Dr. Anthony Fauci revealed that he’s been infected with COVID for a third time despite having been “vaccinated and boosted six times.”
Yes, really.
The former chief medical advisor to the president, who became the face of the COVID vaccination drive from late 2020 onwards, reacted to catching COVID-19 yet again by thanking the vaccine.
Dr. Fauci has COVID again for the third time and has been vaccinated and boosted six times
“I got infected about two weeks ago, it was my third infection, and I have been vaccinated and boosted a total of six times,” said Fauci.
Fauci, who back in 2021 said, “If you get vaccinated, you are protected,” seemingly hasn’t been protected from catching the virus despite receiving half a dozen vaccines.
He also separately asserted during the same year, “When people get vaccinated, they can feel safe that they are not gonna get infected.”
FAUCI IN 2021: “When people are vaccinated, they are not going to get infected.”
FAUCI NOW: “I got infected about two weeks ago. It was my third Covid-19 infection, and I had been vaccinated and boosted a total of six times.”
Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.
KFC Unveils ‘Finger-Lickin Good’ Meal Deal As Value Wars Heat Up
Quick-service restaurant customers have been frustrated by rising Big Mac and chicken sandwich prices, which we dubbed ‘McFlation.’ As burger sales slide, chains like McDonald’s and Burger King have swiftly introduced meal deals to maintain market share amid a worsening downturn among consumers, especially low/mid-tier ones.
With McDonald’s and Burger King already offering $5 meal deals, it was inevitable that Yum! Brands’ KFC would introduce its own $5 deal, signaling that the value wars in the QSR space are intensifying.
“KFC claps back in “Value Wars” with more deals for customers every day of the week this fall,” KFC wrote in a press release on Monday morning.
KFC’s new $5 meal deal includes “finger-lickin’ good value and make KFC affordable for everyone,” the company said, adding the new deal includes three offers: KFC Chicken Nuggets, Famous Bowl with KFC Chicken Nuggets, and Two-Piece Drum & Thigh.
“As customers are looking for more value from brands, we’re expanding our Taste of KFC lineup with new KFC fan favorites like our nuggets and Famous Bowls, each for just $5,” Nick Chavez, CMO, KFC US wrote in a statement.
Chavez said, “These Taste of KFC Deals offer three choices – with something for everyone – at an incredible price.”
We suspect additional QSRs will soon offer meal deals, as corporate America has already warned numerous times about a consumer downturn on earnings calls.
Take, for instance, the number of times “consumer downturn” was mentioned on earnings calls, spiking to six this earnings season, the highest level since GFC.
The number of times “cautious consumer” was mentioned 33 times, a record high.
“Consumer pressure” mentions still lingers near record highs.
Low/mid-tier consumers seem to have reached their limit in absorbing price hikes on goods and services, thanks to depleted personal savings and maxed-out credit cards. This is due to elevated inflation and high interest rates under Bideonomics.
Also, the second quarter has displayed unmistakable signs of a consumer slowdown, with the latest credit card data from the Federal Reserve also indicating that some consumers have hit a proverbial ‘brick wall.’
Even VP Harris recently admitted at a campaign rally that a cost of living crisis persists. So much for Bidenomics…
QSRs offering meal deals only reflect an economy trending in the wrong direction. The mid/low-iter consumer has tapped out under failed Bidenomics.
Medium-Term Inflation Expectations Tumble In NY Fed Survey As Spending Growth Pessimism Rises
With all eyes on this week’s inflation data barrage, starting with PPI tomorrow and moving to CPI on Wednesday, today’s NY Fed consumer survey was closely watched to see what it would reveal about consumer inflation expectations ahead of the coming hard numbers. The result was generally agreeable: while median 1 and 5-year inflation expectations were unchanged at 3.0% and 2.8%, respectively, consumers’ three-year-ahead inflation expectations fell by 0.6% point to 2.3%, sliding to a new series low since the survey’s inception in June 2013.
This decline in 3 Year inflation expectations was most pronounced for respondents with a high-school education or less and those with annual household income under $50,000. The survey’s measure of disagreement across respondents (the difference between the 75th and 25th percentile of inflation expectations) decreased at the one- and five-year-ahead horizons and was unchanged at the three-year-ahead horizon.
