. "There is no security. There's no dogs. No police. No TSA."
Over time, Carlson became reckless, bragging that he ran drugs for a Mexican cartel. He once took a woman he met on a dating app to Mexico for their second date to meet cartel members. Ultimately, someone Carlson confided in tipped off police.
A few weeks before his arrest, Carlson started flying methamphetamine.
His cartel fixer sent two meth shipments destined for Lexington, known internationally for horse farms and thoroughbred racetracks.
Carlson, now in prison, quipped while testifying during his co-defendants' trial in March: "I got paid for the first trip. On the second trip, the only thing I got was this orange jumpsuit."
When Carlson's plane landed on the second trip to a small airstrip in Lexington in April of 2017, state troopers and federal agents were waiting.
Acting on a tip, police watched the passengers move suitcases from the plane to a black BMW and drive off, ignoring a red light. Police stopped the car, and a drug-detecting dog sniffed out 40 pounds of meth.
The dog also sniffed out three suitcases on the plane stuffed with an estimated 80 kilos of cocaine — the second-largest cocaine bust in Kentucky history. Those drugs had been destined for Atlanta and Miami.
Carlson planned to spend the night at a luxury hotel but ended up in a jail cell.
https://preview.redd.it/946w7xn6aqr51.jpg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=11d41bec3aa6c9ae3c5b9befcb89518033f73d1a
The investigation led to the conviction of Carlson, Matthews and five others, including a man who helped launder the money and a pilot who had to forfeit his million-dollar jet.
"In this case we arrested the rich, the elite, privileged people that were exploiting this method of travel," Romagnoli said.
Carlson pleaded guilty in 2017 to trafficking 5 or more kilos, though he estimates he moved hundreds. His attorney, Patrick Nash, declined to discuss the case. He is waiting to see if the judge will agree to reduce Carlson's sentence of 16 years and eight months in a federal prison, where parole is not an option.
Carlson spent several days detailing his three years of drug smuggling to prosecutors and police. Many of those secrets remain hidden in sealed court documents.
Using Carlson's information, investigators continue to drill down to identify and prosecute the local distributors who bought drugs from Carlson in Lexington, Atlanta, New York, Miami and other cities. And they're trying to work their way up the chain to the cartel suppliers in Mexico and cartel associates in the U.S.
Gorman, a special agent with Homeland Security Investigations, helped send Carlson to prison and is already looking for his next airborne drug smuggling case.
"On any given day, in our skies, there is probably contraband moving from coast to coast," he said.
"There’s guns, aliens and drugs."
An orange grove of drugsSecuring the nation's 2,500 secondary airports, and intercepting illegal drugs remains a challenge.
Customs agents seized 67 kilograms of illegal drugs on private planes in fiscal year 2019, compared with nearly 57 seized the previous year, according to Customs and Border Protection data.
That's just a small percentage of the volume traffickers move on private planes, agents said.
A senior DEA official, who spoke on background, said the agency focuses more on international flights moving larger amounts, up to multitons of cocaine to North and Central America from the Andean and Southern Cone regions. DEA relies on other federal agencies, like Homeland Security Investigations and the Federal Aviation Administration, to target smaller shipments on flights within the U.S.
https://preview.redd.it/lz2p4iv8aqr51.jpg?width=555&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=bb6490779fee238c0a82374163a938b05704859e
A rogue network of private jet pilots were nabbed in Lexington with Sinaloa Cartel drugs bound for Kentucky, Georgia and Florida. (Courtesy Homeland Security Investigations Kentucky)COURTESY OF HOMELAND SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS
Whitmore said Homeland Security Investigations doesn't have the manpower to police all secondary airports.
"TSA, that would alleviate a lot," he said. "But it would just kick 'em down to smaller airports to avoid it."
Some airports are so small they don't have towers or staff at night. There also are countless airstrips in cornfields, deserts, pastures and backyards that are never registered with any federal agency. Florida agents found two prop jets that landed in tandem in an orange grove northwest of Orlando in 2010 with $800,000 worth of marijuana.
Since TSA doesn't have the resources to screen at the majority of the smaller airports, the agency released guidelines on security measures, but they aren't mandatory. And they were developed in collaboration with the AOPA and several other aviation associations.
Christopher Cooper, AOPA's director of regulatory affairs based in Washington, D.C., said most pilots are honest and willing to help police root out those who aren't.
AOPA partnered with TSA in 2002 to create a secure hotline — 1-866-GASECURE — to encourage airport managers, pilots and ground crew to report possible dangers or crimes.
TSA’s Transportation Security Operation Center staff have received 336 calls to the hotline since 2018, said TSA spokesman R. Carter Langston.
Homeland Security also has eyes monitoring aircraft at the Mexican border and on international and domestic flights through the Security's Air and Marine Operations Center.
Also, the FAA is working to train local, state and federal agents on suspicious behaviors at noncommercial airports, said Steven Tochterman, a veteran FAA special agent who helped on the Carlson case.
"The bad guys are always looking to exploit the loophole," he said.
"And we’re trying to shut it down.”
Source
submitted by JBL_0 to NarcoFootage [link] [comments]


2020.10.05 16:04 BelenusUK A COVID-19 Timeline, 1948 to 2021.

1948, Boris Johnson's grandfather on his mother's side, James Fawcett, helps sign the declaration of Human Rights at the United Nations. (Was also a member of Chatham House – of the infamous Chatham House rule, whereby decisions and discussions made are struck from the records and kept secret.)
1968, The Club of Rome is created.
1972, The Club of Rome publishes a report entitled "The Limits to Growth" after international gatherings in Moscow and Rio de Janeiro in 1971.
1991, a book entitled "The First Global Revolution" is published, written by Alexander King and Bertrand Schneider. Alexander King was the co-founder of the Club of Rome.
1992, UNCED holds the "Agenda 21" summit in Rio de Janeiro and is dubbed the "Rio Declaration on Environment and Development."
2000, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is founded.
2009 Onwards. Gates Foundation begins giving grants to Imperial College. Total up to present runs into the hundreds of millions. https://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database#q/k=IMPERIAL
10th July, 2009, Ted Adhanom is appointed chairman of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. https://www.theglobalfund.org/en/news/2009-07-10-global-fund-board-appoints-minister-of-health-of-ethiopia-as-chai#:~:text=Geneva%20%E2%80%93%20The%20Board%20of%20the,as%20the%20new%20Board%20Chair.&text=The%20Global%20Fund%20faces%20big%20challenges%20ahead.
The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria is, like many international health organisations, is heavily funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. https://www.theglobalfund.org/en/news/2009-07-10-global-fund-board-appoints-minister-of-health-of-ethiopia-as-chai#:~:text=Geneva%20%E2%80%93%20The%20Board%20of%20the,as%20the%20new%20Board%20Chair.&text=The%20Global%20Fund%20faces%20big%20challenges%20ahead.
Tedros Adhanom also worked on GAVI's board between 2008-2009. GAVI is almost entirely funded by the Gates Foundation. https://www.gavi.org/gavi-welcomes-election-of-new-who-chief
29th January, 2010. Bill Gates promises $10bn at DAVOS conference for 'decade of vaccines'. http://edition.cnn.com/2010/BUSINESS/01/29/davos.bill.gates.donates/index.html
February, 2010. US military document released detailing rules and advice on running concentration camps. https://info.publicintelligence.net/USArmy-InternmentResettlement.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0dSRv5SEZt4IMXvkSS4BOrWAal3-V30pHD67kWOOKYBXOaFtHqUNsKAt8
29th September, 2010. Gates Foundation comes under fire for buying $23m of Monsanto shares. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/poverty-matters/2010/sep/29/gates-foundation-gm-monsanto
2nd December, 2010. The World Health Organization (WHO), UNICEF, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation have announced a collaboration to increase coordination across the international vaccine community and create a Global Vaccine Action Plan dubbed the “Decade of Vaccines.” Dr Fauci sits on the leadership council. https://www.who.int/immunization/newsroom/press/news_release_decade_vaccines/en/ Since the start of this “philanthropic work”, Gate's net worth has increased from 54bn to $115bn, rising by $15bn since the 1st of May 2020 to the 1st October 2020.
April 2014. UK Ministry of Defence issues a report entitled “Global Strategic Trends - Out to 2045”. In it, it says: ”The developed world is likely to experience a degree of transformation as it moves from a consumerist society based on freedom of choice to a more constrained, sustainable societal model that provides financial and social rewards to encourage greener practices and discourage waste.” https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/654717/GST4_v9_Feb10_archived.pdf
October 2014, US Government outlaws 'monster-germ' research. Dr Anthony Fauci in 2015 then approved a $3.7m project outsource research to Wuhan laboratory. https://www.ispsw.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/689_Lin.pdf
September 2015, Agenda 2030 summit signed by world leaders, leading to what are referred to as SDG or sustainable development goals. These are mostly the same goals set out by the Agenda 21 scheme decades before. Although these goals sound reasonable however, their connections to corporate power and the world's biggest psychopaths calls into question the real purpose behind each of these 17 “sustainability” goals.
29th September, 2015. Mark Carney gives a speech at Lloyds in London on financial contributions to the climate agenda, and starts the organisation “The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5c-eqNxeSQ&feature=youtu.be
November 12th 2015, bat coronaviruses being manipulated under the watch of the NIH before work was transferred to China. https://www.nature.com/news/engineered-bat-virus-stirs-debate-over-risky-research-1.18787
January 19th, 2016. Calls made to investigate the Gates Foundation over questionable influence on the international scene. https://www.globaljustice.org.uk/resources/gated-development-gates-foundation-always-force-good
May 2016. The ID2020 Summit is held at the United Nations headquarters, bringing together 400 experts to discuss "how to provide digital identity to all" one of the sustainable development goals. ID2020 has become connected to many conspiracy theories surrounding Bill Gates. There is no direct work with the Gates Foundation that I have found, however the project is partnered with GAVI (heavily funded by the Gates Foundation) and Microsoft, Bill Gates' original software company. https://id2020.org/alliance
6th December, 2016. Spookily the WEF publishes an article, written by the Bank of England's Mark Carney. "Keeping the patient alive: Monetary policy in a time of great disruption" In it, he proposes three strategies: First, economists must clearly acknowledge the challenges we face, including the realities of uneven gains from trade and technology. Second, we must grow our economy by rebalancing the mix of monetary policy, fiscal policy and structural reforms. Third, we need to move towards more inclusive growth where everyone has a stake in globalisation. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/12/keeping-the-patient-alive-monetary-policy-in-a-time-of-great-disruption/
2017, the website WITS (World Integrated Trade Solution) was found to have included information about “COVID-19 diagnostic test instruments and apparatus” being sold around the world in that year and 2018 on the 5th September 2020. After going viral on social media, the following day the product information was changed to the more vague “medical test kits.”
January 2017, Dr Fauci warned then new president Donald Trump that “there is no question, there is going to be a challenge for the coming administration in the arena of infectious diseases. There will be a surprise outbreak. There’s no doubt in anyone's mind about this.”
January 18th, 2017. Bill Gates goes to DAVOS, the World Economic Forum's summit and pledges support for CEPI a WEF health organisation started to “combat emerging infectious diseases” and donates $100m. https://fortune.com/2017/01/19/epidemics-bill-gates-ebola-davos-cepi/
January 18th, 2017. Chinese President Xi Jinping gives speech at DAVOS summit. The founder of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab, says “In a world marked by great uncertainty and volatility, the international community is looking to China.” https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/01/china-davos-xi-jinping-trump-globalization/513521/
23rd May, 2017. Tedros Adhanom, ex-health minister of Ethiopia, becomes the first non-doctor to be appointed director general of the World Health Organisation. Tedros was supported by “a bloc of African and Asian countries, including China, which has a considerable influence with those members”. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2020/ap10/world-health-organization-who-v-coronavirus-why-it-cant-handle-pandemic
During this election, others had claimed that Tedros had covered up cholera outbreaks in Ethopia. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/13/health/candidate-who-director-general-ethiopia-cholera-outbreaks.html?auth=login-google
January 2018. Cables sent from US Embassy in Beijing warned of safety concerns at Wuhan institute which was studying bat coronaviruses. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/14/state-department-cables-warned-safety-issues-wuhan-lab-studying-bat-coronaviruses/
12th March, 2018. Bill gates warns of the threat of a bio-engineered, weaponised disease, saying: "Whether it occurs by a quirk of nature or at the hand of a terrorist, epidemiologists say a fast-moving airborne pathogen could kill more than 30 million people in less than a year, and they say there is a reasonable probability the world will experience such an outbreak in the next 10-15 years." https://www.businessinsider.com/pandemic-risk-to-humanity-2017-9?r=US&IR=T
18th April, 2018. Bill Gates warns the world that the next global pandemic is coming soon at the Maleria Summit in London. https://www.businessinsider.com/bill-gates-warns-the-next-pandemic-disease-is-coming-2018-4?r=US&IR=T
June 13th, 2019. The World Economic Forum sign “strategic partnership” with the United Nations. https://www.weforum.org/press/2019/06/world-economic-forum-and-un-sign-strategic-partnership-framework/
Many NGOs take issue with this which they call the “corportate capture” of the United Nations. https://www.escr-net.org/news/2019/corporate-capture-global-governance-wef-un-partnership-threatens-un-system
28th August, 2019. Greta Thunberg completes her journey to New York from Plymouth on the “environmentally friendly” carbon fibre racing yacht Malizia II, although it was found out later that the ship was part of a team of racing sail boats called Gitana, started in 2000 by Baron Benjamin de Rothschild. Malizia II had also previously been named Edmond de Rothschild. https://time.com/5663534/greta-thunberg-arrives-sail-atlantic/#:~:text=Swedish%20climate%20activist%20Greta%20Thunberg,28%2C%202019%20in%20New%20York.&text=Thunberg%20seemed%20a%20little%20weary,spoke%20forcefully%20about%20climate%20change.
September 2019. Vaccination legislation is changed in the United States. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-modernizing-influenza-vaccines-united-states-promote-national-security-public-health/
September 2019. The newly created “Global Preparedness Monitoring Board”, an organisation set up by through the World Health Organisation and the World Bank, issue their first annual report called “A World At Risk”. The document features a coronavirus or SARS type virus on the cover. Of particular note is on page 27 where it discusses “Preparing for the worst: a rapidly spreading, lethal respiratory pathogen epidemic.” https://apps.who.int/gpmb/assets/annual_report/GPMB_annualreport_2019.pdf
In the UK, Extinction Rebellion the environmental protest movement, puts on a number of protests across London again. They appear to have state support including prime minister Boris Johnson's father, Stanley Johnson (who himself was an environment advisor for the UK government, the United Nations and the EU) and lobbyists within industry sectors that would have the most to gain from the “fourth industrial revolution.” Extinction Rebellion's core leadership have connections to the telecommunications industry (which will gain prominence through the looming 5G and Artificial Intelligence) and research and strategy organisations which stand to gain contracts from companies seeking advice on sustainability. https://nowhere.news/index.php/2019/05/27/xrspacejunk-5g-citizens-online-industry-agents-digital-acolytes-and-state-agitators/
15th September, 2019. The UN issues a report entitled “The Future Is Now, Science for Achieving Sustainable Development.” The preamble states: “Despite considerable efforts these past four years, we are not on track to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030. We must dramatically step up the pace of implementation as we enter a decisive decade for people and the planet. We must connect the dots across all that we do – as individuals, civic groups, corporations, municipalities and Member States of the United Nations – and truly embrace the principles of inclusion and sustainability. Science is our great ally in the efforts to achieve the Goals. The Global Sustainable Development Report 2019, prepared by an independent group of scientists, presents an objective assessment of where we are falling short and what needs to be done. The Report highlights central entry points to leverage interlinkages and accelerate progress across all 17 Sustainable Development Goals. https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/24797GSDR_report_2019.pdf
20th September, 2019. The ID2020 'Alliance' signed a deal with the Bangladesh government and GAVI to; quote "leverage immunization as an opportunity to establish digital identity."
https://www.biometricupdate.com/201909/id2020-and-partners-launch-program-to-provide-digital-id-with-vaccines
September 23rd 2019. UN climate summit held. Greta Thunberg gives “how dare you speech”. https://www.npr.org/2019/09/23/763452863/transcript-greta-thunbergs-speech-at-the-u-n-climate-action-summit?t=1601405178824
Boris Johnson gives speech regarding “rights, freedoms and values” with regards to emerging technologies. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-speech-to-the-un-general-assembly-24-september-2019
September 24th 2019, Bank of England governor Mark Carney gives speech about the need to drive new changes through financial responsibility – threatening that companies that refuse to go carbon neutral will go bankrupt. https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/speech/2019/mark-carney-remarks-at-united-nations-climate-action-summit-2019
September 25th 2019, The UN formally announces that 2020 will start a “decade of accelerated actions on the 2030 agenda.” https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdgsummit UNCTAD announces a “high” chance of a recession in 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/sep/25/global-recession-a-serious-danger-in-2020-says-un
October 18th 2019, “Event 201” takes place with a table top “theoretical exercise” to simulate measures that would be needed between private and public institutions. The exercise was hosted by The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/
November 2019. US Intelligence finds evidence of pandemic in the Wuhan region. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/intelligence-report-warned-coronavirus-crisis-early-november-sources/story?id=70031273
19th December, 2019. Bill gates tweets the following ominous statement: “What's next for our foundation? I'm particularly excited about what the next year could mean for one of the best buys in global health: vaccines.”
30th December, 2019. Mark Carney issues climate change warning, saying “the financial sector had begun to curb investment in fossil fuels – but far too slowly.” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50868717
submitted by BelenusUK to conspiracy [link] [comments]


2020.10.05 12:35 Buck_Joffrey Wealth Formula Episode 232: Real Estate Volatility Ahead?

