SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

   Non-TechKirk's Market Thoughts


Previous 10 Next 10 
To: Winfastorlose who wrote (10452)10/19/2020 12:19:26 PM
From: Kirk ©
1 Recommendation   of 15350
 
Do you believe these numbers from behind the wall?
  • 4.9% Chinese GDP growth is less than expected but it is still a nice gain over Q2 and Q1.
  • China’s headline unemployment fell to 5.4% in September, lower than August’s 5.6% rate

How did they do so much better than the US and most of Europe and India?



seekingalpha.com

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Winfastorlose who wrote (10452)10/19/2020 9:04:11 PM
From: Kirk ©
1 Recommendation   of 15350
 
Your guy should use this headline in the next debate

Downtown San Francisco Walgreens to close following months of rampant shoplifting

Walgreens spokesman Phil Caruso said the store will close on Nov. 11 and it's the seventh Walgreens store to close in the city this year. According to the Chronicle, Caruso added, "the safety of our team members and customers is our top concern."

"All of us knew it was coming. Whenever we go in there, they always have problems with shoplifters, " longtime customer Sebastian Luke said to the Matier. He lives a block away and is a frequent customer who has been posting photos of the thefts for months.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Kirk © who wrote (10472)10/19/2020 11:05:42 PM
From: Kirk ©
   of 15350
 
What do the top 10 cities have in common?

San Francisco ranked 5th 'rattiest city' in the US, report says
Monday, October 19, 2020 12:44PM
Here is how the top 10 looks:
1. Chicago
2. Los Angeles
3. New York
4. Washington, D.C.
5. San Francisco
6. Detroit
7. Philadelphia (+3)
8. Baltimore (+4)
9. Denver
10. Minneapolis (-2)
SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) -- San Francisco is being recognized for something no city wants.

Pest control service Orkin lists San Francisco among the "rattiest" places in the U.S. In fact, it's number five on the list of most infested cities.

Orkin says it ranked metro regions by the number of new rodent treatments performed from Sept. 1, 2019 to Aug. 31, 2020, including homes and businesses.

"As reported in the spring, the pandemic-driven closure of restaurants forced rodents to find new food sources. Without food waste to consume, these pests were seen scavenging new areas and exhibiting unusual or aggressive behavior," the company said in a press release earlier this week.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Kirk © who wrote (10471)10/20/2020 3:12:11 AM
From: Winfastorlose
2 Recommendations   of 15350
 
New Stanford Study Suggests Biden's Agenda Will Have 4 Devastating Economic Consequences

.

The study concludes that Biden’s interventions would, among other things, distort labor incentives, decrease productivity, and kill jobs.

As a result, the experts project that the policy agenda would, by 2030, lead to 4.9 million fewer jobs and the economy shrinking by $2.6 trillion. So, too, the study projects that consumption would be $1.5 trillion lower in 2030 and families would see a $6,500 drop in median household income compared to a neutral scenario.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (3)


To: Winfastorlose who wrote (10474)10/20/2020 11:17:53 AM
From: Kirk ©
1 Recommendation   of 15350
 
Thanks. Here is a direct link to the study for those who question the source.

It is funny. To me this has been so obvious since high school when I argued with young, liberal social studies teachers that corporations that provide jobs should not be taxed... tax the workers and or total sales instead.

hoover.org

VIII. Conclusions

We reach three key conclusions as to the effects of Vice President Biden’s full policy agenda
on tax and productivity wedges. First, transportation and electricity will require a lot more
inputs (including 1.3 million net additional energy workers) to produce the same outputs
due to Vice President Biden’s ambitious plans to further cut the nation’s carbon emissions.
Because these industries are a nontrivial share of the overall economy, that means one or
two percent less total factor productivity overall. These affects would be significantly larger
– likely dwarfing the (nontrivial) rest of the agenda – and speculative if the energy goals
are taken literally, which we do not. The costs would also be concentrated geographically.
Second, labor wedges are increased by proposed changes to regulation as well as to the ACA.
Our quantitative findings for the ACA should be no surprise given what had been found for
previous efforts in the U.S. and other countries to expand health insurance coverage. Third,
Vice President Biden’s agenda reduces capital intensity by increasing average marginal tax
rates on capital income.