Extending the inflation outlook,, median home price growth expectations was unchanged at 3.0% in July…
… while year-ahead commodity price expectations declined by 0.8 percentage point for gas to 3.5% and 0.1 percentage point for food to 4.7%, but rose by 0.2 percentage point for the cost of medical care to 7.6%, 1.9 percentage points for the cost of college education to 7.2%, and 0.6 percentage point for rent to 7.1%.
Turning to the labor market, we find that optimism here fizzled as median one-year-ahead expected earnings growth declined by 0.3% point to 2.7% in July. The series has been moving within a narrow range of 2.7-3.0% since January 2024.
At the same time, mean unemployment expectations, or the mean probability that the U.S. unemployment rate will be higher one year from now, decreased by 1.0 percentage point to 36.6%, remaining below its 12-month trailing average of 37.7%.
One surprise is that according to the survey, the mean perceived probability of losing one’s job in the next 12 months decreased by 0.5% point to 14.3% even though the actual unemployment rate surged last month and triggered the Sahm’s Rule which has preceded every record recession.
Additionally, the mean probability of leaving one’s job voluntarily in the next 12 months increased by 0.2 percentage point to 20.7%, the measure’s highest reading since February 2023. The mean perceived probability of finding a job (if one’s current job was lost) decreased by 0.9 percentage point to 52.5%.
Turning to household finances, the median expected growth in household income was unchanged at 3.0% in Jul…
… while median household spending growth expectations fell by 0.2 percentage point to 4.9%, the measure’s lowest reading since April 2021.
Some more findings:
Perceptions of credit access compared to a year ago deteriorated in July, with the share of households reporting it is harder to obtain credit than one year ago increasing. However, expectations for future credit availability improved in July, with the share of respondents expecting it will be harder to obtain credit in the year-ahead decreasing.
Delinquency expectations increased, with the average perceived probability of missing a minimum debt payment over the next three months increasing by 1.0 percentage point to 13.3%, its highest level since April 2020. The increase was most pronounced for those with an annual income below $50,000 and those with a high school degree or less education.
The median expectation regarding a year-ahead change in taxes (at current income level) declined by 0.3 percentage point to 4.0%. Boy are they going to be surprised.
Median year-ahead expected growth in government debt was unchanged at 9.3% in July.
The mean perceived probability that the average interest rate on saving accounts will be higher in 12 months decreased by 0.2 percentage point to 25.1%.
Perceptions about households’ current financial situations compared to a year ago improved slightly in July, with the share of households reporting a better situation compared to a year ago rising. Conversely, year-ahead expectations about households’ financial situations deteriorated in July, with the share of households expecting a worse financial situation in one year from now rising.
The mean perceived probability that U.S. stock prices will be higher 12 months from now increased by 0.1 percentage point to 39.3%.
Ideological litmus tests have no place in higher education. They weaponize loyalty and contradict the university’s purpose of fostering academic inquiry and informed debates. Scholars cannot pursue truth or progress if they are denied academic jobs based on their devotion to a specific political ideology or philosophy.
I applaud states like Florida, Alabama, Wyoming, Tennessee, and Texas that have banned varied Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) requirements that mandate loyalty to its agenda. But we need to go further. Congress can deny federal funding to universities that impose DEI on faculty, administrators, and staff. Conservative lawmakers are already trying to “dismantle” DEI in the federal government and others are currently weighing defunding universities over Title VI violations. They should extend defunding to universities that require DEI.
DEI litmus tests must go because they do not serve students. In reality, they are about power. DEI loyalty oaths fortify campus leaders’ power to reduce diversity, equal opportunity, and access initiatives to a set of counterproductive far-left policy prescriptions that ultimately marginalize, limit, and exclude students.
In February, Cornell University emeritus trustee Jon Lindseth blamed the school’s embrace of DEI for the growing “antisemitism and general intolerance” on its campus. And yet, loyalty to the toxic DEI agenda has become pervasive in faculty hiring protocols, as have commitment pledges. A new report by the Cornell Free Speech Alliance claims that the Ivy League university has systematically filled faculty positions based on applicants’ DEI statements.
Cornell is not the only university to demand DEI loyalty, but the problem goes beyond mere numbers. In 2021, the American Enterprise Institute discovered that while 34% of faculty job postings at elite universities mandated DEI statements, 68% of all listings discussed diversity as a core aspect of the position. This large percentage supports the Cornell report’s indications that even when DEI statements are a choice, academics who omit the document are stigmatized in the application process.