Catch the full episode: https://www.wealthformula.com/podcast/232-real-estate-volatility-ahead/
Buck: Welcome back to the show everyone. Today my guest on Wealth Formula Podcast well he's making his 150th appearance on the show no I'm just kidding but he's been on a lot. He's a good friend of mine and the show, Mr. Jorge Newbery who you probably know through one of any number of businesses that he has started and that we've participated in one way or another as a community. There was initially American Homeowner Preservation which later on became AHP Servicing which deals with non-performing debt and there's a fund there which we'll talk about a little bit more today and there was also REO which we've been talking about a little bit on this show as well. It's a good opportunity for people looking to get their hands a little bit dirtier and potentially you know kind of rack up a few real estate professional hours at the same time and so that's been great too. Then wait where there's also Debt Cleanse right we talk about debt cleanse forgot about that one. Jorge here is you're still rocking and rolling man welcome back to the show.
Jorge: I appreciate that buck and actually it's 151st.
Buck: You know the funny thing I mean the funny thing about you is you know you've got all these businesses and I feel like you're I think you're actually like five or six years older than me I think you're like 51 or something right?
Jorge: 54.
Buck: Okay well you only look five or six years younger than me. Older than me but you look younger then but I feel like I used to have the energy to start businesses like this but as soon as I hit like 44 it kind of just died and I don't know what kind of supplements you're taking but I think I think I need some of that. Jorge so you know today I wanted to get your feedback. Again people are very very curious what's going on you know in the housing space and because you deal with notes with mortgages etc I'm curious what is the latest? Are you seeing anything different from you know a couple months ago when you were last on in terms of you know increases in distress or you know what's happening around the country?
Jorge: Sure. Significant increases in distressed mortgages and just to stress economic distress in general in our country I mean that's apparent from the headlines and you know there's been measures put in place forbearances stimulus and whatnot that have tried to kind of delay this with the hope that you know after two weeks with the original but after a few months everything gets back to normal and I think it's increasingly apparent that things aren't getting back to normal anytime soon and that there will be some significant economic pain in this country which is unfortunate but it's what we have and so for a company like AHP that does mean that there's an increased amount increased supply of distressed mortgages that attractive prices we're already seeing that and we anticipate the fourth quarter and next year that that will only increase significantly and that means opportunities to both help families that are struggling by buying these at a discount and sharing those discounts with them and also to earn a good return for our investor.
Buck: You know let me let me ask you this. So try to give us some perspective and some flavor on that because I mean you you know you started AHP or as American Homeowner Preservation like you know right around the last major economic crisis and you know obviously as time went on over the next decade or so things really really really tightened up you know and now it sounds like what you're saying is okay well things are loosening up there's more inventory, can you give us a sense sort of at a you know quantitative level like what that's looking like?
Jorge: Sure so you're right we started buying mortgages a decade ago and the the supply at that point and that was about two years after the crisis really became got going there was a massive supply of distressed mortgages and we were a tiny company that was work was working with a very limited amount of money and we were able to right away go and buy from the biggest banks in the country. Citibank was selling to us within a few weeks of us getting started. And then as as the economy improved and the pricing on distressed mortgages became more competitive and the supply became became dwindled that you know wasn't so easy to buy and buy as attractively as we were and go back a year ago it was very difficult AHP had a lot of money in the bank and very few favorable opportunities to to deploy that money that's all changed in the last six months you know right away there was an immediate change but June July August we've seen a lot of opportunities to purchase I think that's just the beginning
Buck: Do you feel like it's like back at maybe like 2012 levels or 2014 or is it still not like that?
Jorge: No for distressed mortgages yeah I'd probably call it 2012 and and going backwards so we're going to be probably at 2010 levels in six months.
Buck: So tell me how that's working because obviously you know there was it's interesting because I think you know I kept hearing about banks and mortgages that that like you know the big ones at least like chase and wells fargo and stuff they were allowing mortgages to be essentially you know it wasn't like they weren't tacking on the payments to the end of the loan they would you know they they would forgive and say they wouldn't report late payments and for three months or so but at the end of that three months they expected you to pay all of it back is that sort of what happened here?
Jorge: Yes that's very much what's what's happened and there's been but now it's been extended and so that forbearance period has been extended but not forgiven and and some instances they're putting them you know go three months and then they're all due or then they're paid back over three or six months or in some of the government-backed loans it's put onto the very end of the loan and so there's different iterations of the same goal which is to take those payments which would be now move them to some point in the future and give the borrowers some extra time to get through this challenging period.
Buck: yeah I mean if they move them to the back I mean I feel like people have a better shot but I mean you got these people you know like these major banks that are expecting a payment you know to get caught up and the economy has not substantially you know improved and and you know talk a little bit about what the government's input on this has resulted in and you know what what we can expect to see in the next couple months.
Jorge: The challenge with some of the government programs is some of the everybody hears on the news you know hey there's a big forbearance program but know for the forbearances it only applies to government-backed loans generally is where it's you you have to do it. With privately held loans you can voluntarily offer forbearances and we've done that I think most servicers have done that just because you recognize that otherwise you know a lot of people just won't are unable to pay and but I think what's the unknown and the challenge is how long this is going to go for because the to to have this go for another year on top of the six months that it's already passed it creates a lot of you know somebody's taking a hit here and you know can't be the the mortgage holder the servicer the the homeowner and the government those are the players and who's gonna ultimately pay for us and that's an unknown question at this point.
Buck: Yeah what's interesting too is you know I come from the apartment space and you know we're trying to kind of see how that plays out as well but so far there is very very little distress in the multi-family market you know across the country and you know as a asset manager myself on a lot of these I look at it and I think well maybe it's because of all of these government programs and stuff I think that has added to it a little bit I mean that has helped a little bit but I think part of it also depends on demographics right where you are and I think you know what your market is you know ours happens to be working class in these areas like Texas and Arizona and for some reason you know these people seem to be doing okay and paying their rents. Talk about if you would just the differences that come to mind when you think about you know why there would be distress in you know in mortgages across the country as a whole but not necessarily with rent payers why would why would that be?
Jorge: I think there's well I will agree when this first started a lot of people were concerned that the amount of families defaulting on their mortgage are unable to pay their rent would be very would be 30% plus and that hasn't yet happened overall and it so it has been less I think it's been less than any than everyone expected but that doesn't mean that people and maybe it's because of stimulus or other types of programs but at other at some point you know if a family does lose a job or an income that does make it is going to create challenges and I don't think there's it's tough to differentiate between homeowners and renters but I think there's a lot of of struggles out there that you know maybe they haven't come to the forefront yet but they will.
Buck: Yeah what about the demographic issue are you seeing in mortgages specifically either you know the types of homes or across the country in different areas like varying levels of distress
Jorge: I think it's just there's more of a concentration in lower moderate to neighborhoods those are ones where I think there's less of a financial safety net number one and number two there's just probably more job losses that have affected those you know those of more modest means
Buck: Yeah and what about what about on the upper end of stuff Jorge I'll tell you the reason I'm thinking about this is you know I live in Montecito which is you know 93108 zip code it's probably one of the wealthiest zip codes in the country and you know the single family market here is on fire right I mean it is you know probably going literally houses are selling for probably 20 more than they were listed for in pre-covid and we're talking about multi-million dollar acquisitions and to me that has a lot to do with people wanting to move out of you know LA or San Francisco into you know this nice little beach community that's you know not you know affluent but it's also because you've got significantly you know there for people who are doing mortgages a lot of them are ultra wealthy they're not using mortgages anyway but you know it's pretty attractive rates too right now right. So you've got that balance. What are you seeing if anything I mean usually you're not dealing with the higher-end homes but you are in Pre-REO so what are you seeing on that side?
Jorge: Everything you just described is accurate and I'd say it's high-end and low-end the low mortgage interest rates are making it very attractive for families of all sizes plus the fact that more people are working from home and stay and spending more time at home the REOs which lent many of them are concentrated in low to moderate neighborhoods these are selling very fast today at prices that were significantly more same 10-20 better than they were Covid and that's extraordinary but and something we would never have anticipated when Covid first hit that it was going to be a helpful for the housing market but I think those if you look forward to the future it's tough to say how long this can last I mean at some point all these millions of families that are on some kind of payment arrangement or forbearance that runs out their economic situation hasn’t improved and they end up getting foreclosed upon that will increase the inventory significantly probably at all income levels but again concentrated on the lower income levels and the and will that you know that should probably increase supply should should push prices down but the low mortgage interest rates this economy is so weak that the low interest rates will have I mean there's nothing they can't raise them for the next probably several years you know two to three years at a minimum and that will make it so attractive to to buy so that that will keep the the housing market propped up.
Buck: But then there is definitely a geographic element of that too because you know I just look at what's happening for example you've been to my house in in the northern suburbs of Chicago again really nice neighborhood really affluent place and then the price is there I mean I'm looking my house there I'm trying to sell and it's it's now listed for a full 20 percent less than I bought it for in 2012. and so what's what's driving the differences in terms of and it might just be because of all the mess that you know Chicago is in and I know you know that from your from your own person so what what do you make of that I mean what are you seeing across the board across the country in different markets because I know you guys are kind of all over.
Jorge: Yeah we do see that I mean what's interesting and you mentioned this earlier is that in the cities you know there's definitely people that think and probably rightly so they were they moved into cities to be close to work now they can suddenly work from home in many cases then why not move to a neighborhood that they really want to live in that's maybe a smaller community a resort community in some of those areas hey we can live and work here if we're doing work from home so I think there's definitely going to be a continued exodus from the big cities and that will I mean that's not new that's a lot of people expect like that and you know that will reduce the you know probably have a reduction in time of values in in cities and you know New York chicago you know these downtowns and increased values as you go to the suburbs I mean I live in Barrington you know which has been a really very another affluent suburb of Chicago but it has this for the last several years with all the job losses has been a very weak market and but in the last six eight weeks we've seen properties that were on the market for a year or two they're all selling getting you know under contract signed sold signs and that's a big change. I think it's going to be a great time to sell your property if ever there was a time to sell it this is the market.
Buck: You would think but yeah no I'm really struggling with this thing unfortunately but and I may end up just keeping it for that reason because I think it's kind of there's something going on in the cChicago suburbs in particular. But what what do you anticipate so you you know you talked about sort of how we're we might be sort of at 2012 levels and sort of going back back in time from there what is it that you know from the that you're seeing that makes you think we're going to continue down this path and at some point does it just you know does the full kimono come off and and all of a sudden you see the sort of the pinnacle of the drop in the single family market?
Jorge: Yeah it's we're still we had a long run up of you know since you know the last since the 2008 and the the great recession there was a long run up that that included increases or appreciation home values for for almost a decade or more than a decade almost and that I think right now we're on kind of the fumes of that. I mean there's different circumstances that are extending it but at some point there has to be a big you know there will be a massive spike in foreclosures I mean it's inevitable and that increased supply should drive down prices even with the low interest rates.
Buck: Do you see that okay say for example a Covid vaccination becomes available in December becomes widely disseminated by March April May all of a sudden you know business as usual do you see that that could put the brakes on this or do you feel like you know that train is already left?
Jorge: I think it's the latter I think that that's I don't think you know the vaccine will be a cure-all for the challenges we have in the country. I mean we were due for a for a downturn and Covid happened to be the trigger it could have been any other reason but Covid happened to be the trigger and I think you know we're still seeing some some activity but if you look back at 2008 when things started going awry in 2009 the government put in place some kind of credit I think it was about a 7500 credit to incent buyers to buy a home and that helped kind of prop the market up for a little while longer maybe a year and then it was already weak and weakening but I think it probably slowed the the contraction here. We're due. I mean if you go back in history we're due for a downturn and this the company's I mean the the economy is definitely on the decline the the housing market is still staying strong and actually in some cases like we pointed out is is improving but that the economic fundamentals behind it are not there so there needs to needs to be a correction.
Buck: Here's the problem and I'm playing devil's advocate here because I hear you and in many ways I kept for I was sort of beating this drum of tsunami you know of defaults and all that but what's going on with the fed and the interest in interest rates and then you know fiscal policy it just seems to me like as long as the fed keeps printing money asset prices stay keep staying high as they are you know it it's hard to imagine if exactly if something positive comes out of the vaccine that there isn't some artificial continued you know elevation of those asset prices I mean look at the stock market right I mean and you know all these all these markets are ultimately correlated we're doing things differently than we did in 2008 so I just wonder how if there is a possibility where there really is a truly you know sort of soft landing because of the extraordinary means that the federal reserve and fiscal policy have taken. But you don't see that I guess I mean I think you're probably I mean you're you're kind of where I i was before, but now I'm just looking at it saying I mean listen and you know we had one little dip in the markets at all-time highs you know that and so so I just I'm not really seeing you know exactly what happens you know across the board if everything is correlated but I don't know your thoughts on that?
Jorge: Yeah well I will say it's the good news I think for any investor out there is that the market is unpredictable and people can make convincing arguments on all sides and that creates opportunity I mean. The problem was a year ago we had so much data that informed us that you know hey this is what happens with distressed mortgages or real estate when when the markets become predictable that's when you know returns contract now the market is unpredictable I would think you could have some of the brightest minds in the country put them all in a room saying what's going to happen the next year in this country to the economy you'll get multiple different answers you go back a year or two and you'd probably get some pretty you come to some kind of consensus by and large you wouldn't get that today and I think that unpredictability creates some creates opportunity I mean unfortunately the the opportunity is going to be the result of I think since to the extent opportunity comes it's due to some significant economic challenges rippling through the country and the globe for that matter.
Buck: What we do know though is right now as you mentioned your business AHP servicing is seeing an increase on opportunity and inventory. Talk a little bit about what hp servicing does remind us kind of like the way this whole notes process works and what non-performing notes are and all that stuff.
Jorge: Sure so AHP buys mortgages when people can't pay and so typically a bankers hedge fund will own a loan and then when they stop paying they'll be willing to sell that at a discount and the further behind they get generally the greater the discount and so we buy those loans we crowdfund the money at AHP servicing and we use that money for two things one is to buy those mortgages at discounts and then work them out ideally and then the other is to what we've used it for is to build a national mortgage servicer and just to give a little detail on that we've been buying mortgages for a decade in that decade we went through nine different servicers we were never satisfied with one of them so in 2017 or with one of them with any of them and so in 2017 we decided to start our own servicer and thinking that would take us maybe a year to build it out here we are three years later we are licensed in every state of the union except for New York and New York is imminent they announced their new licensees every Friday we're eagerly anticipating an announcement today they published on their website so hopefully we'll be there we've completed everything they've asked us for. But either way right now we're a national mortgage servicer and so we service our mortgages plus we have about 40 additional clients which we service for and we're continually adding new clients the fact with the distress and the new pools of loans being sold into the market new pools of defaulted mortgages being sold in the market there's definitely we're seeing more and more servicers are more more of a demand for a servicer who can meet the needs of those of those investors who hold on performing mortgages so we're definitely seeing an up to you can uptake a business.
Buck: And then there's a fund tell us about the fund.
Jorge: Yeah so the fund is the crowd we crowdfund this money to buy both the loans and fund the servicer and that has it pays that we pay the first 10 percent to investors and it's typically distributed monthly and that's the fund that we operate now it's started in november of 2018 it closes november 5th of 2020 so that'll be the last time that it's available. We are working on another fund to go after that the next fund right now we're anticipating that it will distribute seven percent as opposed to the 10 percent and that's I you know partially a response to the extremely low interest rate environment that we are in today you know which compared to 2018 it's continued to drop so we think seven percent will be well received.
Buck: Oh wow okay and so the 10 opportunity is about to end how long do you think or you know how much you got left in that one?
Jorge: There's ample capacity we have November 5th is the date but there's room for more investors. Remember we started this fund in november of 2018. In May of 2019 we stopped accepting new investments and that went on until I believe november of 2019. for several months we would have taken money the reason is we would raise a lot of money and we just as we mentioned before there just weren't the opportunities to deploy it now fast forward to 2020 post covid we're seeing lots of opportunities so now we are we do have capacity so we are welcoming new investments in.
Buck: And I'm just going to back up for a second and remind people kind of the business model of a non-performing note. Essentially you've got somebody who's not you know you're not not paying their mortgage and the the bank you know may end up these could be you know bank held notes or they could be from seller financing whatever and then somebody ends up you know whoever owns that ends up selling that debt to an investor like you or me or Jorge's fund and then at that point you know you presumably bought these things at a big discount and so you have a few different options at that point you could technically just foreclose on somebody take the property and sell it, the other thing is you could pay him some money and tell him to scram and see if that works, or you could try to negotiate some kind of a new mortgage that somebody can afford and wipe out you know most of their old debt and try to keep it performing now the third option is what Jorge's company really tries to do and so there's a social element of doing good behind behind the fund is that about a pretty good summary?
Jorge: That's a great summary Buck. I was gonna say we might have you write a commercial or two.
Buck: And so effectively that's important because I know there's especially these days there's a strong push I know by a number of investors to have some sort of social meaning behind their you know their investments well this one does. In addition to that I do want to point out that you know this is not an easy business to do as an individual. I have tried doing it myself and I can tell you that I lost a lot of interest pretty quickly just doing it myself because it just seemed tough and I think what makes this business kind of a lot more stable is the fact that first of all Jorge's company this is all they do he's very very good at this stuff and they deal in large numbers so in general my personal feeling on note investing is if you're going to do it I would highly recommend doing it through a big fund rather than doing it yourself and just from speaking from personal experience. Jorge do you think that's fair? Talk about the advantage of doing this through large numbers because I think that's critically important.
Jorge: Yeah I think you're right. We don't make money on every loan that we buy. There's oftentimes situations where we you know you rely on an agent driving by saying hey I think that property's worth a hundred thousand dollars and then you get it back and foreclosed now you go inside and it's you know termite invested or something like that so we've you know if you buy a hundred loans there's probably a portion of them it could be ten percent of them where you're you're not going to do well. So the problem I think for individual investors is if you happen to buy you know one or two or three and they all happen to be in that you know challenging bunch where you could lose money and that increases the likelihood that you'll have some investors who didn't do well maybe they'll win on one lose on the other and they said hey this didn't work. So the larger the pools are the larger amount of loans you buy generally the better that you you'll do in aggregate and I think that's what's approved out of AHP.
Buck: The other part of this fund that I think is really unique and something that I think is important to to know is that unlike most funds unlike most placements well I should point out this is also open to you know anybody you don't have to be accredited and investments can be as little as 100 bucks so it really is open to anybody. But there's also an element of liquidity to this which is really unusual for a fund. Do you want to talk a little bit about that Jorge because I think that also helps people to make some decisions.
Jorge: Sure so I'll reiterate the first two points one is yeah minimum investment is only 100 and we are open to accredited and non-accredited investors like you said almost anyone can invest and we do offer best efforts liquidity which basically means that although the investment is for a term of five years you can invest we request your money back at any time and we'll undertake our best efforts to return the money to you. Now there is a caveat to that though we pay as I've stated before we’ve paid first 10 percent to investors but if you redeem in the first year that goes from ten to eight and the second year goes from ten to nine after two years you get to keep the full ten percent and the next caveat is typically we will once the redemption's requested we returned that money within 30 days, we were able to do that for years up until Covid. Covid hit we had a huge number of redemption requests, an unprecedented number and we're still working through those requests. So I guess you want to make you want to hear that yes we do process redemptions and we continue to process redemptions but once an investor and it's typically done within 30 days except in extreme circumstances like Covid things can get delayed and they are but we're distributing we have distributed considerable amounts of money since Covid has began.
Buck: So just just as a reminder the deadline for the 10% fund is november 15th meaning that if you want to get in there and get a 10% return that's what you need to do. How do you invest Jorge?
Jorge: Sure you go to ahpservicing.com there's a button near the top invest now you can click and you walk through a very expedited process where in a handful of minutes you can complete the investment process sign the investment agreement even request an ach to fund your account all within a few minutes all online.
Buck: Jorge Newbery everyone always a pleasure Jorge, thanks for joining us. We’ll be right back.
submitted by Buck_Joffrey to u/Buck_Joffrey [link] [comments]


2020.10.03 13:21 bigbear0083 Wall Street Week Ahead for the trading week beginning October 5th, 2020

Good Saturday morning to all of you here on smallstreetbets. I hope everyone on this sub made out pretty nicely in the market this past week, and is ready for the new trading week ahead.
Here is everything you need to know to get you ready for the trading week beginning October 5th, 2020.

Trump’s health and fiscal stimulus fight will steer the markets in the week ahead - (Source)

President Donald Trump’s health and the state of a fiscal stimulus package will be the main focus for markets in the coming week.
In the early morning hours Friday, President Donald Trump tweeted that he and the first lady tested positive for Covid. Stocks sold off hard, but the S&P 500 came off its lows in Friday trading and closed down just under 1%. It was up 1.5% for the week.
The market was helped by signs that a stimulus package is still a possibility, after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi asked airlines not to furlough workers. She promised either a stand alone aid bill, or a bigger negotiated relief legislation that would help the industry.
“The market is going to watch health updates from the White House medical staff, and it’s going to watch how the president communicates with the public,” said Julian Emanuel, head of equities and derivatives at BTIG. “Will we see him in person in the next week in any form? What’s his volume of tweets? All as a way to first gauge the severity of the case.”
Trump and Melania Trump are reported to have mild cases, but as time goes on the market will turn to how the illness could impact the presidential election.
Former Vice President Joe Biden gained slightly in the polls after the first debate Tuesday night, and now the calendar for further debates is in question. The market has seemingly warmed to Biden, and even though he would raise taxes, it is assumed Democrats would quickly pass a major infrastructure package if there is a Democratic sweep of Congress.
Trump, however, is widely seen on Wall Street as stronger on the economy and better for markets.
“What you’ve done from a campaign perspective, is you’ve taken away the thing that gives him the most energy - his ability to interact with crowds,” said Emanuel. “The president had wanted to paint the economic recovery of the last three or four months as the cornerstone, and this basically puts the virus back as topic number 1, number 2 and number 3. And it’s all the more so because the data is coming in weaker than expected.”
The market is fixated on the prospect of stimulus to help business, the unemployed and state and local governments. The House passed a $2.2 trillion package this week, but there is still no agreement with Republicans. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has pushed for a $1.6 trillion package.
“I think there’s an underlying bid under the market because nobody wants to be super short if we get a stimulus approved, but you can’t be too long in case his mild symptoms turn into severe symptoms,” said Scott Redler, partner with T3live.com. “We’re in a tough spot but overall we’re still pretty constructive.”
Emanuel said the fact the president is now ill could hurt confidence and slow down some of the improvement in the economy.
“The underlying tone is, again, whether its directly or later, there’s going to be stimulus,” Emanuel said. ”’Whether it’s this month or November, this reinforces the need for stimulus because the president falling ill signals to, at the margin, the person whose thinking about going out to dinner to think again. It’s a significant economic and psychological hindrance.”
Also coming up in the week ahead is a speech Tuesday by Fed Chairman Jerome Powell to the National Association of Business Economists.
Powell is also expected to push for the stimulus package to boost the economy so the recovery does not stall.
“I think his whole objective is to try to get Congress and the Administration to sign onto a fiscal rescue package,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics. “He’ll all but come out and say [the recovery] is not a ‘V.’ Without additional support from lawmakers, risks are pretty high that we backtrack. I think that’s the kind of outlook he’s going to give. It’s going to be full-throated.”
September’s employment report, released Friday, was seen by some as a warning that the economy is not rebounding as expected. There were 661,000 jobs added in September, well below the 800,000 expected.
Besides Powell, there are a half dozen other Fed speakers. There are also minutes from the Fed’s last minute released Wednesday afternoon.

This past week saw the following moves in the S&P:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE FULL S&P TREE MAP FOR THE PAST WEEK!)

Major Indices for this past week:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE MAJOR INDICES FOR THE PAST WEEK!)

Major Futures Markets as of Friday's close:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE MAJOR FUTURES INDICES AS OF FRIDAY!)