We then assume, as many growth models do, that the supply of capital is elastic in the
long run to its after-tax return and that the substitution effect of wages on labor supply is
nontrivial. We conclude that, in the long run, Vice President Biden’s full agenda reduces
full-time equivalent employment per person by about 3 percent, the capital stock per person
by about 15 percent, real GDP per capita by more than 8 percent, and real consumption per
household by about 7 percent. Relative to the CBO’s 2030 projections for these variables, this suggests there will be 4.9 million fewer employed individuals, $2.6 trillion less GDP,
and $1.5 trillion less consumption in that year alone. Median household income in
2030 would be $6,500 less. The projections are conservative in terms of the sensitivity
of wages and average productivity to the after-tax share of capital income (Barro and
Furman 2018 assume about twice as much), our treatment of business and labor regulation
as redistributive versus resource using, and the ambitions of Biden’s agendas for health
insurance, energy, and climate. On the other hand, the economic effects could be less if the
agenda is only partially implemented.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Ken Adams who wrote (10364)10/20/2020 11:22:36 AM
From: Kirk ©
   of 15350
 
PC memory supply falls short of demand

Siu Han, Taipei; Jessie Shen, DIGITIMES
Tuesday 20 October 2020
digitimes.com

The supply of PC memory chips and devices has already fallen short of demand, with the tight supply unlikely to ease until the first quarter of 2021
, according to sources in Taiwan's memory industry.

Demand for enterprise notebooks and Chromebooks has been particularly strong this year, digesting related memory inventories, the sources indicated. The visibility of orders for Chromebooks has already been extended to the first quarter of next year, the sources said.

Memory module houses generally have over two months of inventories, according to Simon Chen, chairman for Adata Technology. Nevertheless, inventories for notebook applications have been dragged down and are even insufficient to satisfy customer demand, Chen said.

Chen also said that sales of enterprise and gaming notebooks will be better than those of consumer models in 2021. Adata expects gaming products to account for over 10% of company revenue next year, Chen said.

Digitimes Research has forecast that worldwide notebook shipments will surge over 20% to 190 million units in 2020, while shipments of educational-purpose mobile computing devices will climb 32.3% on year to 42.1 million units.



Demand for educational-purpose notebooks has been strong
Photo: Digitimes file photo

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Winfastorlose who wrote (10474)10/20/2020 12:51:18 PM
From: Kirk ©
   of 15350
 
I searched the full document for "Velocity" as in how the velocity of money COULD reverse direction under a leader who gets along well with others. They did not mention it in the study. My guess is that is why academics miss how economies often do better under "feel good" Democrats than their models suggest.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Winfastorlose who wrote (10474)10/20/2020 12:51:38 PM
From: Kirk ©
2 Recommendations   of 15350
 
10-20-20: Inflation Remains Low Because “Velocity” Has Fallen Off the Table

by Gary Alexander

October 20, 2020

Last week (October 14-17) was the 46th annual New Orleans Investment Conference, and I’ve been a speaker, MC, and/or panel moderator there for the last 37 of them. This one was uniquely “virtual” over ZOOM. I hosted a political panel (with Tucker Carlson, Doug Casey, and Stephen Moore) from four corners of the nation (Florida, Maine, Washington, and Colorado) and I also listened to nearly all of the General Sessions from an array of other seasoned economic analysts. One of the biggest questions asked (and frequently answered) by speakers was, “With all this newly-printed money, where is the inflation?”

Several speakers, including Jim Rickards and Ronald-Peter Stoeferle, pointed out the rapid decline of monetary velocity – the speed at which money turns over. Rickards even disputed the term “stimulus,” with reference to bailout money, when that money is not spent but squirreled away. A stimulus check does not stimulate the economy if it is not spent. One example he used is that when a couple would go out to dinner and a show, they may have taken a taxi to both spots, spending and tipping along the way, but when they are forced to stay home, that means several hundred dollars are not spent. The taxi drivers, restaurant owners and employees, theater operators, musicians, and others are now totally out of work.

The standard equation for inflation in the Chicago “monetarist” school, championed by the late Milton Friedman, is MV = PQ, where M is the Money Supply, often denominated in M1 or M2, and V is the Velocity of that money in exchanges per year, with a normal turnover of 10 times for M1 or 2 for M2. The other side of the equation is “P,” referring to a price index for inflation, and “Q” stands for GDP.

Milton Friedman said that rising money supply generally causes inflation because he assumed that monetary velocity was constant, but velocity is by no means constant. It started going down in 1998, then accelerated its decline after the 2008-09 monetary crisis and then fell off a table here in 2020 (see chart).



Graphs are for illustrative and discussion purposes only. Please read important disclosures at the end of this commentary.