But DEI statements are not just for getting a job in academia, they are too often needed for promotion and advancement. In 2022, the American Association of University found that 45.6% of “large” universities — where the most prestigious research takes place — require “DEI criteria in tenure standards.” Tenured professors are at the top of the academic food chain. They sit on curriculum, hiring, and programming committees, and have the greatest access to funding and publication resources.
Those academics that get the top spots get to dictate who is worthy of inclusion or exclusion in the academic job market. A scholar marked unfit might as well be branded with a “Scarlet Letter” confirming his ostracization from higher education. These DEI zealots are the same people teaching the next generation of educators, parents, business leaders, and politicians.
That is why leaders outside of higher education must step in to strip undue power away from ideologically driven administrators and professors. Ideologues and their administrative allies are grafting divisive politics onto their institutions, erroneously marketing their insertions as sutures for past injustices. That is not the purpose or the design of higher education.
The Western university is nearly 1,000 years old and its mission pre-dates liberal democracies, capitalism, socialism, communism, and every other system of government or economics currently being debated by politicians. It exists to help students cultivate their intellectual and moral development. It is its own animal in the West that may examine — but should never reflect — fleeting political trends or sympathies.
When personal growth becomes political, rigor and truth erode from the foundations of higher learning. The DEI campus complex, which inculcates groupthink and replaces scholars with social justice warriors, attests to this intellectual and moral decline. Faculty and students should be encouraged to think and question, not to be complicit in a regime of unquestioning conformity.
As an adjunct professor, I can attest that DEI statements contravene the objectives of higher education. America cannot afford to have the next generation of business, political, and cultural leaders operate according to that immoral logic. Professors should be exposing students to uncomfortable truths and diverse perspectives. This process requires exposure to contradicting ideas that challenge students intellectually.
Ideological purity paves over the debates and discussions that hone students’ critical thinking skills. A campus of like-minded people not only lacks diversity, but it also inhibits students’ abilities to learn from one another.
Trump Posts On X In Big Return Ahead Of “Unscripted” Interview With Elon Musk
Former President Donald Trump is preparing for tonight’s highly anticipated interview on the X platform with Elon Musk, which is expected to be an ‘internet-breaking’ event.
The interview on X is set to begin live-streaming at 8 pm EST. Musk wrote on X, “This is unscripted with no limits on subject matter, so should be highly entertaining!”
This is unscripted with no limits on subject matter, so should be highly entertaining!
If you have specific questions & comments, post them under the chat.
On Sunday evening, Musk launched multiple stream tests, garnering millions of views to ensure X’s backend systems are ready for scaling ahead of tonight’s conversation.
Test preparations followed the May 2023 streaming event on X between Musk and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, which suffered multiple technical difficulties.
Despite Trump’s posting to only Truth Social, the former president has finally returned to X around 1120 ET. Trump’s last post on X dates back to August 2023.
In the days following the attempted assassination of Trump at the Butler, Pennsylvania, rally in mid-July, Musk endorsed Trump. With that came Trump’s U-turn on electric vehicles as well, declaring: “I’m for electric cars; I have to be because Elon endorsed me very strongly. So, I have no choice.”
Musk and his entourage of tech VCs have for decades supported Democrats, if that’s Obama, Clinton, and Biden. But in recent years, especially for Musk, he has declared war on the ‘woke mind virus‘ and Marxism pushed by Democrats. Furthermore, Musk believes in secured borders and law and order in cities – something the Trump ticket supports at the very core level. Yet, VP Harris supports a radical far-left agenda (an extension of Biden’s) of open borders (hence her failed position as ‘Border Czar’), and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, her running mate, has had a horrendous response record during BLM riots.
The Washington Post said VP Harris has no public events scheduled on Monday. She and her team will likely be tuning in to the event, as keyboard warriors on both sides of the political aisle will engage in a meme war on X during the interview.
VP Harris has yet to give a press interview since she was catapulted to the top of the Democratic ticket. The reason likely stems from her poor debating skills, hence why she cannot go off script of the real VP Harris will be revealed. She must have a teleprompter nearby to speak coherently.
The interview with Musk and Trump, unscripted, is yet another sign legacy ‘far left’ corporate media is dying as the next-gen media rises from the ashes this election cycle. It’s only a matter of time before presidential debates will be held on X.
The recent market weakness suggests a combination of profit-taking and concerns about the latest United States jobs and manufacturing figures, added to the abrupt unwinding of part of the yen carry trade. Valuations had soared and market participants now demand central bank easing. However, rate cuts may not be enough to send markets to new all-time highs. Money supply growth and quantitative easing are needed to maintain these valuations.