Economic Calendar for the Week Ahead:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE FULL ECONOMIC CALENDAR FOR THE WEEK AHEAD!)

Percentage Changes for the Major Indices, WTD, MTD, QTD, YTD as of Friday's close:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

S&P Sectors for the Past Week:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Major Indices Pullback/Correction Levels as of Friday's close:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!

Major Indices Rally Levels as of Friday's close:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Most Anticipated Earnings Releases for this week:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Here are the upcoming IPO's for this week:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Friday's Stock Analyst Upgrades & Downgrades:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART LINK #1!)
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART LINK #2!)
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART LINK #3!)

Make Up Your [email protected]#$%&* Mind!

We've all had versions of this conversation where you or the person you were talking to just couldn't make up their mind. At the end of the day, it only causes trouble and plans are ruined.
The market is having its own back and forth this year trying to decide between growth and value. Just today, growth stocks are getting slaughtered while value stocks are up marginally. As an example, the Russell 1000 Growth index is down 1.8% on the day while the Russell 1000 Value index has managed to rally 0.25%. The chart below shows the daily performance spread between the Russell 1000 Growth index and the Russell 1000 Value index for each day in 2020. Today's performance spread between the two indices marks the ninth time this year that value has outperformed growth by more than two percentage points. At the other extreme, there have also been eight trading days where growth outperformed value by more than two percentage points.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
So how does this year's frequency of days where the performance spread between the two indices was more than two percentage points stack up to other years? The chart below shows the daily performance spread between the two indices going all the way back to 1990. Over the last thirty years, the only two periods where we saw a frequency of these large daily dislocations was back in 2008 and the period spanning 2000 and 2001. In fact, with 17 days this year where the performance spread between the two indices was greater than two percentage points, the only other years that saw a higher frequency of large dislocations were 2000 (54) and 2001 (28). If you think the market has been indecisive this year, in 2000 we saw these types of daily dislocations an average of once per week.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Election Anxiety Weighs on October Market Performance

October often evokes fear on Wall Street as memories are stirred of crashes in 1929, 1987, the 554-point drop on October 27, 1997, back-to-back massacres in 1978 and 1979, Friday the 13th in 1989 and the 733-point drop on October 15, 2008. During the week ending October 10, 2008, Dow lost 1,874.19 points (18.2%), the worst weekly decline in our database going back to 1901, in percentage terms. March 2020 now holds the dubious honor of producing the worst, second and third worst DJIA weekly point declines. The term “Octoberphobia” has been used to describe the phenomenon of major market drops occurring during the month. Market calamities can become a self-fulfilling prophecy, so stay on the lookout and don’t get whipsawed if it happens.
But October has become a turnaround month—a “bear killer” if you will. Twelve post-WWII bear markets have ended in October: 1946, 1957, 1960, 1962, 1966, 1974, 1987, 1990, 1998, 2001, 2002 and 2011 (S&P 500 declined 19.4%). However, eight were midterm bottoms. Over the last 21 years, October’s performance has been solid. Average gains over the last 21-years range from 1.3% by Russell 1000 to 2.4% by NASDAQ. Small caps have still struggled though with Russell 2000 gaining a modest 0.5%
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
Election-year Octobers rank dead last for Dow, S&P 500 (since 1952), NASDAQ (since 1972), Russell 1000, and Russell 2000 (since 1980). Eliminating gruesome 2008 from the calculation provides a moderate amount of relief, as rankings climb to mid pack. Should a meaningful decline materialize in October it is likely to be an excellent buying opportunity, especially for any depressed technology and small-cap shares.

What Have Democratic Sweeps Meant for the S&P 500?

Headed into the first presidential debate Tuesday night, betting markets (ElectionBettingOdds.com) placed Democratic candidate Joe Biden as the slight favorite to take the White House in November. The debate resulted in Biden gaining another 5 percentage point chance of winning the Presidency. As of this morning, Biden's odds to win are at 59.8% versus Trump's odds of 38.9%. Additionally, Democrats are slight favorites to win control of the Senate (58.4% to 41.5%) and big favorites to maintain the House (82.8% to 17.1%). Given these odds, in the chart below we show the average performance of the S&P 500 from the three months before Election Day through three months after Election Day for all election years post-WWII that resulted in a sweep of the executive and legislative branch by the Democrats.
As shown, on average the S&P 500 has been on the decline in the weeks leading up to Election Day, though in the days just before the Election there has been a small rally that sharply reverses once the results come in. After the initial post-Election drop, the market has trended a bit higher, but by three months after the Election, it has only found itself around the same levels as Election Day; on average a 2.6% loss versus where the index stood three months prior.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
The composite shown above is comprised of six different years: 1948, 1960, 1964, 1976, 1992, and 2008. While on average the S&P 500 has traded lower, it is not necessarily a sure-fire thing. For example, 1948 and 2008 were the only years that saw the S&P 500 trade and stay significantly lower in the wake of the election. In 1976, there was similarly a sell-off in the immediate aftermath of the election, but the index did make its way back up to the highs of that six-month time frame later on albeit no new high was put in place. Meanwhile, 1960, 1964, and 1992 all saw the S&P 500 run higher after the election even despite some periods of consolidation after initial moves higher. In our B.I.G. Tips report from Tuesday, we show these same charts for all Presidential election years post WWII including a look at the average performance given every potential election outcome.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

How Current Returns Stack Up to History

Even after September's weakness, the S&P 500's trailing 12-month total return stood at an impressive 14.9%. Given the events of the last 12 months, one could even say that performance is remarkable. What's even crazier is that the S&P 500's performance over the last 12 months is more than three times stronger than the 12 month period before that (+4.25%). The chart below compares the S&P 500's annualized total returns over the last one, two, five, ten, and twenty years and compares that performance to the historical average return of the index over those same time periods.
The S&P 500's historical average 12-month return is 11.7%, so the current 14.9% gain exceeds that average by more than three full percentage points. Over a two-year window, though, the S&P 500's annualized return of 9.4% is more than a full percentage point below the historical average. Looking further out, the S&P 500's trailing five and ten-year annualized return has been much stronger than average, which makes sense given the long bull market we were in. Over a 20 year window, though, the S&P 500 is only just starting to work off some of the declines from the dot-com bust and as a result, the 6.4% annualized gain is a four and a half percentage points below the long-term average of 10.9%.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
Below we show how the current performance of the S&P 500 in each of the time frames shown compares to all other periods on a percentile basis. The S&P 500's performance over the last year, ranks just below 56th percentile of all other periods, while the two-year performance ranks just below the 42nd percentile. Even as the five and ten-year periods have seen well above average returns, they still rank in just the mid-60s on a percentile basis. The S&P 500's ranking over a 20-year time period is a completely different story ranking in single-digits on a percentile basis. Even with the equity market right near record highs, the last two decades have been forgettable for US equities.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Seasonals Are Back In Style Again

There is no denying that market seasonality has not worked so well this year. But we have been here before and history is on our side. Over the long term, intermediate term and short term market seasonality has suffered brief periods when seasonality was overridden by more powerful forces. The COVID pandemic and economic shutdown certainly qualifies. But it is only a matter of time until repetitive human behavior patterns and people and institutions return to moving money around in the usual daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly and seasonal patterns.
The return of perennial September weakness is emblematic of a return to normal market behavior and a reflection of the fact that despite the continuing concerns about surges in coronavirus cases life is beginning to return to normal. In our area, about 25-30 miles north of New York City, our kids are beginning hybrid learning, playing rugby, lacrosse and other sports (yes with some COVID protocols, but tackling and facing-off), golf outings are happening and people are going to restaurants and out and about.
The chart here shows the historical One-Year Pattern of the S&P 500 Since 1950 versus 2020. The black line shows the seasonal pattern since 1950. The blue represents the pattern since 1988. We use 1988 as it is the first year after the 1987 Crash when the market underwent a major systemic change with the implementation of downside protection circuit breakers and collars. It is noteworthy how the seasonal pattern persists during both the 70-year and 31-year timeframes.
2020 is plotted on the right axis due to the magnitude of the move this year. The yellow box highlights the rebirth of seasonality this September, especially during this notoriously negative Week After Triple Witching Week as detailed page 108 of the 2020 Almanac, indicated by the two black arrows
Years like 1980, 1982, 2009 and 2016 with unseasonably early weakness and bear markets like 2020 returned to normal seasonal patterns in short order. And years like 1954, 1958, 1980, 1982, 1995 and 2009 that exhibited double-digit gains in the Worst Six Months still proceeded to deliver further sizable gains in the subsequent Best Six Months (page 52, STA 2020). We believe the return of market seasonality is upon us. So remain cautious through the end of September and be alert to Octoberophobia, but remain ready to pounce on our Best Months Seasonal MACD Buy Signal, when it triggers.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

STOCK MARKET VIDEO: Stock Market Analysis Video for Week Ending October 2nd, 2020

(CLICK HERE FOR THE YOUTUBE VIDEO!)

STOCK MARKET VIDEO: ShadowTrader Video Weekly 10.4.20

([CLICK HERE FOR THE YOUTUBE VIDEO!]())
(VIDEO NOT YET POSTED.)
Here are the most notable companies (tickers) reporting earnings in this upcoming trading week ahead-
  • $DPZ
  • $PAYX
  • $RPM
  • $HELE
  • $AYI
  • $LEVI
  • $LW
  • $LNDC
  • $SAR
  • $EXFO
  • $RGP
(CLICK HERE FOR NEXT WEEK'S MOST NOTABLE EARNINGS RELEASES!)
(CLICK HERE FOR NEXT WEEK'S HIGHEST VOLATILITY EARNINGS RELEASES!)
Below are some of the notable companies coming out with earnings releases this upcoming trading week ahead which includes the date/time of release & consensus estimates courtesy of Earnings Whispers:

Monday 10.5.20 Before Market Open:

([CLICK HERE FOR MONDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
(NONE.)

Monday 10.5.20 After Market Close:

([CLICK HERE FOR MONDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
(NONE.)

Tuesday 10.6.20 Before Market Open:

(CLICK HERE FOR TUESDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Tuesday 10.6.20 After Market Close:

(CLICK HERE FOR TUESDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Wednesday 10.7.20 Before Market Open:

(CLICK HERE FOR WEDNESDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Wednesday 10.7.20 After Market Close:

(CLICK HERE FOR WEDNESDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Thursday 10.8.20 Before Market Open:

(CLICK HERE FOR THURSDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Thursday 10.8.20 After Market Close:

([CLICK HERE FOR THURSDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
(NONE.)

Friday 10.9.20 Before Market Open:

([CLICK HERE FOR FRIDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
(NONE.)

Friday 10.9.20 After Market Close:

([CLICK HERE FOR FRIDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
(NONE.)

Domino's Pizza, Inc. $433.78

Domino's Pizza, Inc. (DPZ) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 7:30 AM ET on Thursday, October 8, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $2.73 per share on revenue of $944.53 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $2.83 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 76% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 33.17% with revenue increasing by 15.07%. Short interest has decreased by 31.5% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 7.4% from its open following the earnings release to be 22.3% above its 200 day moving average of $354.71. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 7.3% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 8.2% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Paychex, Inc. $79.43

Paychex, Inc. (PAYX) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 8:30 AM ET on Tuesday, October 6, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.56 per share on revenue of $895.39 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $0.57 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 49% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 21.13% with revenue decreasing by 9.74%. Short interest has decreased by 9.7% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 2.8% from its open following the earnings release to be 6.0% above its 200 day moving average of $74.91. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. On Friday, September 18, 2020 there was some notable buying of 1,269 contracts of the $90.00 call expiring on Friday, March 19, 2021. Option traders are pricing in a 4.8% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 2.1% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

RPM International Inc. $82.64

RPM International Inc. (RPM) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 6:45 AM ET on Wednesday, October 7, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $1.21 per share on revenue of $1.49 billion and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $1.26 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 65% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 27.37% with revenue increasing by 1.17%. Short interest has decreased by 39.7% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 3.3% from its open following the earnings release to be 12.4% above its 200 day moving average of $73.51. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 4.4% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 2.3% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Helen of Troy Ltd. $199.83

Helen of Troy Ltd. (HELE) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 6:30 AM ET on Thursday, October 8, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $2.39 per share on revenue of $451.26 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $2.57 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 62% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 18.91% with revenue increasing by 9.00%. Short interest has decreased by 6.4% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted lower by 4.4% from its open following the earnings release to be 12.8% above its 200 day moving average of $177.13. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 5.7% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 8.9% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Acuity Brands, Inc. $105.61

Acuity Brands, Inc. (AYI) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 8:40 AM ET on Thursday, October 8, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $2.01 per share on revenue of $814.63 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $2.12 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 46% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 28.21% with revenue decreasing by 13.16%. Short interest has increased by 62.6% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 5.6% from its open following the earnings release to be 4.1% above its 200 day moving average of $101.43. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 5.8% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 9.0% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Levi Strauss & Co. $14.15

Levi Strauss & Co. (LEVI) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:00 PM ET on Tuesday, October 6, 2020. The consensus estimate is for a loss of $0.27 per share on revenue of $766.84 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is ($0.20) per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 40% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 187.10% with revenue decreasing by 47.01%. Short interest has increased by 3.9% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 7.3% from its open following the earnings release to be 3.5% below its 200 day moving average of $14.66. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. On Friday, October 2, 2020 there was some notable buying of 8,166 contracts of the $14.00 call expiring on Friday, October 16, 2020. Option traders are pricing in a 10.6% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 6.9% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Lamb Weston Holdings, Inc. $67.93

Lamb Weston Holdings, Inc. (LW) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 8:30 AM ET on Wednesday, October 7, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.30 per share on revenue of $877.60 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $0.28 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 36% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 62.03% with revenue decreasing by 11.26%. Short interest has decreased by 21.7% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 4.1% from its open following the earnings release to be 1.8% below its 200 day moving average of $69.17. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. On Friday, October 2, 2020 there was some notable buying of 1,580 contracts of the $70.00 call expiring on Friday, October 16, 2020. Option traders are pricing in a 8.3% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 6.7% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Landec Corp. $9.43

Landec Corp. (LNDC) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:20 PM ET on Tuesday, October 6, 2020. The consensus estimate is for a loss of $0.11 per share on revenue of $127.86 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is ($0.09) per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 41% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 31.25% with revenue decreasing by 7.82%. Short interest has decreased by 5.1% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted lower by 12.3% from its open following the earnings release to be 8.4% below its 200 day moving average of $10.30. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 16.7% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 10.6% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Saratoga Investment Corp $17.27

Saratoga Investment Corp (SAR) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:00 PM ET on Wednesday, October 7, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.47 per share on revenue of $12.95 million. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 48% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 30.88% with revenue decreasing by 6.75%. Short interest has decreased by 60.5% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 6.3% from its open following the earnings release. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

EXFO Inc. $3.24

EXFO Inc. (EXFO) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:00 PM ET on Wednesday, October 7, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.07 per share on revenue of $64.85 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $0.07 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 30% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 40.00% with revenue decreasing by 7.59%. Short interest has decreased by 17.5% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted lower by 14.7% from its open following the earnings release. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

DISCUSS!

What are you all watching for in this upcoming trading week?
I hope you all have a wonderful weekend and a great trading week ahead smallstreetbets.
submitted by bigbear0083 to smallstreetbets [link] [comments]


2020.10.03 13:15 bigbear0083 Wall Street Week Ahead for the trading week beginning October 5th, 2020

Good Saturday morning to all of you here on stocks. I hope everyone on this sub made out pretty nicely in the market this past week, and is ready for the new trading week ahead.
Here is everything you need to know to get you ready for the trading week beginning October 5th, 2020.

Trump’s health and fiscal stimulus fight will steer the markets in the week ahead - (Source)

President Donald Trump’s health and the state of a fiscal stimulus package will be the main focus for markets in the coming week.
In the early morning hours Friday, President Donald Trump tweeted that he and the first lady tested positive for Covid. Stocks sold off hard, but the S&P 500 came off its lows in Friday trading and closed down just under 1%. It was up 1.5% for the week.
The market was helped by signs that a stimulus package is still a possibility, after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi asked airlines not to furlough workers. She promised either a stand alone aid bill, or a bigger negotiated relief legislation that would help the industry.
“The market is going to watch health updates from the White House medical staff, and it’s going to watch how the president communicates with the public,” said Julian Emanuel, head of equities and derivatives at BTIG. “Will we see him in person in the next week in any form? What’s his volume of tweets? All as a way to first gauge the severity of the case.”
Trump and Melania Trump are reported to have mild cases, but as time goes on the market will turn to how the illness could impact the presidential election.
Former Vice President Joe Biden gained slightly in the polls after the first debate Tuesday night, and now the calendar for further debates is in question. The market has seemingly warmed to Biden, and even though he would raise taxes, it is assumed Democrats would quickly pass a major infrastructure package if there is a Democratic sweep of Congress.
Trump, however, is widely seen on Wall Street as stronger on the economy and better for markets.
“What you’ve done from a campaign perspective, is you’ve taken away the thing that gives him the most energy - his ability to interact with crowds,” said Emanuel. “The president had wanted to paint the economic recovery of the last three or four months as the cornerstone, and this basically puts the virus back as topic number 1, number 2 and number 3. And it’s all the more so because the data is coming in weaker than expected.”
The market is fixated on the prospect of stimulus to help business, the unemployed and state and local governments. The House passed a $2.2 trillion package this week, but there is still no agreement with Republicans. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has pushed for a $1.6 trillion package.
“I think there’s an underlying bid under the market because nobody wants to be super short if we get a stimulus approved, but you can’t be too long in case his mild symptoms turn into severe symptoms,” said Scott Redler, partner with T3live.com. “We’re in a tough spot but overall we’re still pretty constructive.”
Emanuel said the fact the president is now ill could hurt confidence and slow down some of the improvement in the economy.
“The underlying tone is, again, whether its directly or later, there’s going to be stimulus,” Emanuel said. ”’Whether it’s this month or November, this reinforces the need for stimulus because the president falling ill signals to, at the margin, the person whose thinking about going out to dinner to think again. It’s a significant economic and psychological hindrance.”
Also coming up in the week ahead is a speech Tuesday by Fed Chairman Jerome Powell to the National Association of Business Economists.
Powell is also expected to push for the stimulus package to boost the economy so the recovery does not stall.
“I think his whole objective is to try to get Congress and the Administration to sign onto a fiscal rescue package,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics. “He’ll all but come out and say [the recovery] is not a ‘V.’ Without additional support from lawmakers, risks are pretty high that we backtrack. I think that’s the kind of outlook he’s going to give. It’s going to be full-throated.”
September’s employment report, released Friday, was seen by some as a warning that the economy is not rebounding as expected. There were 661,000 jobs added in September, well below the 800,000 expected.
Besides Powell, there are a half dozen other Fed speakers. There are also minutes from the Fed’s last minute released Wednesday afternoon.

This past week saw the following moves in the S&P:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE FULL S&P TREE MAP FOR THE PAST WEEK!)

Major Indices for this past week:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE MAJOR INDICES FOR THE PAST WEEK!)

Major Futures Markets as of Friday's close:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE MAJOR FUTURES INDICES AS OF FRIDAY!)

Economic Calendar for the Week Ahead:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE FULL ECONOMIC CALENDAR FOR THE WEEK AHEAD!)

Percentage Changes for the Major Indices, WTD, MTD, QTD, YTD as of Friday's close:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

S&P Sectors for the Past Week:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Major Indices Pullback/Correction Levels as of Friday's close:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!

Major Indices Rally Levels as of Friday's close:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Most Anticipated Earnings Releases for this week:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Here are the upcoming IPO's for this week:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Friday's Stock Analyst Upgrades & Downgrades:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART LINK #1!)
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART LINK #2!)
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART LINK #3!)

Make Up Your [email protected]#$%&* Mind!