If V is near zero, then Jim Rickards said, “$22 trillion (GDP) times zero (Velocity) is zero.” Velocity is by no means zero, but M2 velocity has fallen by 50% in the last two decades – from 2.2 down to 1.1.

The basic reason for this sharp decrease in velocity is the fear of deflation – the fear of the bad times to come, a job layoff, or falling prices in general – the belief that prices will be lower tomorrow than today.

People will tend to hold onto their cash if they believe prices will be lower next month, including the price of stocks. That’s why the Federal Reserve, and central bankers everywhere, fight deflation so fiercely. They need people to spend now, to goose the GDP this quarter, not next year, so the Fed has pulled out all stops in creating tools to encourage inflation in order to slay the greater devil of deflation.

The three major central banks in the U.S., Japan, and Europe increased their balance sheets by 47% in seven months (February 21 to September 25), from $14.4 trillion to $21.2 trillion, a $6.8 trillion infusion. The dollar fell 10% from March through September because the Fed created money faster than the others:





Graphs are for illustrative and discussion purposes only. Please read important disclosures at the end of this commentary.

What it Will Take to Get All This Money CirculatingThere are several monetary measures. For money in circulation, including checking accounts (M1), the normal velocity is 10, whereas for the broader M2 – which includes M1 plus savings deposits, money market securities, and other near-cash deposits – the velocity was 2/year in 2008 and is barely one now.

MV=PQwhereM= money supply in the economy, mainly M1V= velocity of circulation.P=price level in the economyQ= output produced by the economyThe velocity of circulation “v” is defined as the average number of times a dollar bill circulates in the economy per year.Assume on average a dollar bill does ten transactions (buying and selling of goods and services) per year.Thus, velocity of circulation “v” in this case is 10. Here, a one-dollar bill does the equivalent of ten dollars’ worth of transactions.So, M x V=1×10=10 dollarsSource: Econmentor

With trillions of new dollars in circulation, there will be no meaningful inflation until those dollars start to circulate more. There is already some inflation in asset prices – in gold, stocks, and real estate – but not in everyday prices. In general, people are sitting on their savings and their stimulus checks, if they can.

Personal savings rates and government stimulus payments peaked in the second quarter, but both are still well above historical levels. Personal savings, at $2.4 trillion, are more than double their level at the start of 2020, and government social benefits at $4.1 trillion are about $1 trillion above previous annual levels.



Graphs are for illustrative and discussion purposes only. Please read important disclosures at the end of this commentary.

And now we’re talking about another $2 trillion (or so) “stimulus” package that will not stimulate the economy or generate inflation until the Covid-19 threat ends and the economy begins to open up without fear. At that time, when people spend with hope for the future, monetary velocity will return to normal and we may see a shocking rise in inflation rates across the board, in producer, consumer, and asset prices.

The latter category is the most important to investors. With trillions still on the sidelines, there is still great room for expansion in the current bull market in stocks. Like the Fed says, we can put up with 4% or 5% inflation – even a temporary spurt to 10% or more – if our assets are rising faster than 10%. The greater problem is putting the toothpaste back in the tube, curing double-digit inflation, as Fed Chairman Paul Volcker engineered in the early 1980s. That would involve raising interest rates and a new recession.

We’ll see the first official GDP figure in late October but for the time being the Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow forecast for third-quarter growth is 35.2% as of Friday, October 16, so maybe that’s fast enough growth. A 35% rebound will not get us back to pre-pandemic levels, but it’s a giant step in the right direction.

While Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell is joining Congress and both Presidential candidates in claiming the economy will suffer without more fiscal aid, the monetarist St. Louis Fed President James Bullard told The Wall Street Journal last week that the economy is healthy enough that no more monetary stimulus may be needed. Maybe we should just open up the economy and let that be “stimulus” enough.

All content above represents the opinion of Gary Alexander of Navellier & Associates, Inc.

Please see important disclosures below.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Kirk © who wrote (10477)10/20/2020 1:28:58 PM
From: Winfastorlose
1 Recommendation   of 15350
 
The Democrats have the graft and corruption through bribery thing down pat. It makes the wheels and gears spin, but at what cost? They have been liquidating America.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)


To: Winfastorlose who wrote (10479)10/20/2020 3:26:04 PM
From: Kirk ©
   of 15350
 
They way they've sent jobs overseas to keep the economy for the connected and educated humming is similar to burning structural components of ships to fuel boilers and reach the destination. Much like massive deficit spending concerns me.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read
Previous 10 Next 10