Investors are turning to utilities and real estate stocks, but these sectors need more than low rates; they need a buoyant economy and strong consumer demand, so interest rate decisions may be insufficient.
If we look at the long-term trend, the market remains in a cyclical bullish mode, but we need to understand why and be aware of the rise in volatility.
Markets have been rising, discounting an ever-increasing money supply and future currency debasement. However, the next wave of central bank easing may not come until 2025.
Fundamentals may have been weak and earnings not as robust as required by demanding valuations, but investors understand that the fiscal challenges posed by rising government expenditure and public debt will ultimately mean ultra-loose monetary policies, which make sovereign bonds more expensive, erode currency purchasing power and, by comparison, make equities and risky assets more attractive.
Investors may continue to accept higher valuations for equities and risky assets because they fear monetary and fiscal insanity more than they are concerned about a recession.
It is not that markets like fiscal imprudence. Extreme monetary policies erode the currency’s purchasing power, and equities and risky assets become protection for real inflation. Murray Rothbard calculated the true money supply (TMS), which is the most realistic indicator of inflation. As Professor Joseph Salerno explains, “three items which are not included in any Fed measure of the money supply (Ml, M2, M3) or even of overall “liquidity” (L) find a place in the TMS.”. These are the demand and other deposits held by the U.S. government, foreign official institutions, and foreign commercial banks at “U.S. commercial and Fed banks.”.
When we look at True Money Supply, we can understand what market participants really look at for a bullish market trend, even if they may not be calculating it in the Rothbard way. The available money for market transactions. The quantity of money that is put to work to generate a return that offsets inflation. “Liquidity,” as most market participants call it.
Mike Shedlock, a great macroeconomic analyst and investor, discusses these important differences when analyzing money growth because they basically give us an idea of the buying or selling pressure in a market. The True Money Supply (TMS) includes the currency component of M1, total checkable and savings deposits, as well as U.S. government deposits, note balances, and demand deposits from foreign banks and public institutions. Any market trader understands this when they are talking of “cash on the sides,” “high liquidity,” and “bullish sentiment.”. All these money measures, when rising, indicate stronger demand for risky assets looking for a return. Alternatively, Professor Frank Shostak’s definition of total money supply includes cash plus demand deposits with commercial banks and institutions plus government deposits with banks and the central bank.
Why are these measures more important than the traditional M2 and M3 money aggregates? Because they show us the level of buying pressure in the market.
Many Keynesian economists see deposits and savings accounts as idle money and invented the ludicrous “excessive savings” concept. There is no such thing as excessive savings or idle money. The reason they see those savings as negative is because their political view of economics perceives that any money not spent by the government is not productive. Far from it. Those savings and deposits are invested in the capital markets and are the key to originating lending, investment, and growth in the real economy. Keynesians tend to think of the “social use of money,” which means more printing of currency through deficit spending, because they mostly perceive that the government is the only one making a real social use of currency issued. However, inflationism is not a social policy but a tool for serfdom that creates hostage clients of citizens by destroying the purchasing power of their wages and deposit savings. It is a transfer of wealth from the middle class to the government.
Once we understand that what matters for market participants is the elusive “liquidity” and “sentiment” perception and that bullish sentiment and liquidity come from a rising true money supply, while bearish signals arise from a decline in this measure of liquidity, then we can understand that the allegedly hawkish messages of central banks disguise a much looser policy than headlines suggest. Furthermore, using any of the different measures of true money supply previously mentioned, we can understand why market participants try to defend their clients from the current and future loss of purchasing power of the currency by taking more risk and accepting higher valuations for growth assets.
Most market participants are aware that higher liquidity injections will mask the current fiscal imbalances. Unsustainable deficit spending is money printing, which creates strong long-term pressure on the purchasing power of fiat currencies. Thus, market corrections are always an opportunity to buy stocks and risky assets that will always rise in value in fiat currency terms because the unit of measure, money, loses purchasing power.
Once it is established that fiscal insanity will make currencies fall in value and, consequently, markets denominated in that currency rise, investors need to understand the timing and where to invest.
The difficulty this time is that now we have persistent inflation and central bank losses in their bond portfolio. Thus, timing is essential. The lag effect of a market correction and its subsequent bounce may be longer. It will happen, but we need to guess when.