We've all had versions of this conversation where you or the person you were talking to just couldn't make up their mind. At the end of the day, it only causes trouble and plans are ruined.
The market is having its own back and forth this year trying to decide between growth and value. Just today, growth stocks are getting slaughtered while value stocks are up marginally. As an example, the Russell 1000 Growth index is down 1.8% on the day while the Russell 1000 Value index has managed to rally 0.25%. The chart below shows the daily performance spread between the Russell 1000 Growth index and the Russell 1000 Value index for each day in 2020. Today's performance spread between the two indices marks the ninth time this year that value has outperformed growth by more than two percentage points. At the other extreme, there have also been eight trading days where growth outperformed value by more than two percentage points.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
So how does this year's frequency of days where the performance spread between the two indices was more than two percentage points stack up to other years? The chart below shows the daily performance spread between the two indices going all the way back to 1990. Over the last thirty years, the only two periods where we saw a frequency of these large daily dislocations was back in 2008 and the period spanning 2000 and 2001. In fact, with 17 days this year where the performance spread between the two indices was greater than two percentage points, the only other years that saw a higher frequency of large dislocations were 2000 (54) and 2001 (28). If you think the market has been indecisive this year, in 2000 we saw these types of daily dislocations an average of once per week.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Election Anxiety Weighs on October Market Performance

October often evokes fear on Wall Street as memories are stirred of crashes in 1929, 1987, the 554-point drop on October 27, 1997, back-to-back massacres in 1978 and 1979, Friday the 13th in 1989 and the 733-point drop on October 15, 2008. During the week ending October 10, 2008, Dow lost 1,874.19 points (18.2%), the worst weekly decline in our database going back to 1901, in percentage terms. March 2020 now holds the dubious honor of producing the worst, second and third worst DJIA weekly point declines. The term “Octoberphobia” has been used to describe the phenomenon of major market drops occurring during the month. Market calamities can become a self-fulfilling prophecy, so stay on the lookout and don’t get whipsawed if it happens.
But October has become a turnaround month—a “bear killer” if you will. Twelve post-WWII bear markets have ended in October: 1946, 1957, 1960, 1962, 1966, 1974, 1987, 1990, 1998, 2001, 2002 and 2011 (S&P 500 declined 19.4%). However, eight were midterm bottoms. Over the last 21 years, October’s performance has been solid. Average gains over the last 21-years range from 1.3% by Russell 1000 to 2.4% by NASDAQ. Small caps have still struggled though with Russell 2000 gaining a modest 0.5%
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
Election-year Octobers rank dead last for Dow, S&P 500 (since 1952), NASDAQ (since 1972), Russell 1000, and Russell 2000 (since 1980). Eliminating gruesome 2008 from the calculation provides a moderate amount of relief, as rankings climb to mid pack. Should a meaningful decline materialize in October it is likely to be an excellent buying opportunity, especially for any depressed technology and small-cap shares.

What Have Democratic Sweeps Meant for the S&P 500?

Headed into the first presidential debate Tuesday night, betting markets (ElectionBettingOdds.com) placed Democratic candidate Joe Biden as the slight favorite to take the White House in November. The debate resulted in Biden gaining another 5 percentage point chance of winning the Presidency. As of this morning, Biden's odds to win are at 59.8% versus Trump's odds of 38.9%. Additionally, Democrats are slight favorites to win control of the Senate (58.4% to 41.5%) and big favorites to maintain the House (82.8% to 17.1%). Given these odds, in the chart below we show the average performance of the S&P 500 from the three months before Election Day through three months after Election Day for all election years post-WWII that resulted in a sweep of the executive and legislative branch by the Democrats.
As shown, on average the S&P 500 has been on the decline in the weeks leading up to Election Day, though in the days just before the Election there has been a small rally that sharply reverses once the results come in. After the initial post-Election drop, the market has trended a bit higher, but by three months after the Election, it has only found itself around the same levels as Election Day; on average a 2.6% loss versus where the index stood three months prior.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
The composite shown above is comprised of six different years: 1948, 1960, 1964, 1976, 1992, and 2008. While on average the S&P 500 has traded lower, it is not necessarily a sure-fire thing. For example, 1948 and 2008 were the only years that saw the S&P 500 trade and stay significantly lower in the wake of the election. In 1976, there was similarly a sell-off in the immediate aftermath of the election, but the index did make its way back up to the highs of that six-month time frame later on albeit no new high was put in place. Meanwhile, 1960, 1964, and 1992 all saw the S&P 500 run higher after the election even despite some periods of consolidation after initial moves higher. In our B.I.G. Tips report from Tuesday, we show these same charts for all Presidential election years post WWII including a look at the average performance given every potential election outcome.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

How Current Returns Stack Up to History

Even after September's weakness, the S&P 500's trailing 12-month total return stood at an impressive 14.9%. Given the events of the last 12 months, one could even say that performance is remarkable. What's even crazier is that the S&P 500's performance over the last 12 months is more than three times stronger than the 12 month period before that (+4.25%). The chart below compares the S&P 500's annualized total returns over the last one, two, five, ten, and twenty years and compares that performance to the historical average return of the index over those same time periods.
The S&P 500's historical average 12-month return is 11.7%, so the current 14.9% gain exceeds that average by more than three full percentage points. Over a two-year window, though, the S&P 500's annualized return of 9.4% is more than a full percentage point below the historical average. Looking further out, the S&P 500's trailing five and ten-year annualized return has been much stronger than average, which makes sense given the long bull market we were in. Over a 20 year window, though, the S&P 500 is only just starting to work off some of the declines from the dot-com bust and as a result, the 6.4% annualized gain is a four and a half percentage points below the long-term average of 10.9%.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
Below we show how the current performance of the S&P 500 in each of the time frames shown compares to all other periods on a percentile basis. The S&P 500's performance over the last year, ranks just below 56th percentile of all other periods, while the two-year performance ranks just below the 42nd percentile. Even as the five and ten-year periods have seen well above average returns, they still rank in just the mid-60s on a percentile basis. The S&P 500's ranking over a 20-year time period is a completely different story ranking in single-digits on a percentile basis. Even with the equity market right near record highs, the last two decades have been forgettable for US equities.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Seasonals Are Back In Style Again

There is no denying that market seasonality has not worked so well this year. But we have been here before and history is on our side. Over the long term, intermediate term and short term market seasonality has suffered brief periods when seasonality was overridden by more powerful forces. The COVID pandemic and economic shutdown certainly qualifies. But it is only a matter of time until repetitive human behavior patterns and people and institutions return to moving money around in the usual daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly and seasonal patterns.
The return of perennial September weakness is emblematic of a return to normal market behavior and a reflection of the fact that despite the continuing concerns about surges in coronavirus cases life is beginning to return to normal. In our area, about 25-30 miles north of New York City, our kids are beginning hybrid learning, playing rugby, lacrosse and other sports (yes with some COVID protocols, but tackling and facing-off), golf outings are happening and people are going to restaurants and out and about.
The chart here shows the historical One-Year Pattern of the S&P 500 Since 1950 versus 2020. The black line shows the seasonal pattern since 1950. The blue represents the pattern since 1988. We use 1988 as it is the first year after the 1987 Crash when the market underwent a major systemic change with the implementation of downside protection circuit breakers and collars. It is noteworthy how the seasonal pattern persists during both the 70-year and 31-year timeframes.
2020 is plotted on the right axis due to the magnitude of the move this year. The yellow box highlights the rebirth of seasonality this September, especially during this notoriously negative Week After Triple Witching Week as detailed page 108 of the 2020 Almanac, indicated by the two black arrows
Years like 1980, 1982, 2009 and 2016 with unseasonably early weakness and bear markets like 2020 returned to normal seasonal patterns in short order. And years like 1954, 1958, 1980, 1982, 1995 and 2009 that exhibited double-digit gains in the Worst Six Months still proceeded to deliver further sizable gains in the subsequent Best Six Months (page 52, STA 2020). We believe the return of market seasonality is upon us. So remain cautious through the end of September and be alert to Octoberophobia, but remain ready to pounce on our Best Months Seasonal MACD Buy Signal, when it triggers.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

STOCK MARKET VIDEO: Stock Market Analysis Video for Week Ending October 2nd, 2020

([CLICK HERE FOR THE YOUTUBE VIDEO!]())
(VIDEO NOT YET POSTED.)

STOCK MARKET VIDEO: ShadowTrader Video Weekly 10.4.20

([CLICK HERE FOR THE YOUTUBE VIDEO!]())
(VIDEO NOT YET POSTED.)
Here are the most notable companies (tickers) reporting earnings in this upcoming trading week ahead-
  • $DPZ
  • $PAYX
  • $RPM
  • $HELE
  • $AYI
  • $LEVI
  • $LW
  • $LNDC
  • $SAR
  • $EXFO
  • $RGP
(CLICK HERE FOR NEXT WEEK'S MOST NOTABLE EARNINGS RELEASES!)
(CLICK HERE FOR NEXT WEEK'S HIGHEST VOLATILITY EARNINGS RELEASES!)
Below are some of the notable companies coming out with earnings releases this upcoming trading week ahead which includes the date/time of release & consensus estimates courtesy of Earnings Whispers:

Monday 10.5.20 Before Market Open:

([CLICK HERE FOR MONDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
(NONE.)

Monday 10.5.20 After Market Close:

([CLICK HERE FOR MONDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
(NONE.)

Tuesday 10.6.20 Before Market Open:

(CLICK HERE FOR TUESDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Tuesday 10.6.20 After Market Close:

(CLICK HERE FOR TUESDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Wednesday 10.7.20 Before Market Open:

(CLICK HERE FOR WEDNESDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Wednesday 10.7.20 After Market Close:

(CLICK HERE FOR WEDNESDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Thursday 10.8.20 Before Market Open:

(CLICK HERE FOR THURSDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Thursday 10.8.20 After Market Close:

([CLICK HERE FOR THURSDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
(NONE.)

Friday 10.9.20 Before Market Open:

([CLICK HERE FOR FRIDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
(NONE.)

Friday 10.9.20 After Market Close:

([CLICK HERE FOR FRIDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
(NONE.)

Domino's Pizza, Inc. $433.78

Domino's Pizza, Inc. (DPZ) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 7:30 AM ET on Thursday, October 8, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $2.73 per share on revenue of $944.53 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $2.83 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 76% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 33.17% with revenue increasing by 15.07%. Short interest has decreased by 31.5% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 7.4% from its open following the earnings release to be 22.3% above its 200 day moving average of $354.71. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 7.3% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 8.2% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Paychex, Inc. $79.43

Paychex, Inc. (PAYX) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 8:30 AM ET on Tuesday, October 6, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.56 per share on revenue of $895.39 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $0.57 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 49% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 21.13% with revenue decreasing by 9.74%. Short interest has decreased by 9.7% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 2.8% from its open following the earnings release to be 6.0% above its 200 day moving average of $74.91. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. On Friday, September 18, 2020 there was some notable buying of 1,269 contracts of the $90.00 call expiring on Friday, March 19, 2021. Option traders are pricing in a 4.8% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 2.1% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

RPM International Inc. $82.64

RPM International Inc. (RPM) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 6:45 AM ET on Wednesday, October 7, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $1.21 per share on revenue of $1.49 billion and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $1.26 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 65% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 27.37% with revenue increasing by 1.17%. Short interest has decreased by 39.7% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 3.3% from its open following the earnings release to be 12.4% above its 200 day moving average of $73.51. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 4.4% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 2.3% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Helen of Troy Ltd. $199.83

Helen of Troy Ltd. (HELE) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 6:30 AM ET on Thursday, October 8, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $2.39 per share on revenue of $451.26 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $2.57 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 62% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 18.91% with revenue increasing by 9.00%. Short interest has decreased by 6.4% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted lower by 4.4% from its open following the earnings release to be 12.8% above its 200 day moving average of $177.13. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 5.7% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 8.9% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Acuity Brands, Inc. $105.61

Acuity Brands, Inc. (AYI) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 8:40 AM ET on Thursday, October 8, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $2.01 per share on revenue of $814.63 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $2.12 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 46% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 28.21% with revenue decreasing by 13.16%. Short interest has increased by 62.6% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 5.6% from its open following the earnings release to be 4.1% above its 200 day moving average of $101.43. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 5.8% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 9.0% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Levi Strauss & Co. $14.15

Levi Strauss & Co. (LEVI) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:00 PM ET on Tuesday, October 6, 2020. The consensus estimate is for a loss of $0.27 per share on revenue of $766.84 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is ($0.20) per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 40% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 187.10% with revenue decreasing by 47.01%. Short interest has increased by 3.9% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 7.3% from its open following the earnings release to be 3.5% below its 200 day moving average of $14.66. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. On Friday, October 2, 2020 there was some notable buying of 8,166 contracts of the $14.00 call expiring on Friday, October 16, 2020. Option traders are pricing in a 10.6% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 6.9% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Lamb Weston Holdings, Inc. $67.93

Lamb Weston Holdings, Inc. (LW) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 8:30 AM ET on Wednesday, October 7, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.30 per share on revenue of $877.60 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $0.28 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 36% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 62.03% with revenue decreasing by 11.26%. Short interest has decreased by 21.7% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 4.1% from its open following the earnings release to be 1.8% below its 200 day moving average of $69.17. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. On Friday, October 2, 2020 there was some notable buying of 1,580 contracts of the $70.00 call expiring on Friday, October 16, 2020. Option traders are pricing in a 8.3% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 6.7% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Landec Corp. $9.43

Landec Corp. (LNDC) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:20 PM ET on Tuesday, October 6, 2020. The consensus estimate is for a loss of $0.11 per share on revenue of $127.86 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is ($0.09) per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 41% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 31.25% with revenue decreasing by 7.82%. Short interest has decreased by 5.1% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted lower by 12.3% from its open following the earnings release to be 8.4% below its 200 day moving average of $10.30. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 16.7% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 10.6% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Saratoga Investment Corp $17.27

Saratoga Investment Corp (SAR) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:00 PM ET on Wednesday, October 7, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.47 per share on revenue of $12.95 million. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 48% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 30.88% with revenue decreasing by 6.75%. Short interest has decreased by 60.5% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 6.3% from its open following the earnings release. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

EXFO Inc. $3.24

EXFO Inc. (EXFO) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:00 PM ET on Wednesday, October 7, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.07 per share on revenue of $64.85 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $0.07 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 30% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 40.00% with revenue decreasing by 7.59%. Short interest has decreased by 17.5% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted lower by 14.7% from its open following the earnings release. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

DISCUSS!

What are you all watching for in this upcoming trading week?
I hope you all have a wonderful weekend and a great trading week ahead stocks.
submitted by bigbear0083 to stocks [link] [comments]


2020.10.03 02:13 Darclite A deep dive into the astounding numbers of Henrik Lundqvist's HOF career

I wanted to do a deep dive on these numbers, because it's hard to appreciate just how incredible Lundqvist was for us. Hank has a number of impressive accolades and a great reputation, Vezina win, Hart nom, Gold medal, etc. but pretty much every Rangers fan knows that he was more valuable to us than people seem to realize. And the numbers highlight that very clearly.
Some fun statistics to put it into perspective:
For the rankings
Probably most clearly, GSAx/60 rankings. Essentially, goals saved above expected per 60 minutes, so looking at the saves, adjusting for the difficulty of the shots, normalizing for time, and seeing the year by year rank. For a portrait of where you might expect a top tier goalie to stand, here are some of his best contemporaries, Price, Rinne, and (1st all-decade team LMAO) Fleury.
Price (starting 2008, leaving out 2016 due to injury): 6th, 18th, 19th, 8th, 23rd, 24th, 2nd, 1st, 6th, 29th, 13th, 20th
Rinne (starting 2009, leaving out 2014 due to injury): 7th, 14th, 10th, 24th, 22nd, 14th, 31st, 19th, 4th, 6th, 21st
Fleury (starting 2009, leaving out 2017 due to injury): 22nd, 24th, 15th, 25th, 14th, 28th, 16th, 16th, 5th, 17th, 25th
Hank (starting 2008, leaving out no years): 3rd, 3rd, 1st, 2nd, 1st, 1st, 3rd, 5th, 1st, 14th, 13th, 15th, 10th
This is generally considered one of the better ways to measure a goalie, and according to it, Hank was the best goalie in four separate seasons, was top 3 in 8 seasons, top 5 in 9 seasons, and even after his decline, never was a below average starter. For a nine year stretch, he provided absolutely top tier play.
If you were to take the top 8 seasons of these top goalies, Hank's average ranking is 1.875, Price's is 9.125, Rinne's is 11.875, and Fleury's is 19.25.
Even this year, when it became time to move on, he still wasn't performing below average, it was only because we had the goalies ranked 2nd and 7th also on this team (thank you Allaire and the scouts).
Credit to JFreshHockey, and here are the charts of this data to visualize it better
For the raw numbers
See here, for the best breakdown (thanks chocolatealmondfudge). Lundqvist leads in GSAx/60 among everyone, so that's after adjusting for workload, which he had the heaviest. It's not a case of a goalie with a few hot high-end years here and there, or a high peak, he was consistently the best. Lundqvist is at 0.364, and only one other goalie was above 0.207.
See here. This was an analysis for the all-decade team. In total, over the last decade or so, Hank is off the charts, in a league of his own. His numbers, already the best, jump in the playoffs, showing that he was better and increased the margin by which he was the best when it mattered more
From the ESPN article ranking the best players of the decade, which placed him 5th, "his 242.1 goals saved above average is over 75 more than the next player on the list."
This chart pretty much says it all, with 2007-2018 as the parameters: https://i.imgur.com/u22CtZm.png (thanks qua-1). Note, the x axis isn't even zero. Most of the goalies are BELOW 0, and he's at 230.
WAR is a bit of a tough stat to use in hockey, but from 2007 onward, Hank's is 57.2 wins above replacement, which is 20 more than the second highest, Price, at 37. And wins above replacement is just vs an average, replacement level, goalie. Meaning average is 0. He brought us enough wins for a top-3-during-his-career-season's worth of wins
In goals above expected from 07-08 onward, Lundqvist stopped 278 goals more than the average NHL goalie. Second place is Halak, at 90. Over three times the second place finisher, and an elite offense's season's worth of goals prevented vs the average goalie.
Note, these numbers don't go before 07-08, so they don't even include Hank's first two years, in which he was 3rd in Vezina voting both times, was an all-star both times, and was 9th and 22nd in Hart voting. These elite numbers EXCLUDE two elite seasons.
For the playoffs
Lundqvist's rankings in the playoffs according to GSAx/60: 1st, 3rd, 1st, 3rd, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 12th, 8th. In short, the entire time the Rangers were a contending team, Hank was a top or the top goalie in the playoffs. He essentially had one bad playoff series in his career, and a couple of dozen great ones.
See here again. With minimum 30 games, Lundqvist is the leader in GSAx/60 at 0.467, with second place all the way down at 0.381. Hank was the best playoff goalie of the era by a larger margin than he was the best regular season goalie of the era
In the playoffs, over the course of Hank's career, the Rangers are 3rd worst in goals per game, beating out only the Panthers and the Wild. Over the course of Hank's career, the Rangers are 3rd worst in expected goals against per game, beating out only the Coyotes and Oilers. So on average, Rangers playoff teams had a bottom 3 defense and bottom 3 offense compared to everyone else's playoff teams. Just had the best goalie.
For context of this and last year, the most goals scored by anyone in a playoff during Hank's career was St Louis with 8; this year the Stars had 4 guys with at least 8, the Isles had 3 guys with at least 8, and the Bolts had 3 guys with at least 10. Last year, the Bruins had 4, Blues had 3, and Sharks had 2.
Fun stat for elimination games and game 7s: "Over his last 20 elimination games, ‘The King’ is 15-5, a record that dates back to Game 6 of New York’s 2012 first round series versus Ottawa. Over that stretch, he has posted two shutouts and an impressive 1.74 goals against average. Even more remarkably, Lundqvist is 10-1 in his last 11 games on the brink, with an eye-opening 1.05 goals against average." (Thanks Bardown)
For Game 7s: "Lundqvist holds an impressive 6-2 record and boasts a .958 save percentage in these intense games" (Thanks BlueShirtBanter)
In summary, he was better than all of his contemporaries, in an era with other good goaltenders, he maintained his better play longer than anyone, he elevated his game even further to be better by even more when the stakes were raised, and it wasn't even close.
submitted by Darclite to rangers [link] [comments]


2020.10.02 22:54 bigbear0083 Wall Street Week Ahead for the trading week beginning October 5th, 2020

Good Friday evening to all of you here on StockMarket. I hope everyone on this sub made out pretty nicely in the market this past week, and is ready for the new trading week ahead.
Here is everything you need to know to get you ready for the trading week beginning October 5th, 2020.

Trump’s health and fiscal stimulus fight will steer the markets in the week ahead - (Source)

President Donald Trump’s health and the state of a fiscal stimulus package will be the main focus for markets in the coming week.
In the early morning hours Friday, President Donald Trump tweeted that he and the first lady tested positive for Covid. Stocks sold off hard, but the S&P 500 came off its lows in Friday trading and closed down just under 1%. It was up 1.5% for the week.
The market was helped by signs that a stimulus package is still a possibility, after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi asked airlines not to furlough workers. She promised either a stand alone aid bill, or a bigger negotiated relief legislation that would help the industry.
“The market is going to watch health updates from the White House medical staff, and it’s going to watch how the president communicates with the public,” said Julian Emanuel, head of equities and derivatives at BTIG. “Will we see him in person in the next week in any form? What’s his volume of tweets? All as a way to first gauge the severity of the case.”
Trump and Melania Trump are reported to have mild cases, but as time goes on the market will turn to how the illness could impact the presidential election.
Former Vice President Joe Biden gained slightly in the polls after the first debate Tuesday night, and now the calendar for further debates is in question. The market has seemingly warmed to Biden, and even though he would raise taxes, it is assumed Democrats would quickly pass a major infrastructure package if there is a Democratic sweep of Congress.
Trump, however, is widely seen on Wall Street as stronger on the economy and better for markets.
“What you’ve done from a campaign perspective, is you’ve taken away the thing that gives him the most energy - his ability to interact with crowds,” said Emanuel. “The president had wanted to paint the economic recovery of the last three or four months as the cornerstone, and this basically puts the virus back as topic number 1, number 2 and number 3. And it’s all the more so because the data is coming in weaker than expected.”
The market is fixated on the prospect of stimulus to help business, the unemployed and state and local governments. The House passed a $2.2 trillion package this week, but there is still no agreement with Republicans. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has pushed for a $1.6 trillion package.
“I think there’s an underlying bid under the market because nobody wants to be super short if we get a stimulus approved, but you can’t be too long in case his mild symptoms turn into severe symptoms,” said Scott Redler, partner with T3live.com. “We’re in a tough spot but overall we’re still pretty constructive.”
Emanuel said the fact the president is now ill could hurt confidence and slow down some of the improvement in the economy.
“The underlying tone is, again, whether its directly or later, there’s going to be stimulus,” Emanuel said. ”’Whether it’s this month or November, this reinforces the need for stimulus because the president falling ill signals to, at the margin, the person whose thinking about going out to dinner to think again. It’s a significant economic and psychological hindrance.”
Also coming up in the week ahead is a speech Tuesday by Fed Chairman Jerome Powell to the National Association of Business Economists.
Powell is also expected to push for the stimulus package to boost the economy so the recovery does not stall.
“I think his whole objective is to try to get Congress and the Administration to sign onto a fiscal rescue package,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics. “He’ll all but come out and say [the recovery] is not a ‘V.’ Without additional support from lawmakers, risks are pretty high that we backtrack. I think that’s the kind of outlook he’s going to give. It’s going to be full-throated.”
September’s employment report, released Friday, was seen by some as a warning that the economy is not rebounding as expected. There were 661,000 jobs added in September, well below the 800,000 expected.
Besides Powell, there are a half dozen other Fed speakers. There are also minutes from the Fed’s last minute released Wednesday afternoon.

This past week saw the following moves in the S&P:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE FULL S&P TREE MAP FOR THE PAST WEEK!)

Major Indices for this past week:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE MAJOR INDICES FOR THE PAST WEEK!)

Major Futures Markets as of Friday's close:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE MAJOR FUTURES INDICES AS OF FRIDAY!)

Economic Calendar for the Week Ahead:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE FULL ECONOMIC CALENDAR FOR THE WEEK AHEAD!)

Percentage Changes for the Major Indices, WTD, MTD, QTD, YTD as of Friday's close:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

S&P Sectors for the Past Week:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Major Indices Pullback/Correction Levels as of Friday's close:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!

Major Indices Rally Levels as of Friday's close:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Most Anticipated Earnings Releases for this week:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Here are the upcoming IPO's for this week:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Friday's Stock Analyst Upgrades & Downgrades:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART LINK #1!)
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART LINK #2!)
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART LINK #3!)

Make Up Your [email protected]#$%&* Mind!

We've all had versions of this conversation where you or the person you were talking to just couldn't make up their mind. At the end of the day, it only causes trouble and plans are ruined.
The market is having its own back and forth this year trying to decide between growth and value. Just today, growth stocks are getting slaughtered while value stocks are up marginally. As an example, the Russell 1000 Growth index is down 1.8% on the day while the Russell 1000 Value index has managed to rally 0.25%. The chart below shows the daily performance spread between the Russell 1000 Growth index and the Russell 1000 Value index for each day in 2020. Today's performance spread between the two indices marks the ninth time this year that value has outperformed growth by more than two percentage points. At the other extreme, there have also been eight trading days where growth outperformed value by more than two percentage points.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
So how does this year's frequency of days where the performance spread between the two indices was more than two percentage points stack up to other years? The chart below shows the daily performance spread between the two indices going all the way back to 1990. Over the last thirty years, the only two periods where we saw a frequency of these large daily dislocations was back in 2008 and the period spanning 2000 and 2001. In fact, with 17 days this year where the performance spread between the two indices was greater than two percentage points, the only other years that saw a higher frequency of large dislocations were 2000 (54) and 2001 (28). If you think the market has been indecisive this year, in 2000 we saw these types of daily dislocations an average of once per week.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Election Anxiety Weighs on October Market Performance

October often evokes fear on Wall Street as memories are stirred of crashes in 1929, 1987, the 554-point drop on October 27, 1997, back-to-back massacres in 1978 and 1979, Friday the 13th in 1989 and the 733-point drop on October 15, 2008. During the week ending October 10, 2008, Dow lost 1,874.19 points (18.2%), the worst weekly decline in our database going back to 1901, in percentage terms. March 2020 now holds the dubious honor of producing the worst, second and third worst DJIA weekly point declines. The term “Octoberphobia” has been used to describe the phenomenon of major market drops occurring during the month. Market calamities can become a self-fulfilling prophecy, so stay on the lookout and don’t get whipsawed if it happens.
But October has become a turnaround month—a “bear killer” if you will. Twelve post-WWII bear markets have ended in October: 1946, 1957, 1960, 1962, 1966, 1974, 1987, 1990, 1998, 2001, 2002 and 2011 (S&P 500 declined 19.4%). However, eight were midterm bottoms. Over the last 21 years, October’s performance has been solid. Average gains over the last 21-years range from 1.3% by Russell 1000 to 2.4% by NASDAQ. Small caps have still struggled though with Russell 2000 gaining a modest 0.5%
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
Election-year Octobers rank dead last for Dow, S&P 500 (since 1952), NASDAQ (since 1972), Russell 1000, and Russell 2000 (since 1980). Eliminating gruesome 2008 from the calculation provides a moderate amount of relief, as rankings climb to mid pack. Should a meaningful decline materialize in October it is likely to be an excellent buying opportunity, especially for any depressed technology and small-cap shares.

What Have Democratic Sweeps Meant for the S&P 500?

Headed into the first presidential debate Tuesday night, betting markets (ElectionBettingOdds.com) placed Democratic candidate Joe Biden as the slight favorite to take the White House in November. The debate resulted in Biden gaining another 5 percentage point chance of winning the Presidency. As of this morning, Biden's odds to win are at 59.8% versus Trump's odds of 38.9%. Additionally, Democrats are slight favorites to win control of the Senate (58.4% to 41.5%) and big favorites to maintain the House (82.8% to 17.1%). Given these odds, in the chart below we show the average performance of the S&P 500 from the three months before Election Day through three months after Election Day for all election years post-WWII that resulted in a sweep of the executive and legislative branch by the Democrats.
As shown, on average the S&P 500 has been on the decline in the weeks leading up to Election Day, though in the days just before the Election there has been a small rally that sharply reverses once the results come in. After the initial post-Election drop, the market has trended a bit higher, but by three months after the Election, it has only found itself around the same levels as Election Day; on average a 2.6% loss versus where the index stood three months prior.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
The composite shown above is comprised of six different years: 1948, 1960, 1964, 1976, 1992, and 2008. While on average the S&P 500 has traded lower, it is not necessarily a sure-fire thing. For example, 1948 and 2008 were the only years that saw the S&P 500 trade and stay significantly lower in the wake of the election. In 1976, there was similarly a sell-off in the immediate aftermath of the election, but the index did make its way back up to the highs of that six-month time frame later on albeit no new high was put in place. Meanwhile, 1960, 1964, and 1992 all saw the S&P 500 run higher after the election even despite some periods of consolidation after initial moves higher. In our B.I.G. Tips report from Tuesday, we show these same charts for all Presidential election years post WWII including a look at the average performance given every potential election outcome.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

How Current Returns Stack Up to History

Even after September's weakness, the S&P 500's trailing 12-month total return stood at an impressive 14.9%. Given the events of the last 12 months, one could even say that performance is remarkable. What's even crazier is that the S&P 500's performance over the last 12 months is more than three times stronger than the 12 month period before that (+4.25%). The chart below compares the S&P 500's annualized total returns over the last one, two, five, ten, and twenty years and compares that performance to the historical average return of the index over those same time periods.
The S&P 500's historical average 12-month return is 11.7%, so the current 14.9% gain exceeds that average by more than three full percentage points. Over a two-year window, though, the S&P 500's annualized return of 9.4% is more than a full percentage point below the historical average. Looking further out, the S&P 500's trailing five and ten-year annualized return has been much stronger than average, which makes sense given the long bull market we were in. Over a 20 year window, though, the S&P 500 is only just starting to work off some of the declines from the dot-com bust and as a result, the 6.4% annualized gain is a four and a half percentage points below the long-term average of 10.9%.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
Below we show how the current performance of the S&P 500 in each of the time frames shown compares to all other periods on a percentile basis. The S&P 500's performance over the last year, ranks just below 56th percentile of all other periods, while the two-year performance ranks just below the 42nd percentile. Even as the five and ten-year periods have seen well above average returns, they still rank in just the mid-60s on a percentile basis. The S&P 500's ranking over a 20-year time period is a completely different story ranking in single-digits on a percentile basis. Even with the equity market right near record highs, the last two decades have been forgettable for US equities.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Seasonals Are Back In Style Again

There is no denying that market seasonality has not worked so well this year. But we have been here before and history is on our side. Over the long term, intermediate term and short term market seasonality has suffered brief periods when seasonality was overridden by more powerful forces. The COVID pandemic and economic shutdown certainly qualifies. But it is only a matter of time until repetitive human behavior patterns and people and institutions return to moving money around in the usual daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly and seasonal patterns.
The return of perennial September weakness is emblematic of a return to normal market behavior and a reflection of the fact that despite the continuing concerns about surges in coronavirus cases life is beginning to return to normal. In our area, about 25-30 miles north of New York City, our kids are beginning hybrid learning, playing rugby, lacrosse and other sports (yes with some COVID protocols, but tackling and facing-off), golf outings are happening and people are going to restaurants and out and about.
The chart here shows the historical One-Year Pattern of the S&P 500 Since 1950 versus 2020. The black line shows the seasonal pattern since 1950. The blue represents the pattern since 1988. We use 1988 as it is the first year after the 1987 Crash when the market underwent a major systemic change with the implementation of downside protection circuit breakers and collars. It is noteworthy how the seasonal pattern persists during both the 70-year and 31-year timeframes.
2020 is plotted on the right axis due to the magnitude of the move this year. The yellow box highlights the rebirth of seasonality this September, especially during this notoriously negative Week After Triple Witching Week as detailed page 108 of the 2020 Almanac, indicated by the two black arrows
Years like 1980, 1982, 2009 and 2016 with unseasonably early weakness and bear markets like 2020 returned to normal seasonal patterns in short order. And years like 1954, 1958, 1980, 1982, 1995 and 2009 that exhibited double-digit gains in the Worst Six Months still proceeded to deliver further sizable gains in the subsequent Best Six Months (page 52, STA 2020). We believe the return of market seasonality is upon us. So remain cautious through the end of September and be alert to Octoberophobia, but remain ready to pounce on our Best Months Seasonal MACD Buy Signal, when it triggers.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

STOCK MARKET VIDEO: Stock Market Analysis Video for Week Ending October 2nd, 2020

(CLICK HERE FOR THE YOUTUBE VIDEO!)

STOCK MARKET VIDEO: ShadowTrader Video Weekly 10.4.20

([CLICK HERE FOR THE YOUTUBE VIDEO!]())
(VIDEO NOT YET POSTED.)
Here are the most notable companies (tickers) reporting earnings in this upcoming trading week ahead-
  • $DPZ
  • $PAYX
  • $RPM
  • $HELE
  • $AYI
  • $LEVI
  • $LW
  • $LNDC
  • $SAR
  • $EXFO
  • $RGP
(CLICK HERE FOR NEXT WEEK'S MOST NOTABLE EARNINGS RELEASES!)
(CLICK HERE FOR NEXT WEEK'S HIGHEST VOLATILITY EARNINGS RELEASES!)
Below are some of the notable companies coming out with earnings releases this upcoming trading week ahead which includes the date/time of release & consensus estimates courtesy of Earnings Whispers:

Monday 10.5.20 Before Market Open:

([CLICK HERE FOR MONDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
(NONE.)

Monday 10.5.20 After Market Close:

([CLICK HERE FOR MONDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
(NONE.)

Tuesday 10.6.20 Before Market Open:

(CLICK HERE FOR TUESDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Tuesday 10.6.20 After Market Close:

(CLICK HERE FOR TUESDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Wednesday 10.7.20 Before Market Open:

(CLICK HERE FOR WEDNESDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Wednesday 10.7.20 After Market Close:

(CLICK HERE FOR WEDNESDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Thursday 10.8.20 Before Market Open:

(CLICK HERE FOR THURSDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Thursday 10.8.20 After Market Close:

([CLICK HERE FOR THURSDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
(NONE.)

Friday 10.9.20 Before Market Open:

([CLICK HERE FOR FRIDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
(NONE.)

Friday 10.9.20 After Market Close:

([CLICK HERE FOR FRIDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
(NONE.)

Domino's Pizza, Inc. $433.78

Domino's Pizza, Inc. (DPZ) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 7:30 AM ET on Thursday, October 8, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $2.73 per share on revenue of $944.53 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $2.83 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 76% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 33.17% with revenue increasing by 15.07%. Short interest has decreased by 31.5% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 7.4% from its open following the earnings release to be 22.3% above its 200 day moving average of $354.71. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 7.3% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 8.2% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Paychex, Inc. $79.43

Paychex, Inc. (PAYX) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 8:30 AM ET on Tuesday, October 6, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.56 per share on revenue of $895.39 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $0.57 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 49% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 21.13% with revenue decreasing by 9.74%. Short interest has decreased by 9.7% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 2.8% from its open following the earnings release to be 6.0% above its 200 day moving average of $74.91. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. On Friday, September 18, 2020 there was some notable buying of 1,269 contracts of the $90.00 call expiring on Friday, March 19, 2021. Option traders are pricing in a 4.8% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 2.1% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

RPM International Inc. $82.64

RPM International Inc. (RPM) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 6:45 AM ET on Wednesday, October 7, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $1.21 per share on revenue of $1.49 billion and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $1.26 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 65% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 27.37% with revenue increasing by 1.17%. Short interest has decreased by 39.7% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 3.3% from its open following the earnings release to be 12.4% above its 200 day moving average of $73.51. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 4.4% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 2.3% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Helen of Troy Ltd. $199.83

Helen of Troy Ltd. (HELE) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 6:30 AM ET on Thursday, October 8, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $2.39 per share on revenue of $451.26 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $2.57 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 62% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 18.91% with revenue increasing by 9.00%. Short interest has decreased by 6.4% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted lower by 4.4% from its open following the earnings release to be 12.8% above its 200 day moving average of $177.13. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 5.7% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 8.9% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Acuity Brands, Inc. $105.61

Acuity Brands, Inc. (AYI) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 8:40 AM ET on Thursday, October 8, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $2.01 per share on revenue of $814.63 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $2.12 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 46% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 28.21% with revenue decreasing by 13.16%. Short interest has increased by 62.6% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 5.6% from its open following the earnings release to be 4.1% above its 200 day moving average of $101.43. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 5.8% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 9.0% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Levi Strauss & Co. $14.15

Levi Strauss & Co. (LEVI) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:00 PM ET on Tuesday, October 6, 2020. The consensus estimate is for a loss of $0.27 per share on revenue of $766.84 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is ($0.20) per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 40% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 187.10% with revenue decreasing by 47.01%. Short interest has increased by 3.9% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 7.3% from its open following the earnings release to be 3.5% below its 200 day moving average of $14.66. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. On Friday, October 2, 2020 there was some notable buying of 8,166 contracts of the $14.00 call expiring on Friday, October 16, 2020. Option traders are pricing in a 10.6% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 6.9% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Lamb Weston Holdings, Inc. $67.93

Lamb Weston Holdings, Inc. (LW) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 8:30 AM ET on Wednesday, October 7, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.30 per share on revenue of $877.60 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $0.28 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 36% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 62.03% with revenue decreasing by 11.26%. Short interest has decreased by 21.7% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 4.1% from its open following the earnings release to be 1.8% below its 200 day moving average of $69.17. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. On Friday, October 2, 2020 there was some notable buying of 1,580 contracts of the $70.00 call expiring on Friday, October 16, 2020. Option traders are pricing in a 8.3% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 6.7% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Landec Corp. $9.43

Landec Corp. (LNDC) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:20 PM ET on Tuesday, October 6, 2020. The consensus estimate is for a loss of $0.11 per share on revenue of $127.86 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is ($0.09) per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 41% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 31.25% with revenue decreasing by 7.82%. Short interest has decreased by 5.1% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted lower by 12.3% from its open following the earnings release to be 8.4% below its 200 day moving average of $10.30. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 16.7% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 10.6% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Saratoga Investment Corp $17.27

Saratoga Investment Corp (SAR) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:00 PM ET on Wednesday, October 7, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.47 per share on revenue of $12.95 million. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 48% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 30.88% with revenue decreasing by 6.75%. Short interest has decreased by 60.5% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 6.3% from its open following the earnings release. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

EXFO Inc. $3.24

EXFO Inc. (EXFO) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:00 PM ET on Wednesday, October 7, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.07 per share on revenue of $64.85 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $0.07 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 30% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 40.00% with revenue decreasing by 7.59%. Short interest has decreased by 17.5% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted lower by 14.7% from its open following the earnings release. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

DISCUSS!

What are you all watching for in this upcoming trading week?
I hope you all have a wonderful weekend and a great trading week ahead StockMarket.
submitted by bigbear0083 to StockMarket [link] [comments]


2020.10.02 18:30 Rsubs33 [Game Preview] Week 4 - Philadelphia Eagles(0-2-1) at San Francisco 49ers (2-1)