After the Fed decided to hold rates steady at its two-day meeting, equities slumped, even though Powell seemed to signal that rate cuts could be coming as soon as September. Markets discounted a slump in liquidity, therefore lowering buying pressure. Hence, multiple compressions. Rate cuts do not signal a healthy economy but a slowing one, so equities slump despite the promise of a rate cut because investors continue to see lower buying pressure.
Even with the bounce after Black Monday, most indices remain significantly below the level when markets started to weaken on July 22. The lag effect of the true money supply started to show its effect on March 13. The Nasdaq and the S&P 500 were leading markets that had begun to slow down and pointed to lower highs and deeper lows.
What can we learn ahead of the next bullish wave of money growth? First, pay attention to the components mentioned above and their trends. Second, analyze when the Fed may start a true easing path, being realistic. The trend now signals liquidity drying up. There may not be a recession, but monetary buying pressure is slowing down markedly. The tap is not closed, but the flow is slow.
The Fed may cut rates in September, but that is only realizing that the economy is weaker than headlines suggest. A rate cut of 25 or 50 basis points is unlikely to generate an immediate burst in credit demand or rising deposits. Hence, the truly bullish signal would come when the Fed returns to purchasing mortgage-backed securities and treasuries. However, that may not happen until elections have passed and there is clarity about the next chairman of the Fed. We may be talking about March 2025.
Before that money growth bounces abruptly and leads to the next multiple expansion phase, we must remember the lessons of this correction. So-called defensive indices do not protect investors. Japan and Europe remain bad options in a liquidity drought. Cryptocurrencies do not show defensive qualities and their correlation to US tech stocks remains elevated. Gold is a better defense against a market correction than most risky assets, and commodities do not perform well in a slowing economy with diminishing liquidity.
Most investors will look at the recent slump with prudence, knowing they need to leave some dry powder (less liquidity, less buying pressure) to take advantage of opportunities.
In this era of monetary insanity, ignoring the macroeconomic, geopolitical, and earnings’ realities may lead to excessive risk-taking and significant losses in a correction. We must consider the fundamentals when looking at buying opportunities and pay attention to when liquidity will flow back to capture the currency debasement trend that leads to the next bull market. It’s not easy. Risks accumulate slowly but manifest quickly, and we tend to blame one catalyst instead of the complacency built after years of fiscal and monetary excess.
The next wave of monetary excess will be more aggressive than the past one, that is guaranteed. That means markets will soar again. However, timing is key… and it may take a few painful months to arrive.
Trump To Sue DOJ For $100 Million Over Mar-a-Lago Raid
Former President Donald Trump is set to sue the DOJ for $100 million in damages over the 2022 raid on his Mar-a-Lago property in Palm Beach, Florida – arguing that it was done “clear intent to engage in political persecution.”
According to a memo obtained by Fox News, the lawsuit will claim “tortious conduct by the United States against President Trump.”
Trump and his legal team intend to sue the Justice Department for its conduct during the FBI’s raid on Mar-a-Lago on Aug. 8, 2022, amid the federal investigation into his alleged improper retention of classified records.
After the raid, Special Counsel Jack Smith was appointed to investigate. Smith ultimately brought 37 felony counts against Trump, including willful retention of national defense information, conspiracy to obstruct justice, and false statements. Trump pleaded not guilty to all counts.
Last month, US District Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the DOJ’s case against Trump – ruling that Smith was unlawfully appointed and funded, citing the Appointments Clause in the constitution.
The notice to sue was filed by Trump attorney Daniel Epstein, and gives the DOJ 180 days from the date of receipt to respond and come to a resolution. If no agreement is made, Trump’s case will move to federal court in the Southern District of Florida.
“What President Trump is doing here is not just standing up for himself – he is standing up for all Americans who believe in the rule of law and believe that you should hold the government accountable when it wrongs you,” Epstein told Fox Business’ Lydia Hu.
According to the filing, the “tortious acts against the president are rooted in intrusion upon seclusion, malicious prosecution, and abuse of process resulting from the August 8, 2022 raid of his and his family’s home at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach Florida,” adding that decisions made by the DOJ and FBI in conducting the raid were “inconsistent with protocols requiring the consent of an investigative target, disclosure to that individual’s attorneys, and the use of the local U.S. Attorney’s Office.”
Epstein further argues that decisions made by Attorney General Merrick Garland as well as FBI Director Christopher Wray were not based on “social, economic, and political policy,” but instead were in “clear dereliction of constitutional principles, inconsistent standards as applied to” Trump and a “clear intent to engage in political persecution – not to advance good law enforcement practices.”
“Garland and Wray should have never approved a raid and subsequent indictment of President Trump because the well-established protocol with former U.S. presidents is to use non-enforcement means to obtain records of the United States,” wrote Epstein. “But notwithstanding the fact that the raid should have never occurred, Garland and Wray should have ensured their agents sought consent from President Trump, notified his lawyers, and sought cooperation.”
“Garland and Wray decided to stray from established protocol to injure President Trump,” the filing continues.
Epstein argued that the DOJ violated Florida law, intrusion upon seclusion, which is recognized as a form of invasion of privacy. Intrusion upon seclusion includes “an intentional intrusion, physically or otherwise, into the private quarters of another person” and the intrusion “must occur in a manner that a reasonable person would find highly offensive.” -Fox News
“The FBI’s demonstrated activity was inconsistent with protocols used in routine searches of an investigative target’s premises,” the filing continues, adding that Trump “had a clear expectation of privacy at Mar-a-Lago. Worse, the FBI’s conduct in the raid – where established protocol was violated – constitutes a severe and unacceptable intrusion that is highly offensive to a reasonable person.”
The filing also argues that the DOJ and special counsel’s office “brought a lawless criminal indictment,” which constitutes “malicious prosecution.”
“As such, given the Supreme Court’s immunity decision and Judge Cannon’s dismissal of the prosecution on grounds that the Special Counsel’s appointment violated the appointments clause and his office was funded through an improper appropriation, there was no constitutional basis for the search or the subsequent indictment.”
Trump is also planning to sue for punitive damages.
“For these harms to President Trump, the respondents must pay punitive damages of $100 million,” Epstein wrote, adding that there was an “abuse of process,” and that the methods used against Trump were “unconstitutional and aimed at politically persecuting the former President, which led to extensive legal costs and negative consequences for him.”
In a statement to Fox Business, Epstein said: “You have clear evidence that the FBI failed to follow protocols, and the failure to follow protocols shows that there was an improper purpose,” adding “f the government is able to say, well, we don’t like someone, we can raid their home, we can violate their privacy, we can breach protocols when we decide to prosecute them, we can use the process to advance our personal motive–not a motive of justice–if someone doesn’t stand against that in a very public way and seek to obtain and protect their rights, then the government will have a mandate to roughshod over every American.”
The dramatic rise in median home prices in New York City and other busy real estate markets from pre-pandemic levels, and the intense competition for desirable properties, has driven buyers throughout the country to pursue a range of innovative solutions they might never have considered four or five years ago, brokers and real estate lawyers have told The Epoch Times.
With the median home listing price in New York City at $825,000, and a median sale price of $776,100, according to realtor.com figures, the Big Apple stands out as one of the most expensive and competitive markets in the nation.
By comparison, the median price stood at $615,000 in January 2019.
But that does not mean that buyers elsewhere have it easy. Throughout the rest of the country, they are looking long and hard for affordable deals with average home prices poised at $412,300.
The pandemic was something of a turning point. In the period from the first quarter of 2020 to the end of 2024, for example, the average price rose nearly 50 percent, from $329,000 to $479,500, according to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
Mark Scheier, cofounder of Acton, Massachusetts-based real estate law firm Scheier Katin & Epstein, said recent analyses that describe the current market as a buyer’s market—where inventory volume and a relatively low bar for access favor buyers over sellers—are mistaken.
“I’m not experiencing a buyer’s market at all, I’m still experiencing a seller’s market here,” he told The Epoch Times.
Until recently, about 10 percent of the deals Scheier brokered for clients were all-cash deals, while the rest involved some mixture of financing—typically, bank loans—and cash.
“Almost 40 percent of my deals are cash deals, which was never the case before. People are doing everything they can, breaking into their retirement money, pooling all their assets together, to try to make cash deals,” Scheier said.
With prices rising so rapidly, one factor is fear of missing out (FOMO)—an acute sense on the part of many buyers that if they don’t get in now, they will face an even more fiercely competitive market in the near future, he stated.
A corollary to this perception, he said, is the need to acquire properties whose value is increasing dramatically and take advantage of the price appreciation while they still can.
“I’ve been practicing for 51 years, and I’ve seen all the ups and downs, and right now, I think there’s a lot of FOMO going on,” said Scheier.