Philadelphia Eagles (0-2-1) at San Francisco 49ers (2-1)
The Eagles are off to their worst start since 1999 when Eagles coach Doug Pederson was the starting QB for the Eagles in Andy Reid’s first season; where the Eagles started 0-3 and finished 5-11. The Eagles look to be on a similar trajectory this season with their 0-2-1 start following an embarrassing tie to the Bengals last week. The Eagles have the toughest remaining schedule in the NFL this season and the Eagles look like a bad football team. There really isn’t any other description of this team. They are bad on every level and it starts from the top. The team has played undisciplined and the offensive and defensive play-calling has been atrocious and has lacked identity. It seems like the game-planning this season has been phoned in with the coaches running the same vanilla offense and defense week in and week out and expecting the players to win it for them which they haven’t. Carson Wentz has regressed to the point he is unrecognizable and is making mistakes from his rookie season. His coaches don’t seem interested in helping him with fix those mistakes either as Doug Pederson and Press Taylor have failed to recognize Carson’s breakdowns in his mechanics. Their gameplans have done him no favors either utilizing a large number of 5 and 7 step drops despite having a multitude of injuries on the offensive line and at the wide receiver position. If the Eagles have any hope of salvaging their season they will need to pull out a win on Sunday night football against the 49ers and their strong defense. The 49ers are dealing with some injuries of their own with Bosa and Sherman on the IR on the defensive side and Jimmy G and Mosert most likely missing the game on offense. The San Fran defense is still tough with an impressive defensive line and speed all over the field. If Doug cares about Carson at all he will move the pocket and rely on Miles Sanders on the ground to keep the pass rush honest. On the defensive side, Schwartz will need to continue to mix it up with blitzes like he did against the Bengals, but he will need to pull his out of his ass in the secondary and learn that his CBs should not be playing 8-10 yards off the ball when playing man coverage. If Schwartz does a lot of the same in the secondary it could be a long day because Shanahan’s offense will exploit it and lead to another Eagles loss, this time in Prime Time. The Eagles will need to figure out how to get a win this week, or this streak of 3 straight playoff appearances will come to an end. Go Birds!
General Information
Posting Rules and Guidelines
Remember to join us on Discord during the game!
New to the Eagles? Take a look at our New Fan Page!
Score Prediction Contest
Date
Sunday, October 4th, 2020
Game Time Game Location
8:20 PM - Eastern Levi’s Stadium
7:20 PM - Central 4900 Marie P DeBartolo Way
6:20 PM - Mountain Santa Clara, CA 95054
5:20 PM - Pacific Wikipedia - Map
Weather Forecast
Stadium Type: Open Air
Surface: Grass
Temperature: 74°F
Feels Like: 74°F
Forecast: Clear. Clear throughout the day
Chance of Precipitation: 0%
Cloud Coverage: 1%
Wind: West-Northwest 6 MPH
Betting Odds
Oddsshark Information
Favorite/Opening Line: 49ers -7
OveUnder: 46
Record VS. Spread: Philadelphia 0-3, San Francisco 2-1
Where to Watch on TV
NBC* will broadcast Sunday’s game to a national audience. Al Michaels will handle the play-by-play duties and Chris Collinsworth will provide analysis and Michele Tafoya will report from the sidelines.
TV Map - Week 4 TV Coverage Map
Radio Streams
List of Eagles Radio network member stations with internet broadcast availability
Radio.com 94.1 Desktop Streaming
Listen to Merrill Reese and Mike Quick
Calling the game on 94WIP and the Eagles Radio Network will be Merrill Reese, the NFL’s longest-tenured play-by-play announcer (44th season). Joining Reese in the radio booth will be former Eagles All-Pro wide receiver Mike Quick, while Howard Eskin will report from the sidelines.
Location Station Frequency
Philadelphia, PA WIP-FM 94.1 FM and 610 AM
Allentown, PA WCTO-FM 96.1 FM
Atlantic City/South Jersey WENJ-FM 97.3 FM
Levittown, PA WBCB-AM 1490 AM
Northumberland, PA WEGH-FM 107.3 FM
Pottsville, PA WPPA-AM 1360 AM
Reading, PA WEEU-AM 830 AM
Salisbury/Ocean City, MD WAFL-FM 97.7 FM
Wilkes-Barre/Scranton, PA WEJL-FM 96.1 FM
Salisbury/Ocean City, MD WAFL-FM 97.7 FM
Salisbury/Ocean City, MD WEJL-AM 630 AM
Salisbury/Ocean City, MD WBAX-AM 1240 AM
Williamsport, PA WBZD-FM 93.3 FM
Wilmington, DE WDEL-FM/AM 101.7 FM
York/LancasteHarrisburg, PA WSOX-FM 96.1 FM
Philadelphia Spanish Radio
Rickie Ricardo and Bill Kulik will handle the broadcast in Spanish on Mega 105.7 FM in Philadelphia and the Eagles Spanish Radio Network.
Location Station Frequency
Philadelphia, PA LA MEGA 105.7 FM
Allentown, PA WSAN 1470 AM
Atlantic City, NJ WIBG 1020 AM; 101.3 FM
49ers Radio
49ers Radio Greg Papa will handle play-by-play and Tim Ryan will provide analysis for the game.
National Radio
Westwood One will broadcast the game nationally with Ryan Radtke handling the play by play and Terrell Davis will provide analysis.
Satellite Radio
Station Eagles Channel 49ers Channel
Sirius Radio SIRI 81 (Streaming 825) SIRI 83 (Streaming 827)
XM Radio XM 226 (Streaming 825) 225 (Streaming 827)
Sirius XM Radio SXM 226 (Streaming 825) SXM 225 (Streaming 827)
Eagles Social Media 49ers Social Media
Website Website
Facebook Facebook
Twitter Twitter
Instagram Instagram
Snapchat: Eagles Snapchat: sf49ers
NFC East Standings
NFC EAST Record PCT Home Road Div Conf PF PA Net Pts Streak
Football Team 1-2 .333 1-0 0-2 1-0 1-1 62 81 -19 2L
Cowboys 1-2 .333 1-0 0-2 0-0 1-2 88 97 -9 1L
Eagles 0-2-1 .167 0-1-1 0-1 0-1 0-2 59 87 -28 0
Giants 0-3 .000 0-2 0-1 0-0 0-2 38 79 -41 3L
Series Information
Rhe San Francisco 49ers lead the Philadelphia Eagles(San Francisco 49ers lead series, 19-13-1)
Series History
Head to Head Box Scores
First Game Played
October 6th, 1951 at Shibe Park, Philadelphia, PA . Philadelphia Eagles 21 - San Francisco 49ers 14.
Points Leader
Philadelphia Eagles lead San Francisco 49ers (749-733)
Coaches Record
Doug Pederson: 1-0 against the 49ers
Kyle Shanahan: 0-1 against Eagles
Coaches Head to Head
Doug Pederson vs Kyle Shanahan: Pederson leads 1-0
Quarterback Record
Carson Wentz: Against 49ers: 1-0
Jimmy Garapolo: Against Eagles: 0-0
Quarterbacks Head to Head
Carson Wentz v Jimmy Garapolo: First meeting between QBs.
Records per Stadium
Record @ Lincoln Financial Field: Eagles lead 49ers: 3-2
Record @ Levi’s Stadium: 49ers lead Eagles 1-0
Rankings and Last Meeting Information
AP Pro 32 Ranking
Eagles No. 26 - 49ers No. 12
Record
Eagles: 0-2-1
49ers: 2-1
Last Meeting
Sunday, October 29th, 2017
Eagles 34 - 49ers 10
The Eagles looked to win their 6th game in a row against the winless San Francisco 49ers. The Eagles got off to a slow start, only leading 3–0 after the first quarter. Late in the second quarter, the Eagles blew the game open. Carson Wentz found tight end Zach Ertz for a 1-yard touchdown in the back of the end zone off of a bootleg pass, and Jalen Mills intercepted rookie quarterback C.J. Beathard and returned it 37 yards for a touchdown. The 49ers appeared to have some life in the third quarter, following a Carson Wentz interception, leading to a Matt Breida 22 yard touchdown reception. However, the Eagles responded, with Wentz connecting with Alshon Jeffery for a 53-yard touchdown, putting the game out of reach. The Eagles went on to win 33–10 and advanced to 7–1 on the season. Despite the win, the Eagles played a sloppy game on a rainy afternoon in Philadelphia.
Click here to view the Video Recap
Click here to view the Stats Recap
Last 10 Meetings
Date Winner Loser Score
10/29/2017 Eagles 49ers 33-10
9/28/2014 49ers Eagles 26-21
10/2/2011 49ers Eagles 24-23
10/10/2010 Eagles 49ers 27-24
12/20/2009 Eagles 49ers 27-13
10/12/2008 Eagles 49ers 40-26
9/24/2006 Eagles 49ers 38--24
9/18/2005 Eagles 49ers 42-3
12/21/2003 49ers Eagles 31-28
11/25/2002 Eagles 49ers 38-17 
Injury Reports Depth Charts
Eagles Eagles
49ers 49ers
2020 “Expert” Picks
Week 4 - "Expert" Picks
2020 Team Stats
Eagles Season Stats
49ers Season Stats
2020 Stats (Starters/Leaders)
Passing
Name CMP ATT PCT YDS TD INT RAT
Wentz 79 132 59.85% 737 3 6 63.9
Garoppolo 33 49 67.35% 390 4 0 118.6
Mullens 33 47 70.21% 414 4 1 95.5
Rushing
Name ATT YDS YDS/G AVG TD
Sanders 38 190 95 5.0 1
Mosert 23 148 74.0 6.4 1
Mckinnon 20 139 46.3 7.0 2
Receiving
Name REC YDS YDS/G AVG TD
Ertz 15 130 43.3 8.7 1
Reed 11 85 28.3 7.7 2
Sacks
Name Sacks Team Total
Graham 3.0 12
Hyder 2.0 5
Tackles
Name Total Solo Assist Sacks
Gerry 25 12 13 0.0
Warner 28 17 11 0.0
Interceptions
Name Ints Team Total
N/A 0 0
Tartt/Warner 1 2
Punting
Name ATT YDS LONG AVG NET IN 20 TB BP
Johnston 13 673 62 51.8 45.5 7 1 0
Wishnowsky 8 377 59 47.1 43.6 5 1 0
Kicking
Name ATT MADE % LONG PAT
Elliot 7 6 85.7% 54 5/5
Gould 7 6 85.7% 52 9/9
Kick Returns
Name ATT YDS AVG LONG TD
Scott 3 61 20.3 25 0
McKinnon 4 87 21.8 29 0
Punt Returns
Name RET YDS AVG LONG TD FC
Ward 3 10 3.3 8 0 3
Taylor 2 21 10.5 12 0 1
League Rankings 2020
Offense Rankings
Category Eagles Stat Eagles Rank 49ers Stat 49ers Rank
Total Offense 336.3 24th 381.7 14th
Rush Offense 117.7 17th 132.7 12th
Pass Offense 218.7 24th 249.0 15th
Points Per Game 19.7 27th 29.0 T-11th
3rd-Down Offense 46.8% 9th 47.2 8th
4th-Down Offense 0.0% T-28th 0.0 T-28th
Red Zone Offense (TD%) 57.1% T-20th 61.5% T-16th
Defense Rankings
Category Eagles Stat Eagles Rank 49ers Stat 49ers Rank
Total Defense 330.7 5th 304.0 3rd
Rush Defense 106.3 9th 116.7 16th
Pass Defense 224.3 7th 187.3 2nd
Points Per Game 29.0 23rd 15.3 2nd
3rd-Down Defense 34.9% 5th 42.1% 14th
4th-Down Defense 66.7% 21st 25.0% T-6th
Red Zone Defense (TD%) 69.2% 21st 50.0% T-6th
Team
Category Eagles Stat Eagles Rank 49ers Stat 49ers Rank
Turnover Diff. -7 32nd +3 T-5th
Total Penalties 19 19th 16 T-11th
Total Penalty Yards 143 16th 157 18th
Recap from Last Week’s Games.
Eagles - The Eagles welcomed the Cincinnati Bengals to Lincoln Financial Field seeking their first win over Cincinnati since 2000. After a scoreless first quarter, the two teams traded field goals in the second, before the Bengals took a 10-6 lead on a touchdown reception by Tee Higgins. Wentz responded on the ensuing drive, as he threw his 100th career touchdown pass to Greg Ward to put the Eagles in front 13-10 at halftime. After the Eagles added another Jake Elliott field goal, the Bengals reclaimed a one-point lead with Higgins' second touchdown of the afternoon. Cincinnati would pad its lead to seven points with two fourth-quarter field goals. Trailing 23-16 with just over 3 minutes left in regulation, Philadelphia drove down the field to score the game-tying touchdown on a 7-yard run for Wentz. In overtime, both defenses held strong, with neither team being able to get into field goal range until the final drive, when the Eagles got to the Bengals' 41. However, a costly false start on Matt Pryor brought Philadelphia out of field goal range. The Eagles punted the ball, and the game ended on the following play with the Bengals at their own 20. Despite his milestone, Wentz's struggles continued as he also threw two interceptions for the third straight game and finished the game with a 62.8 passer rating. Philadelphia improved to 0-2-1 with the tie, but failed to snap their winless streak against Cincinnati and fell to 0-3-2 in their last five against the Bengals, including an 0-2-1 mark at Lincoln Financial Field. This marked the Eagles' first tie since 2008, which was also against the Bengals.
49ers - The way the San Francisco 49ers played, missing quarterback Jimmy Garoppolo and a slew of starters wasn't an issue against the woeful and winless New York Giants, who were also missing their best player in Saquan Barkley. 49ers backup Nick Mullens threw for 343 yards and a touchdown and the Niners controlled the ball on offense, took it away on defense and had another easy day on the East Coast in a 36-9 win at MetLife Stadium Sunday. San Francisco scored on seven of its first eight possessions. It would have been all eight but a snap-hold problem led to Gould missing a 55-yarder. He connected from 52, 32 and 26 yards. The Niners' ninth possession ended the game.
Connections
49ers Practice Squad LB Joe Walker played 3 seasons for the Eagles from 2016-2018.
49ers Offensive Quality Control Coach Miles Austin played one season for the Eagles in 2015.
49ers Inside LB coach Demeco Ryans played 4 seasons for the Eagles from 2012-2015.
49ers Assistant Special Teams coach Michael Clay was a Defensive Special Assistant (2014) and Assistant Special Teams coach(2015) from 2014-2015.
49ers RB Raheem Mosert was signed as an undrafted free agent in 2015 and was placed on their practice squad before he was signed off the practice squad by the Miami Dolphins.
Eagles Special Teams coach Dave Fipp worked as the Assistant special teams coach for the 49ers from 2008-2010.
Eagles Senior Offensive Assistant Rich Scangarello worked as the QB coach for the 49ers from 2017-2018.
Eagles Senior Offensive Assistant Marty Mornhinweg worked for the 49ers as Offensive coordinator & quarterbacks coach from 1997-2000.
Eagles WR Marquise Goodwin played 3 seasons for the 49ers from 2017-2019.
2020 Pro Bowlers
Eagles 49ers
DT Fletcher Cox (Starter) FB Kyle Juszczyk (Starter)
OG Brandon Brooks (Starter) TE George Kittle (Starter)
C Jason Kelce (Starter) DE Nick Bosa (Starter)
LS Rick Lovato (Starter) CB Richard Sherman(Starter)
TE Zach Ertz
SS Malcom Jenkings (1st Alt)
OT Lane Johnson (1st Alt
General
Referee: Bill Vinovich
Dating back to 2005, Philadelphia has won 6 of its last 8 games vs. San Francisco. In the last meeting between the two teams, the Eagles defeated the 49ers, 33-10, at Lincoln Financial Field.
Additionally, Philadelphia has captured 4 of its previous 5 road games against San Francisco since 2002.
The Eagles defense, which collected a season-high 8.0 sacks in Week 3 vs. Cincinnati, is tied for the 3rd-most sacks (12.0) in the NFL, behind Pittsburgh (15.0) and Washington (13.0).
Brandon Graham is tied for the 5th-most sacks (team-high 3.0) in the NFL this season. He needs only 1.0 sack to surpass Hugh Douglas (54.5, 1998-2002, ‘04) for the 4th-most sacks in team history, trailing only Reggie White (124.0, 1985-92), Trent Cole (85.5, 2005-14) and Clyde Simmons (76.0, 1986-93).
Miles Sanders has produced the 7th-most rushing yards (190) in the NFL since Week 2 (95 rushing yards each against the Rams and Bengals). Sanders has also totaled 100+ scrimmage yards in 4 of his last 5 regular-season games.
Draft Picks
Eagles 49ers
WR Jalen Raegor DT Javon Kinlaw
QB Jalen Hurts WR Brandon Aiyuk
LB Davion Taylor OT Colton McKivitz
S K’Von Wallace TE Charlie Woerner
OT Jack Driscoll WR Jauan Jennings
WR John Hightower
LB Shaun Bradley
WR Quez Watkins
OT Prince Tega Wanogho
LB/DE Casey Toohill
Notable Off-season Additions
Eagles 49ers
S Will Parks OT Trent Williams
DT Javon Hargrave WR Mohamed Sanu
CB Nickell Robey-Coleman DT Kerry Hyder
CB Darius Slay C Hroniss Grasu
WR Tavon Austin
TE Jordan Reed
DE Dion Jordan
Notable Off-season Departures
Eagles 49ers
S Malcom Jenkins OT Joe Staley
CB Ronald Darby DT Deforest Buckner
RB Jordan Howard WR Emmanuel Sanders
WR Nelson Agholor WR Marquise Goodwin
OL Halapoulivaati Vaitai DT Sheldon Day
LB Kamu Grugler-Hill RG Mike Person
RB Darren Sproles TE Garret Celek
DT Timmy Jernigan
LB Nigel Bradham
Milestones
Eagles WR Desean Jackson (6397) needs 68 yards to move up to 3rd on the Eagles all-time receiving yards list all-time passing WR *Mike Quick
Eagles WR Desean Jackson (34) needs 2 TDs to move into a tie for 7th on the Eagles all-time receiving TD list tying WR Jeremy Maclin
Eagles DE Brandon Graham (54) needs 1 sack to move to 4th on the Eagles all-time sack list passing DE Hugh Douglas
Eagles DT Fletcher Cox (49) needs 1.5 sacks to move up to 6th on the Eagles all-time sack list tying DE Greg Brown
Eagles DE Vinny Curry (27.5) needs 2 sacks to move up to 18th on the Eagles all-time sack list tying DT Jerome Brown
49ers DE Arik Armstead(20) needs 2 sacks to move up to 20th on the 49ers all-time sack list passing OLB Parys Haralson.
Stats to Know
Receiving RBs
What if I told you the Niners have two of the league’s best receiving Running Backs? (Yes, one is hurt). What if I also told you the Eagles’ defenders are presently poop covering RBs against the pass? That about sums it up. Mr. McKinnon should have a fun day.
Matchups to Watch
Carson Wentz
This is the only real battle that matters since it's extremely difficult to win in the NFL with poor QB play. Wentz is among the worst QBs in the league to start the season and it could be a significant amount of time before he changes course. Even the most stalwart Wentz supporters must admit he is also a problem with this team right now. With that said, in order to win this game, and any game moving forward, the Eagles need Carson Wentz to improve. Philly can't use the injury excuse in this particular matchup as the Niners are one of the only teams to be in a similar or worse injury predicament than the Eagles. Even with the injuries, the Niners are able to show up and show out on a weekly basis... They are a great team. Wentz has had issues in all areas pertaining to play. He needs to be more precise, smarter, and more relaxed. This team sucks; it's likely no amount of heroism if going to pull this team from the depths of the league this season. The only thing Carson Wentz can do is his job. He's not responsible for coaching blunders, other injuries, or a GM that can't get anything right. Just get better and when he does, this team can actually be competitive.
Kyle Shanahan and his offensive genius vs Jim Schwartz and the LBs and Safeties
It should be no surprise the Eagles LBs and Safeties struggle in coverage as they did nothing in the offseason to add players that can cover. Plain and simple. This is a defense with a great defensive line, a great CB1, and that's it. They struggle to play consistent run defense now with the mediocre talent in the second and third levels. Kyle Shanahan is one of the most innovative offensive minds in the NFL; if you thought the thumping Sean McVay gave us was painful, wait until we see what's in store from the guy who mentored McVay. Shanahan lives for finding your weakest links in the LB and Safety rooms and exploiting that deficiency mercilessly. Nate Gerry is about to have his worst game ever - and that says something. George Kittle should return for this contest which is a tremendous mismatch that the Niners will exploit. Even the best cover guys in the league struggle against Kittle as he's just a monster. Shanahan will use all kinds of motion, misdirection, and play action that will cause this defense to struggle mightily absent some sort of miracle where they learn to play. I have faith that the defensive line can play well, but as we saw in week 2, all the motion, misdirection, and play action teams use can neutralize a pass rush. Lastly, can Schwartz even put his guys in better positions? Yeah, probably not.
Doug Pederson’s Offensive Game Plan vs the Niners Defense
I tried to have a more nuanced look at this matchup but it is difficult. The Eagles offense is marred by underachieving talent and injuries to start the season. Furthermore, they weren't given enough to work with by the front office but that is an entirely different discussion. Point blank: the offensive coaching staff, led by Doug Pederson, has struggled to consistently put its players in successful situations to start the season. It's not all Doug's fault but a large part of it is. There wasn't a real identity to this offense to start and that's only gotten worse 4 weeks in. This roster isn't going to suddenly improve overnight, if at all this season, so it's up to the coaching staff to help the offense succeed. There are a lot of new cooks involved in creating the offensive game plan but not enough overall direction from the man in charge. The Niners defense has plenty of injuries to key players as well; can they design a function offense built on spare parts to put up a fight? Or will they punt?
Special thanks to MikeTysonChicken and abenyishay for their help in creating this Game Preview.
submitted by Rsubs33 to eagles [link] [comments]


2020.09.28 21:10 mr_tyler_durden Notes and Highlights of Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear’s Live Update September 28, 2020

Notes and Highlights of Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear’s Live Update September 28, 2020
Notes by mr_tyler_durden and Daily Update Team
Register for your Absentee Ballot here!
Watch here:
Headlines
Full Notes
(continued in stickied comment)
submitted by mr_tyler_durden to Coronavirus_KY [link] [comments]


2020.09.21 02:12 dem0n0cracy Got the full text PDF to: 'Can a carnivore diet provide all essential nutrients?' by Amber L O'Hearn - October 2020 - Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes

Got the full text PDF to: 'Can a carnivore diet provide all essential nutrients?' by Amber L O'Hearn - October 2020 - Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes
https://sci-hub.tw/downloads/2020-09-08/e0/[email protected]#view=FitH
Purpose of review
The aim of this study was to summarize current contributions affecting knowledge and predictions about the nutritional adequacy of plant-free diets, contextualized by historical accounts. Recent findings As demonstrated in recent experiments, nutrient interactions and metabolic effects of ketogenic diets can impact nutritional needs, sometimes resulting in nutrient-sparing effects. Other studies highlight conflicting hypotheses about the expected effect on metabolic acidosis, and therefore mineral status, of adding alkaline mineral-rich vegetables.
Summary
A carnivore diet is a newly popular, but as yet sparsely studied form of ketogenic diet in which plant foods are eliminated such that all, or almost all, nutrition derives from animal sourced foods. Ketogenic diets are already nutritionally controversial due to their near-complete absence of carbohydrate and high dietary fat content, but most ketogenic diet advocates emphasize the inclusion of plant foods. In this review, we discuss the implications of relying solely on animal sourced foods in terms of essential nutrient status.
Keywords
acidosis, carnivore diet, ketogenic diet, nutritional adequacy, vitamin C
KEY POINTS
  • All essential nutrients can be found in animal sourced foods.
  • Some such nutrients are not commonly eaten in high enough amounts to meet recommended intakes.
  • Studies on individuals eating only meat did not reveal nutrient deficiencies.
  • Carnivore diet nutrient profiles and effects on metabolism may reduce or increase the needs for some nutrients.
  • More study is warranted to understand long term implications of plant-free diets.