“The train is leaving without them and if they don’t rush to get on the train, they’re going to lose out on that appreciation. People are feeling that way, so they’re moving ahead, they’re jumping off the cliff.”
Many people in the market are coming to realize that mortgage rates are unlikely to fall back to 2.5 percent in the foreseeable future and that they will have to accept rates of 6.5–7.0 percent, which might have previously put them off trying to close a deal, Scheier noted.
But the historically high prices and the competition requires a diversification of strategy that brokers say they have rarely seen before.
Some real estate industry professionals hailed the $418 million settlement in March of a long-running lawsuit against the National Association of Realtors (NAR), Sitzer/Burnett v. NAR Commission.
The lawsuit took issue with agents’ use of the association’s Multiple Listing Service (MLS) and the practice of charging 6 percent commissions, often split evenly between sellers’ and buyers’ brokers, in property sales.
Michael Downer, a broker at Coldwell Banker Realty in Naples, Florida, said the settlement means that buyers’ brokers can no longer pretend to their clients that they are acting pro bono while in fact automatically getting half of the 6 percent commission paid to sellers’ brokers at closing.
Buy-side brokers will have to be more transparent about what they are actually doing and what compensation they should rightfully receive for their role in a deal.
At the same time, others criticized the outcome on the grounds that purchasers who cease finding a buy-side broker using the MLS will begin working directly with sellers’ brokers, which poses a conflict of interest given those brokers’ preexisting relationships with their own clients.
“From a legal perspective, I don’t know that there has been that significant of a change in laws. Obviously, there was the recent NAR settlement, but it’s just with respect to the use of the MLS,” Zachary Schorr, a real estate lawyer and partner of the Los Angeles-based firm Schorr Law, told The Epoch Times.
In this highly competitive environment, some buyers are even going so far as waive the loan and appraisal contingencies that many have relied upon in the past to guarantee that they can get their deposit back if the mortgage financing they seek doesn’t get approved, or if the appraisal turned up unexpected issues at the property, said Schorr.
It can be a big mistake to waive these things or skirt due diligence—which may lead to serious problems after a sale, and cases of buyer’s remorse. Yet some people these days are acutely conscious of the disadvantage they face with respect to other buyers who are able to present themselves to sellers as unencumbered by any need to secure financing.
“It’s a more strategic way to do it if you’re in the all-cash market, or you’ll be beaten out by all-cash,” said Schorr.
“This is a higher-end market, too. If you’re way above the median price, there are more all-cash buyers.”
Lara Mizrack, a broker at Brown Harris Stevens in New York City, described many buyers’ unease as largely a function of high interest rates, the upcoming election, and international uncertainty. Mizrack acknowledged the distinct advantage that cash buyers hold in the current market.
“An all-cash deal has a faster application process, easier closing, and a seller does not have concerns about bank rejections,” she said.
The key for buyers in the current market who are not super-wealthy is to show a high degree of flexibility both with regard to the types of properties they set out to acquire no less than the terms and structures of financing, said Cara Ameer, a broker with Coldwell Banker Vanguard Realty in Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida.
Finding prices in the range they can afford may sometimes require buyers to look beyond the area where they live and to consider, say, a townhouse or condo unit rather than a single-family home, Ameer told The Epoch Times.
Another option is to buy a property in order to rent it out and use the revenue from the rental to pay off the mortgage and increase their share in the equity of the property in question, she said.
“There are affordable opportunities in virtually every city and state, you just have to know where to look. Smaller towns near colleges and universities are often promising opportunities,” Ameer stated.
“Buyers should also work with a lender well versed in low- to no-downpayment loans, as well as first-time homebuyer programs and creative lending options that can help them access financing.”
Ameer noted that one Southern California lender she works with makes use of a program where buyers do not need to put any money down on a first mortgage and can take out a second mortgage using 3.5 percent in gift funds directly from the lender. The buyer must have funds to cover the closing costs.
The total paid at closing runs to around 3–4 percent of the purchase price, she said. Buyers who do not have the means even to cover that expense at closing can request a cost credit from the seller.
Ameer also pointed to Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loan programs that require 3.5 percent down, and conventional loan programs with low down payments that cover anywhere from 5 percent to 100 percent of the total purchase price.
Yet another option for buyers who do not have deep pockets is to seek out a property in a state of disrepair, whether that means something as serious as a missing roof or as cosmetic as broken air conditioning, and to apply for a renovation loan, Ameer said.