Table 1

Introduction

A carnivore diet is based on animal sourced foods (ASFs), drawing no significant contribution from plants. Plant elimination is considered a key to the immunological benefits imputed to the diet, which is often promoted as effective against autoimmune conditions. This has been attributed to the exclusion of xenobiotic secondary metabolites [1& ]. Because ASFs are largely devoid of carbohydrate and relatively high in fat, carnivore diets are typically ketogenic as a side effect. The degree of ketogenesis on a carnivore diet varies mostly with the amount of protein consumed. Some varieties of the carnivore diet, such as the ‘Paleolithic Ketogenic Diet’ (PKD), explicitly require highly ketogenic macronutrient ratios (low protein, high fat) [2&&]. Whether a diet is considered ketogenic depends only on whether it causes sufficient ketogenesis such that serum ketone bodies rise above a clinically defined threshold, typically 0.5 mmol [3]. As such, its definition is agnostic about other dietary qualities, including nutritional completeness. For this reason, researchers often emphasize the importance of ketogenic diets being ‘well formulated’ [4]. Encouraging the inclusion of low-starch vegetables in ketogenic diets has been used as a point of agreement bridging otherwise clashing nutritional paradigms, because they are compatible with ketogenesis, and because there is a perceived consensus on their health benefits [5]. We argue here that although plants can certainly be used as sources essential nutrients, and can help with compliance by providing variety and pleasure, a well formulated ketogenic diet need not contain them to be nutritionally adequate. Historical data, biochemistry and physiology are considered.

Most essential nutrients are found in abundance in animal sourced foods

A cursory examination of food nutrient databases, such as the one provided by the United States Department of Agriculture [6], shows that technically speaking, there are no essential nutrients that cannot be found in at least some quantity in some ASF. Indeed, most are more available from animal sources. Some examples are provided in Table 1. This is intuitive in part because animals are made up of the components they require, and humans are similar enough to the animals we eat that there is no major divergence between needs and composition. Nonetheless, some nutrients are more common than others, or are distributed to more commonly eaten parts than others. Further, the rate of use of a given nutrient is not necessarily proportional to its ongoing level in the body. Moreover, it would be a mistake to automatically assume that all nutrients are efficiently extractable from a given source. Absorption, extraction and interconversion of nutrients depend on specific anatomy and physiology. Generally speaking, for humans, most required nutrients are more available and more bioavailable from ASF sources than from plant sources. Two notable exceptions we will consider in depth below are calcium and vitamin C. Whether it is possible to obtain adequate levels of all nutrients without extraordinary measures is contentious even within online communities promoting carnivore diets, in part because nutrient requirements are context dependent. Nutrient requirements depend on context As the recent discovery of vitamins last century, intensive initiatives have helped determine human nutrient needs across a variety of conditions [7]. Guidelines in the form of daily intake references are designed probabilistically [8]. That is, for an individual, meeting a recommended intake will ensure that the chances of inadequacy are very small. As such, they are necessarily overestimates for the average consumer. This is particularly desirable when designing a diet to be administered to many people, because there is little cost incurred by some people getting more than necessary for the benefit of ensuring that the vast majority get enough. Moreover, it is not possible to determine exact needs for each individual on every occasion. A particular individual has no basis for expecting to fall below the higher end of the spectrum, and would therefore be prudently advised to act as though he or she requires more than average. However, if the population receiving the recommendation differs systematically from the population on which the recommendations were derived, these recommendations may be significantly in error in a predictable way. Plant-free diets may thus entail some different rates of use for some nutrients due to nutrient interactions and metabolic effects. For example, ingestion of fibre can negatively affect the absorption of many vitamins and minerals [9], which could lower requirements of those nutrients for those not consuming fibre. Mineral absorption is also impaired in the presence of phytates [10]. Zinc absorption is particularly affected [11]. In a document jointly published by theWHO and the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations examining when fortification is warranted, it is estimated that those with diets very high in grains and legumes may absorb less than one-third as much zinc as those with more typical phytate intake [12]. It can therefore be inferred that those on a diet completely devoid of grains and legumes ought to require significantly less zinc than average. Metabolic effects can take various forms. It has been proposed [13] that as iodine is primarily used for the thyroid hormone triiodothyronine (T3) [12], and as ketogenic diets require less T3 for carbohydrate metabolism [14], the iodine requirement on a low carbohydrate diet may be much lower than on a high carbohydrate diet. Similarly, blood levels of the omega 3 fatty acid DHA are elevated on ketogenic diets [15]. This is thought to be due to reduced conversion to inflammatory eicosanoids [16]. Such preservation could impact essential fatty acid requirements. A second way metabolism can affect nutrient requirements is when there is contribution from synthesis by intestinal bacteria, and this bacterial activity changes due to the diet. Folate levels are increased significantly by ketogenic diets [17], and even by the intermittent fasting of Ramadan [18]. As shown by Mardinoglu et al. [19&&], this is due to increased intestinal microbial production, not intake.

Vitamin C

Vitamin C is an interesting case because despite the fact that meat is a relatively poor source, it has been recognized for centuries that meat has antiscorbutic properties. The following observations from C. Ralfe in an 1882 issue of the Lancet discussing this phenomenon [20] are representative: ’Sir, — I was struck by two independent observations which occurred in your columns last week with regard to the etiology of scurvy, both tending to controvert the generally received opinion that the exclusive cause of that disease is the prolonged and complete withdrawal of succulent vegetables from the dietary of those affected. Thus, Mr. Neale, of the Eira Arctic Expedition, says: ‘‘I do not think that spirit or limejuice is of much use as an antiscorbutic; for if you live on the flesh of the country, even, I believe, without vegetables, you will run very little risk of scurvy’’’. Dr. Lucas writes: ‘In the case of the semi-savage hill tribes of Afghanistan and Beluchistan their food contains a large amount of meat and is altogether devoid of vegetables. The singular immunity from scurvy of these races has struck me as a remarkable physiological circumstance, which should make us pause before accepting the vegetable doctrine in relation to scurvy’’ These observations do not stand alone. Arctic voyagers have long pointed out the antiscorbutic properties of fresh meat, and Baron Larrey, with regard to hot climates, arrived at the same conclusion in the Egyptian expedition under Bonaparte, at the end of last century. A candidate explanation for these observations is that many of the symptoms of scurvy are due to lack of carnitine, which can be derived endogenously using vitamin C, but can also be absorbed in large quantities from meat in the diet [21]. Given thatmeat is an excellent source of carnitine, it may be that the carnitine spares vitamin C that would otherwise be needed for its synthesis, while the small amounts of vitamin C it provides are enough for the remaining functions. Precipitous drops in muscle carnitine have been proposed to explain the early symptoms of scurvy, severe fatigue and muscle weakness, long before tissue lesions from impaired collagen synthesis appear [22]. On the contrary, because carnitine is used for fatty acid oxidation, which is upregulated in ketosis, it may be an example of a substance in higher demand in the ketogenic context, meaning that if carnitine itself is not adequately supplied, vitamin C requirements may instead be increased. Even though these kinds of sparing effects are plausible mechanistically, aside from folate, which has been clinically measured, it is impossible to know whether and to what extent they actually occur in practice. Empirical study under this dietary condition is sparse.

Empirical evidence

What little evidence exists for the sustainability of plant-free diets comes in three forms: reports on Arctic or nomadic societies, such as the Inuit or Mongolians or mountain herders as mentioned in the Lancet above, clinical case studies and anecdotes. The debates surrounding the degree of inclusion of plants in Arctic and nomadic societies are beyond the scope of this review. However, it is clear that in these environments, plant food sources would be exceedingly rare. Anecdotal evidence is also riddled with problems and won’t be considered further here. Of the clinical studies, one of the most informative is from early last century. In 1928, two Arctic explorers, the Harvard anthropologist Vilhjalmur Stefansson and his coexplorer Karsten Andersen, agreed to participate in a year-long study of eating only meat, after having been challenged about their claims to excellent health on plant-free, high-protein diets while living with indigenous people in the Arctic. Part of the experiment was conducted in a ward in Bellevue hospital. Several reports were published on different aspects of the results, including one in which it was specifically noted that there was no clinical evidence of vitamin deficiency [23]. The only comment related to a potential deficiency pertained to calcium, because the amount of calcium they ate was reportedly only a quarter of ‘the average mixed diet’, and, more importantly, they appeared to be in negative calcium balance [24]. According to another study [25], their blood calcium levels remained stable, but normal blood calcium levels are not necessarily an indication of sufficiency, because bone resorption can be used as a source to keep blood calcium at well tolerated levels [26]. Moreover, low carbohydrate diets have at least in one case been found to decrease calcium balance, which was presumed to be a function of acid load [27]. For this reason, high calcium, nonstarchy vegetables have been strongly recommended recently for inclusion in ketogenic diets [28]. On the contrary, another study measuring the effect of a high meat diet on calcium flux concluded that increased calcium absorption precisely compensated for increased excretion leaving no change in bone resorption [29]. Likewise, as discussed in a recent review of evidence for and against the hypothesis that meat eating causes bone resorption [30& ], it has been found that in ketogenic conditions, ketone generation increases or decreases dynamically as a compensatory response to challenge loads of exogenous acid or base [31]. Therefore, attempting to change acid balance through vegetable intake may be futile. In fact, it could actually add acidity despite containing alkaline minerals, as the detoxification of plant secondary compounds requires the production of organic acids that then must be buffered [32]. Increased protein intake can itself provide bicarbonate for this purpose, which is used by some animals when eating plants with high toxic loads [33]. In other words, there are plausible mechanisms predicting both an increase and a decrease of acidity, and so, the net result on acid-base balance by the addition of plant sources of bicarbonate to a meat-only diet remains unknown. As exemplified by the acid-buffering considerations, calcium balance is complicated by biochemically motivated changes in absorption or excretion. Other examples are reviewed in [26], including that absorption is positively affected by vitamin D status and exercise, whereas excretion is enhanced by simple lack of growth stimulus as seen in astronauts, reduced oestrogen levels and high sodium intake. Nonetheless, given that calcium balance was negative in the Bellevue study, and that calcium intake from meat alone is low, it may be a nutrient of concern, particularly in variations of the diet with no dairy intake, and no consumable bones for example from fish. Traditionally, Mongolians [34] and Bedouins [35] made extensive use of dairy, and Inuit ate small bones and reportedly chewed bones as well [36]. These animal sources of calcium may not be present in modern carnivore diets. Other clinical studies in which no nutrient deficiencies were observed include case reports from the International Center for Medical Nutritional Intervention (ICMNI), in which autoimmune patients are treated with low-to-no plant diets, for example [37,38]. These studies differ from the previous in that the individuals already present with substantial disease and may therefore have more acute nutrient needs. Organ consumption for nutritional adequacy is emphasized.

CONCLUSION

Every essential nutrient can be found in ASFs, but not always in high levels in commonly eaten ones. Some nutrients are rarer than others and may require planning if the goal is to guarantee meeting established recommended daily allowances. Because of systematic differences in metabolism and food matrix contexts, requirements on a carnivore diet may likewise differ systematically. Historical and clinical data suggest that all acute micronutrient needs can be met without plants, but long-term consequences are unknown. Calcium levels in particular may be compromised over time, and merit further study, especially in order to disentangle effects of acidity, bone growth stimulation and interacting nutrients.
Acknowledgements None.
Financial support and sponsorship None.
Conflicts of interest There are no conflicts of interest.

  1. & O’Hearn LA. A survey of improvements experienced on a carnivore diet compared to only carbohydrate restriction. OSF 2019. doi:10.17605/OSF.IO/5FU4D. This is the first survey reported on carnivore diets, and the only one attempting to distinguish between observations on a carnivore diet from those on low carb generally 2. && Clemens Z. Paleolithic ketogenic diet (PKD) in chronic diseases: clinical and research data. J Evol Health 2018; 3:. This extended abstract describes clinical observations from therapeutic plant-free diets including case study summaries, and highlights improvements seen over classical ketogenic diets. 3. Gibson AA, Seimon RV, Lee CMY, et al. Do ketogenic diets really suppress appetite? A systematic review and meta-analysis: do ketogenic diets really suppress appetite? Obes Rev 2015; 16:64–76. 4. Volek J, Phinney SD. The art and science of low carbohydrate living: an expert guide to making the life-saving benefits of carbohydrate restriction sustainable and enjoyable. Beyond Obes 2011; 316. The Art and Science of Low Carbohydrate Living. Published May 19th 2011 by Beyond Obesity LLC. ISBN 0983490708 (ISBN13: 9780983490708). 5. Miller VJ, Villamena FA, Volek JS. Nutritional ketosis and mitohormesis: potential implications for mitochondrial function and human health. J Nutr Metab 2018; 2018:5157645. 6. USDA Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies 2015–2016. Food Surveys Research Group Home Page. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service; 2018. 7. Semba RD. The discovery of the vitamins. Int J Vitam Nutr Res 2012; 82:310–315. 8. Harper AE. Evolution of recommended dietary allowances – new directions? Ann Rev Nutr 1987; 7:509–537. 9. Adams S, Sello C, Qin GX, et al. Does dietary fiber affect the levels of nutritional components after feed formulation? Fibers 2018; 6:29. 10. Bohn L, Meyer AS, Rasmussen SrK. Phytate: impact on environment and human nutrition. A challenge for molecular breeding. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B 2008; 9:165–191. 11. Lo¨ nnerdal B. Dietary factors influencing zinc absorption. J Nutr 2000; 130:1378S–1383S. 12. Allen L; World Health Organization. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Guidelines on Food fortification with micronutrients. Geneva; Rome: World Health Organization; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2006. 13. Kopp W. Nutrition, evolution and thyroid hormone levels – a link to iodine deficiency disorders? Med Hypotheses 2004; 62:871–875. 14. Danforth E, Horton ES, O’Connell M, et al. Dietary-induced alterations in thyroid hormone metabolism during overnutrition. J Clin Invest 1979; 64:1336–1347. 15. Fraser DD, Whiting S, Andrew RD, et al. Elevated polyunsaturated fatty acids in blood serum obtained from children on the ketogenic diet. Neurology 2003; 60:1026–1029. 16. Forsythe CE, Phinney SD, Fernandez ML, et al. Comparison of low fat and low carbohydrate diets on circulating fatty acid composition and markers of inflammation. Lipids 2008; 43:65–77. 17. Urbain P, Strom L, Morawski L, et al. Impact of a 6-week non-energy-restricted ketogenic diet on physical fitness, body composition and biochemical parameters in healthy adults. Nutr Metab (Lond) 2017; 14:17. 18. Aksungar FB, Topkaya AE, Akyildiz M. Interleukin-6, C-reactive protein and biochemical parameters during prolonged intermittent fasting. Ann Nutr Metab 2007; 51:88–95. 19. && Mardinoglu A, Wu H, Bjornson E, et al. An integrated understanding of the rapid metabolic benefits of a carbohydrate-restricted diet on hepatic steatosis in humans. Cell Metab 2018; 27:559–571.e5. This study demonstrates rapid benefits of a low carb diet on intestinal microbiota affecting dietary nutrients. 20. Ralfe C. Scurvy. Lancet 1882; 120:959–960. 21. Evans AM, Fornasini G. Pharmacokinetics of L-carnitine. Clin Pharmacokinet 2003; 42:941–967. 22. Hughes RE, Hurley RJ, Jones E. Dietary ascorbic acid and muscle carnitine (b-OH-g-(trimethylamino) butyric acid) in guinea-pigs. Br J Nutr 1980; 43:385. 23. Mcclellan S, Rupp R, Toscani V. Prolonged meat diets with a study of the metabolism of nitrogen, calcium and phosphorus. J Biol Chem 1930; 87:669–680. 24. McClellan WS, Bois EFD, Clinical Calorimetry XLV. Prolonged meat diets with a study of kidney function and ketosis. J Biol Chem 1930; 87:651–668. 25. Lieb CW. The effects on human beings of a twelve months’ exclusive meat diet: based on intensive clinical and laboratory studies on two arctic explorers living under average conditions in a New York climate. J Am Med Assoc 1929; 93:20. 26. Ross AC, Manson JE, Abrams SA, et al. The 2011 report on dietary reference intakes for calcium and vitamin D from the Institute of Medicine: what clinicians need to know. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2011; 96:53–58. 27. Reddy ST, Wang CY, Sakhaee K, et al. Effect of low-carbohydrate highprotein diets on acid-base balance, stone-forming propensity, and calcium metabolism. Am J Kidney Dis 2002; 40:265–274. 28. Yuen AWC, Walcutt IA, Sander JW. An acidosis-sparing ketogenic (ASK) diet to improve efficacy and reduce adverse effects in the treatment of refractory epilepsy. Epilepsy Behav 2017; 74:15–21. 29. Cao JJ, Johnson LK, Hunt JR. A diet high in meat protein and potential renal acid load increases fractional calcium absorption and urinary calcium excretion without affecting markers of bone resorption or formation in postmenopausal women. J Nutr 2011; 141:391–397. 30. & Frassetto L, Banerjee T, Powe N, Sebastian A. Acid balance, dietary acid load, and bone effects: a controversial subject. Nutrients 2018; 10:517. The authors synthesize arguments and data from both sides of the controversies about meat eating and bone health, showing that acute and long-term effects are not always concordant. 31. Hood VL, Tannen RL. Protection of acid–base balance by ph regulation of acid production. N Engl J Med 1998; 339:819–826. 32. Foley WJ, McLean S, Cork SJ. Consequences of biotransformation of plant secondary metabolites on acid-base metabolism in mammals: a final common pathway? J Chem Ecol 1995; 21:721–743. 33. Levey DJ, del Rio CM. It takes guts (and more) to eat fruit: lessons from avian nutritional ecology. The Auk 2001; 118:819–831. 34. May TM; Culture and Customs of Mongolia. Culture and customs of Asia. New York: Greenwood Press; 2009. 35. Leshem M, Saadi A, Alem N, Hendi K. Enhanced salt appetite, diet and drinking in traditional bedouin women in the Negev. Appetite 2008; 50:71–82. 36. Mackey MG. The impact of imported foods on the traditional Inuit diet. Arctic Med Res 1988; 47 Suppl 1:128–133. 37. To´th C, Clemens Z. A child with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) successfully treated with the paleolithic ketogenic diet: a 19-month insulin-freedom. Int J Case Rep Images 2015; 6:752–757. 38. To´ th C, Dabo´ czi A, Howard M, et al. Crohn’s disease successfully treated with the paleolithic ketogenic diet. Int J Case Rep Images 2016; 7:570–578.
submitted by dem0n0cracy to ketoscience [link] [comments]


2020.09.17 19:27 stake_pool Update and Few Thoughts, a (Well-Typed) transcript: Liza&Charles the marketeers, Voltaire kick-off, PrisM and Ebb-and-Flow to fuck ETH2.0 Gasper, the (back)log of a man and a falcon, lots of companies, September Goguen time, Basho, 2021 Titans, Basho, Hydra and much more thoughts and prayers

Hi everybody this is Charles Hoskinson broadcasting live from warm sunny Colorado. I'm trying a new streaming service and it allows me to annotate a few things and simulcast to both periscope and youtube. Let's see how this works. I also get to put a little caption. I think for the future, I'm just for a while going to put: "I will never give away ada". So, when people repost my videos for giveaway scams they at least have that. First off, a thank you, a community member named Daryl had decided to carve a log and give his artistic impression of my twitter profile picture of me and the falcon so that always means a lot when I get these gifts from fans and also I just wanted to, on the back of the Catalyst presentation, express my profound gratitude and excitement to the community.
You know it's really really cool to see how much progress has been made in such a short period of time. It was only yesterday when we were saying "when Shelley"? Now Shelley's out and it's evolving rapidly. Voltaire is now starting to evolve rapidly and we're real close to Goguen. At the end of this month we'll be able to talk around some of the realities of Goguen and some of the ideas we have and give some dates for certain things and give you a sense of where that project is at. The good news is that we have gained an enormous amount of progress and knowledge about what we need to do and how to get that done and basically people are just executing and it's a much smaller task than getting us to Shelley. With Byron to Shelley we literally had to build a completely new cryptocurrency from the ground up. We had to have new ledger rules, new update system, we had to invent a way of transitioning from one system to another system and there's hundreds of other little innovations along the way: new network stack and so forth. Byron cosmetically looks like Shelley but under the hood it's completely different and the Shelley design was built with a lot of the things that we needed for Goguen in mind. For example, we built Shelley with the idea of extended UTXO and we built Shelley understanding what the realities were for the smart contract model and that's one of the advantages you get when you do this type of bespoke engineering. There's two consequences to that, one, the integration is significantly easier, and two, the integration is significantly faster. We won't look at that same complexity there.
The product update at the end of the month... We'll really start discussing around some of these things as well as talk about partners and talk about how the development ecosystem is going to evolve. There are a lot of threads throughout all three organizations that are happening simultaneously. Emurgo, they're really thinking deeply about DeFi and they've invited us to collaborate with them on things like stablecoins for example but we're also looking at oracles (oracle pools), DEX and these other things and because there are already people in market who have made mistakes, learned lessons, it gives us the benefit of hindsight. It means we can be much faster to market and we can build much more competitive things in market and the Cardano community gets first access to these next generation DeFi applications without a lot of the problems of the prior generations and that's super beneficial to us.
You know, the other side of it, is that Voltaire is going to have a systemic influence not just on community funding but also the overall evolution and direction of the platform. The longer it exists the more pervasive it will become. Probably first applied towards the Cardano foundation roadmap but later on it will definitely have a lot of influence and say over every element aspect of the system including the launch dApps and these other things. Basically, long term, the types of problems that Cardano solves so that's incredibly appealing to me and very exciting to me because it's like I have this giant community brain with the best and brightest of all of you working with us to get us where we need to go.
You know, another thing that was super encouraging, it's a small thing, but it shows us that we're definitely in the right direction was that we recently got a demo from Pramod (Viswanath) and his team out of university of Illinois on a protocol they create called PrisM which is a super fast proof-of-work protocol and they wrote this beautiful paper and they wrote code along with it that showed that PrisM is a ten thousand times faster than Nakamoto consensus. If you take the bitcoin proof-of-work protocol, you strip it out, you put PrisM in, you can run the entire bitcoin system 10000 times faster. They have these beautiful benchmarks to show that. Even in bad network conditions. (I'm) promoting this team, they're, they're real researchers, and they're real engineers, they use a lot of cool HPC concepts like springboarding and other things like that to accommodate that. Then I asked him in the presentation, I said well, how much faster if you replay the Ethereum chain? He says, well, that it takes a big performance hit, could be only maybe a hundred times because that model is not as easy to optimize and shard with standard computer science concepts. In fact in some cases there are limitations there that really can't be overcome. It turns out that we're more on that UTXO side than we are on the account side. As a coincidence or intent of the design of extended UTXO we're gonna have a lot easier time getting much higher performance where and when it's necessary.
I also approved this week a scaling up of the Basho project. In particular, to build a hydra prototype team. The science has gotten to a point where we can make a really competitive push in that particular direction. What does that mean? It means that in just a few short months we can de-risk technological approaches that long-term will give us a lot of fruit where and when the community decides that they need infrastructure like hydra. Now, here's the beautiful thing about hydra. If you watch my whiteboard back in September of 2017 when Cardano first hit market with Byron I talked about this concept of looking at scalability with a very simple test which is as you get more people in the system it stays at the same performance or it gets faster. We all experience systems that do this, for example, bittorrent, more people downloading something you tend to be able to get it faster and we all experience the converse which is, the system gets slower when you get more people. What does this mean? It means that hydra is an actual approach towards true scalability in the system and it's a lot easier to do than sharding even though we have a beautiful approach to get the sharding on the ledger side if we truly desire to go down that way. There's beautiful ideas that we are definitely in deep discussions about. That's a very complex thing. There was recently a paper ("Ebb-and-Flow Protocols: A Resolution of the Availability-Finality Dilemma") out of Stanford that showed that the Gasper protocol as proposed for ETH2.0 does have some security concerns and it's going to be the burden on the shoulders of the Ethereum 2.0 developers and Vitalik to address those concerns from those Stanford professors. Whenever you have these very complex protocols they have so many different ways they can break and things can go wrong so it's much more appealing when you don't have to embrace complexity to achieve the same. The elegance of hydra is that stake pool operators are very natural parties to put hydra channels on and every time we add one we get much more performance out of that and the system as it gets more valuable. The k factor increases which means you get more stake pull operators, which means you get more hydra channels, so with growth we get appreciation, with appreciation we get more decentralization, with more decentralization we get more performance. In essence, this spiritually speaking, is really what we meant when we said scalability. That the system will always grow to meet its particular needs and we have a very elegant way of moving in that direction that doesn't require us to embrace very sophisticated techniques. It's not to say that these techniques don't have a place and purpose but it says that the urgency of implementing these is gone and we then have the luxury to pick the best science when it's ready instead of rushing it to market to resolve a crisis of high fees. We'll never have that crisis so there's a beauty to Cardano that is missing, I in my view, from many cryptocurrencies and blockchains in the marketplace and we're now seeing that beauty shine through. Not only through our community who are so passionate and amazing but in the science and the engineering itself and how easy it is for us to navigate the concepts. How easy it is for us to add more things, to take some things away, to clean some things up here and there and our ability to move through.
I never imagined when in 2015 I signed up to go in on this crazy ride and try to build a world financial operating system we would have made as much progress as we made today. We've written more than 75 research papers as an organization many of which are directly applicable to Cardano. We've got great partners who work with Nasa and Boeing and Pfizer, massive companies, that have 10 years of history and millions of users to come in and help us grow better. We've worked with incredible organizations, major universities like university of Wyoming, university of Edinburgh, Tokyo, tech professors all across the world. We've worked with incredible engineering firms like VacuumLabs and AtixLabs and Twig and Well-Typed, runtime verification, QuviQ and dozens of others along the years and despite the fact that at times there's been delays and friction throughout this entire journey we've mostly been aligned and we keep learning and growing. It gives me so much hope that our best days are ahead of us and an almost fanatical belief that success is inevitable in a certain respect. You see because we always find a way to be here tomorrow and we always find a way to make tomorrow a better day than today and as long as that's the trend you're monotonically increasing towards a better tomorrow, you're always going to have that outcome, you're always going to be in a position where Cardano shines bright. Towards the end of the month we'll have a lot more to say about the development side and that'll be a beginning just like Voltaire is the beginning and then suddenly you now notice the beautiful parallelism of the roadmap. Shelley continues to evolve, partial delegation is coming, in fact, I signed the contract with vacuumlabs to bring that to Ledger (and Trezor). The Daedalus team is hard at work to make that feature apparent for everyone as is the Yoroi team.
You see that, with now Voltaire, and soon was Goguen, and these are not endpoints, rather they're just beginnings and they're never over. We can always make staking better, more diverse, more merit-based and entertain different control models, have better delegation mechanics, have better user experience. The same for smart contracts, that's an endless river and along the way what we've discovered is it's easy for us to work with great minds and great people. For example with testing of smart contracts I would love to diversify that conversation above and beyond what we can come up with and bring in some firms who have done this for a long time to basically take that part with us shoulder to shoulder and build beautiful frameworks to assist us. For example, runtime verification is doing this with, the EVM with a beautiful project called Firefly to replace Truffle. I believe that we can achieve similar ends with Plutus smart contracts.
When you ask yourself what makes a system competitive in the cryptocurrency space? In my view there are four dimensions and you have to have a good story for all four of those dimensions. You need security and correctness. A lot of people don't prioritize that but when they get that wrong it hurts retail people, it hurts everyday people, billions of dollars have been lost due to the incompetence and ineptitude of junior developers making very bad mistakes and oftentimes those developers faced no consequences. The people who lost money were innocent people who believed in cryptocurrencies and wanted to be part of the movement but didn't protect themselves adequately. That's a really sad thing and it's unethical to continue pushing a model that that is the standard or the likely outcome rather than a rare edge case. You have to as a platform, a third generation platformn invest heavily in giving the developers proper tools to ensure security and correctness. We've seen a whole industry there's been great innovations out of Quantstamp and ConsenSys and dozens of other firms in the space including runtime verification who have really made major leaps in the last few years of trying to improve that story. What's unique to Cardano is that we based our foundations on languages that were designed right the first time and there's over 35 years of history for the approach that we're following in the Haskell side that allows us to build high assurance systems and our developers in the ecosystem to build high assurance systems. We didn't reinvent the wheel, we found the best wheel and we're giving it to you.
I think we're going to be dominant in that respect as we enter 2021. Second, you look at things like ease of maintenance, ease of deployment, the life cycle of the software upgrades to the software and as we've demonstrated with things like the hard fork combinator and the fact that Voltaire is not just a governance layer for ada and Cardano but will eventually be reusable for any dApp deployed on our system. You have very natural tooling that's going to allow people to upgrade their smart contracts, their dApps and enable governance for their users at an incredibly low cost and not have to reinvent the governance wheel each and every application. This is another unique property to our system and it can be reused for the dApps that you deploy on your system as I've mentioned before. Performance is a significant concern and this was often corrupted by marketers especially ICO marketers who really wanted to differentiate (and) say: "our protocol tested on a single server in someone's basement is 500000 transactions per second" and somehow that translates to real life performance and that's antithetical to anyone who's ever to study distributed systems and understands the reality of these systems and where they go and what they do and in terms of performance. I think we have the most logical approach. You know, we have 10 years of history with bitcoin, it's a massive system, we've learned a huge amount and there's a lot of papers written about, a lot of practical projects and bitcoin is about to step into the world of smart contracts. We congratulate them on getting Schnorr sigs in and the success of Taproot. That means entering 2021, 2022, we are going to start seeing legitimate dApps DeFi projects, real applications, instead of choosing Ethereum or Algorand, EOS, Cardano, choosing bitcoin and they're adding a lot to that conversation. I think that ultimately that model has a lot of promise which is why we built a better one. There are still significant limitations with what bitcoin can accomplish from settlement time to the verbosity of contracts that can be written.
The extended UTXO model was designed to be the fastest accounting and most charitable accounting model ever, on and off chain, and hydra was designed to allow you to flex between those two systems seamlessly. When you look at the foundations of where we're at and how we can extend this from domain specific languages, for domain experts, such as Marlowe to financial experts, and the DSLs that will come later, for others, like lawyers and supply chain experts in medical databases and so forth and how easy it is to write and deploy these. Plutus being beautiful glue code for both on and off chain communications. I think we have an incredibly competitive offering for performance and when hydra comes, simply put, there'll be no one faster. If we need to shard, we're going to do that and definitely better than anybody else because we know where our security model sits and there won't be surprise Stanford papers to blindside us that require immediate addressing.
In terms of operating costs, this is the last component, in my view, and that's basically how much does it cost you the developer to run your application? There are really two dimensions, one is predictability and the other is amount. It's not just good enough to say: it's a penny per transaction today. You need to know that after you spend millions of dollars and months or years of effort building something and deploying something that you're not going to wake up tomorrow and now it's five dollars to do what used to cost a penny. You need that cost to be as low as possible and as predictable as possible and again the way that we architectured our system and as we turn things on towards the end of this year and as we enter into the next year we believe we have a great approach to achieve low operating cost. One person asks why Cardano? Well because we have great security and correctness in the development experience and tools with 35 years of legacy that were built right the first time and don't put the burdens of mistakes on your customers. They ask why Cardano and we say: well the chain itself is going to give you great solutions with identity value transformation and governance itself and as a consequence when you talk about upgrading your applications having a relationship with your customers of your applications and you talk about the ease of maintenance of those applications. There's going to be a good story there and we have beautiful frameworks like Voltaire that allow that story to evolve and we keep adding partners and who have decades of experience to get us along. We won't stop until it's much better. They asked why Cardano? We said because at the moment we're 10 times faster today than Ethereum today and that's all we really need for this year and next year to be honest and in the future we can be as fast as we need to be because we're truly scalable. As the system gets more decentralized the system improves performance and where and when we need to shard we can do that. We'll have the luxury of time to do it right, the Cardano way, and when people ask why Cardano? Because the reality is, it's very cheap to do things on our platform and the way we're building things. That's going to continue being the case and we have the governance mechanisms to allow the community to readjust fees and parameters so that it can continue being affordable for users. Everything in the system will eventually be customizable and parameterizable: from block size, to transaction fees and the community will be in a good position to dynamically allocate these things where and when needed so that we can enjoy as an ecosystem predictability in our cost.
In the coming weeks and months, especially in my company, we're going to invest a lot of time and effort into comparison marketing and product marketing. When I see people say, oh well, you've launched proof of stake, a lot of other people have done. I don't think those people fully appreciate the magnitude of what we actually accomplished as an ecosystem and the quality of the protocols that are in distribution. That's not their fault, it's our fault, because we didn't take the time in simplistic terms, not scientific papers and deep code and formal specifications, but rather everyday language, to really show why we're different. I admit that that's a product failing and that needs to be corrected so we hired a great marketing director, named Liza (Horowitz?) and she is going to work full time with me and others in the ecosystem, a great team of people, every single day to get out there and explain what we have done is novel, unique, competitive and special to our industry. Everything from Ouroboros and contrast to major other protocols from the EOSes and Algorands and the Tezos of the world. Why we're different, trade-offs we chose over them, to our network stack, to the extended UTXO model, to Plutus, to Marlowe and we're going to keep hammering away at that until we get it right and everybody acknowledges and sees what has been accomplished.
I've spent five years of my life, good years of my life, and missed a lot to get this project where it needs to go. All of our employees have invested huge sums of their personal lives, their time, their brand, their careers, in trying to make this the really most magical and special cryptocurrency and blockchain infrastructure around. No one ever signed up in this company or the other companies working on Cardano to work on a mediocre protocol. That's just another blockchain, they signed up to change the world, they signed up to build a system that legitimately can look at you in the face and say: one day we have the potential to have a billion users! That's what they signed up for and they showed up to play. They built technology that evolves in that direction with some certainty and great foundations and we have an obligation to market in a way that can show the world why, succinctly, with clarity. Understandably, this has been a failing in the past but you know what? You can always be better tomorrow that monotonically increasing make it better and that's what we're going to do. We recognized it and we're going to invest in it and with Voltaire if we can't do it. You the community can do it and we'll work with you. If you can do a better job and the funding will be there to get that done. In addition to this, we think about 2021 and we ask where does the future take us? I've thought a lot about this you know I've thought a lot about how do we get the next five years as we close out 2020 and here's the reality: we're not going to leave as a company until we have smart contracts and multi-asset and Voltaire has evolved to a point where the community can comfortably make decisions about the future of the protocol and that the staking experience has solidified and it's stable.
I don't care if this costs me millions or tens of millions of dollars out of my own pocket to make happen. I'm going to do that because that's my commitment to you, the community and every product update will keep pushing our way there. We'll continue to get more transparent, we'll continue to get more aggressive and hire more and parallelize more. Aware when we can, to deliver that experience so that Cardano gets where it needs to go. Then when we ask about where do we go next? The reality is that the science as an industry, the engineering as an industry has given a menu of incredibly unique attractive and sexy things that we can pursue. What we're going to do is work with the community and the very same tools that are turning on today, the Voltaire tools, the cardano.ideascale.com tools and we're going to propose a consortium and we're going to bring the best and brightest together and give a vision of where we can take the system in another five years. With the benefit of hindsight, massively improved processes, better estimation capabilities and the fact that we're not starting with two people at IOG. We're starting with 250 people and the best scientific division in our industry and the legacy of almost, nearly by the end of this year, 100 scientific papers. That's us, you know what, there's dozens of companies throughout the history who have worked on Cardano. It's about time to scale them up too and get client diversity. So come next year when the protocol has evolved to the point where it's ready for it, we'll have that conversation with you the community and that's going to be a beautiful conversation. At the conclusion of it, there's going to be certainty of how we're going to evolve over the next five years to get ourselves beyond the cryptocurrency space. I'm very tired of these conversations we have about: are you going to go to (coindesk's) consensus or not? Or who's going to be the big winner? What about Libra or what about this particular regulation and this crypto unicorn and this thing?
You know I've been in the space a long time and I've noticed that people keep saying the same things year after year in the same venues. Yes, the crowd sizes get larger and the amount of value at risk gets larger but I haven't seen a lot of progress in the places where I feel it is absolutely necessary for this technology to be permanent in the developing world. We need to see economic identity. People often ask what is the mission for Cardano? For us IOG, you look at economic identity and you take a look at a roadmap. For it, you scale up and down, and each and every step along the way, from open data, to self-sovereign identity, to financial inclusion. You can keep going down: to decentralized lending, decentralized insurance, decentralized banking. Each and every step along the way to economic identity. When you admit a blockchain tells you that, there's a collection of applications and infrastructure that you need to build.
My life's work is to get to a point where we have the technology to do that. The infrastructure to do that, with principles, and so we'll keep evolving Cardano and we'll keep evolving the space as a whole and the science as a whole until I can wake up and say: each box and that road to economic identity, for all people not just one group, we have a solution for that. I'm going to put those applications on Cardano and success for me is not about us being king of the crypto hill and having a higher market cap than bitcoin or being entrepreneur of the year coindesk's most influential person. It's meaningless noise, success for me is reflecting back at the things that we have accomplished together and recognizing that millions if not billions now live in a system where they all matter, they all have a voice, they all have an equal footing. The Jeff Bezos of the world have the very same experience as the person born in Rwanda and we're not done until that's the case. It's a long road, it's a hard road, but you know what? We're making progress, we have great people in Africa, we have great people in eastern Europe, we have great people in southeast Asia and great partners all along the way. Great people, Latin America, great people in south America, great people here in the United States.
When we talk about economic identity there are millions, if not tens of millions of Americans who don't have it. Same for Canadians, hundreds of thousands, who don't have it. Developed western cultures, it's the greatest blind spot of policy and as we enter into a depression as a result of coronavirus, add millions if not tens of millions more onto that list. Generations are being disenfranchised by this legacy system and we as an ecosystem, we as an entire community are offering a different way forward. Not hyper centralizationn not social credit but a way forward where you own your own money, your own identity, your own data. You're not a victim of surveillance capitalism, you're not a victim of civil asset forfeiture. When you say the wrong things, you get shut out of society. Each and every human being matters and I'm optimistic to believe that when you remind people that they matter they're gonna rise to the occasion. That is the point of my company. In the things that we do each and every day, that's our mission to give the platforms to the world so that those who don't have economic identity can get it and they can keep it and no one can take it from them and they can enjoy an ever increasing growth of standard of living wealth and prosperity.
However you want to measure that this is my goal post, I couldn't care less about the cryptocurrency space. It was a great place to start but the space needs to be reminded why it exists. Bitcoin was given a mandate on the back of the 2008 financial crisis to do something different. It was not given a mandate to go be a new settlement layer for central banks or a new way for the old guard to make more money and banks get bigger and for those who are in control to preserve their power. The whole point of doing something so crazy as to buy a coin that doesn't even exist in real life, that's just a bunch of numbers in the cloud, the whole point of that was so that we as a society could do something different than the way that we'd been doing things before. So, each and every member of the cryptocurrency space needs to remind everyone else from time to time why we're here and where did we come from and where are we going to go.
The beauty of Cardano is we have already achieved for the most part a decentralized brain and that momentum is pushing harder than ever. More and more scientists are waking up, more and more institutions are waking up, getting us there. The code we have, the right approach and I think we have a great competitive offering for 2021 as we go and battle the titans and that's going to be a lot of fun but we know who we are and where we're going and we're in the right places. It's so incredibly encouraging to see the stake pool operators not just be from California or Texas or New York or Canada. To see a lot of stake pool operators from the place that need the most, help everybody does matter and it means a lot to me for the people who are there but it means a lot to everybody to say that we have created an equal platform. It makes the participation of all of us so much more meaningful. We're not just talking to each other, we're talking to the world and by working together on this platform we're lifting the world up and giving people hope. That's the point, there's a lot more to do, we didn't get everything done. You never do you aspire, you work hard, you set a moon, shot and sometimes you can just get to orbit with the first go but you know what? When you build the next rocket you can go to Mars.
Thank you all for being with me, thank you all for being part of this. Today was a damn good day with the announcement of Voltaire. Go to cardano.ideascale.com. You can participate in that, so end of September is going to be a good day too. There's a lot of good days to come, in between a lot of hard days, doing tasks sometimes entirely forgettable but always necessary to keep the revolution going and the movement going. I cannot wait for 2021, our best days are ahead of us, because of you. You all take care now .
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFa9zL_Dl_w
Other things mentioned:
https://cardano.ideascale.com/
https://www.atixlabs.com/blockchain
https://www.well-typed.com/
https://www.vacuumlabs.com/
https://medium.com/interdax/what-is-taproot-and-how-will-it-benefit-bitcoin-5c8944eed8da
https://medium.com/interdax/how-will-schnorr-signatures-benefit-bitcoin-b4482cf85d40
https://quantstamp.com/
https://bloxian.com/bloxian-platforms/ (TWIG)
https://runtimeverification.com/firefly/
https://www.trufflesuite.com/
https://experts.illinois.edu/en/publications/prism-deconstructing-the-blockchain-to-approach-physical-limits (PrisM and not our Prism https://atalaprism.io/)
Ebb-and-Flow Protocols: A Resolution of the Availability-Finality Dilemma (aka Gasper and ETH2.0 fucker) https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.04987
http://www.quviq.com/products/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schnorr_signature
submitted by stake_pool to cardano [link] [comments]