It is a macro-heavy week, and the market’s key focus will be on US inflation data, with the July CPI print on Wednesday preceded by the PPI data on Tuesday, followed by Retail Sales on Thursday.
The median economist forecast is for both headline and core CPI to rise +0.20% on the month, which would leave annual headline CPI steady at 3.0%, with core ticking down a tenth to 3.2%. On a monthly basis, this would be an acceleration from the +0.1% core CPI print in June, but with both the three- and six-month annualized rates falling by 40bps to 1.7% and 2.9%, respectively.
In terms of the CPI details, there will be focus on whether the June slowing in rental inflation is sustained. For the PPI on Tuesday, economists see headline PPI gains staying at +0.2% MoM, though PPI components that feed into the Fed’s preferred core PCE measure may leave it running ahead of core CPI for the second month in a row.
The upcoming inflation data will be key for whether the Fed gains confidence to signal more clearly a cut at the September meeting. Over the weekend we heard from Fed Governor Bowman, who commented that “she “will remain cautious in my approach to considering adjustments to the current stance of policy” as “inflation is still uncomfortably above the committee’s 2% goal”. So one of the most hawkish FOMC voices sounding not yet convinced on the immediacy of rate cuts.
Speaking of Fed talking heads, several regional Fed presidents are due to speak this week, including Bostic on Tuesday, Musalem and Harker on Thursday and Goolsbee on Friday, so we’ll see if there are any changes in tone in response to the inflation data. We may have to wait until next week’s Jackson Hole symposium for an in depth take on how the Fed is thinking about the expected easing cycle.
Other notable US releases this week will include July retail sales and industrial production on Thursday, which economists expect to grow by +0.4% and shrink -0.3% on the month respectively. These will present some of the first pieces of hard activity data for Q3. We will also have the University of Michigan consumer survey on Friday.
Finally, with earnings season winding down, we will get some more evidence on the health of the US consumer with earnings reports from Home Depot (Tuesday) and Walmart (Thursday) as the earnings season winds down.
A bit of a detour here courtesy of DB’s Peter Sidorov who writes that as we start the week, Fed funds futures are pricing 101bps of cuts by year-end, so favoring at least one 50bps cut across the remaining three FOMC meetings. This is down from 138bps at the peak of the market stress last Monday but still well above the 87bps seen prior to the July payrolls print and it is hard to see how such easing would transpire without a material slowing of the economy. While fears of a US recession ticked up in recent weeks amid softer labor market data, activity surveys have largely held up and the Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow currently signals solid 2.9% growth for Q3. Compared to Europe, the US continues to benefit from stronger productivity growth, higher wealth effects and deeper capital markets.
Courtesy of Rabobank and DB, here is a day by day snapshot of what to expect.
Monday: A light day for data. RBA Deputy Governor Andrew Hauser is speaking, China money supply figures will be released, and we will also see building permits for Canada and the New York Fed’s 1-year inflation expectations index.
Data: US July NY Fed 1-yr inflation expectations, monthly budget statement, Germany June current account balance, July wholesale price index, Canada June building permits, Denmark July CPI
Earnings: Barrick Gold
Tuesday: Japan PPI and New Zealand net migration are first up, followed by Australia’s wage price index (an important one for RBA watchers) and both business and consumer confidence figures. At the start of the European session we have UK labour market data, followed by the ZEW survey in Germany and then it’s over to the USA for PPI and comments from the Fed’s Raphael Bostic.
Data: US July PPI, NFIB small business optimism, UK June average weekly earnings, unemployment rate, July jobless claims change, Japan July PPI, machine tool orders, Germany and Eurozone August Zew survey
Central banks: Fed’s Bostic speaks
Earnings: Home Depot, Asics
Wednesday: The RBNZ policy rate decision is main point of interest early in the day. We think the bank will err on the side of unchanged, but it really is a knife’s edge decision, and the futures see strong odds of a cut. Following that its over to the UK for July CPI (-0.1% m-o-m expected) and then we will get the second read of Q2 GDP for the Eurozone. The key release of the day (and the week) is the US CPI report, where prices are expected to have risen by 0.2% m-o-m on both headline and core readings.
Data: US July CPI, UK July CPI, RPI, PPI, June house price index, Eurozone Q2 GDP, employment, June industrial production, Sweden July CPI
Central banks: RBNZ decision
Earnings: Cisco, Tencent, RWE, Vestas
Thursday: RBNZ Governor Orr will appear before the Kiwi parliament, and we will also see July card spending and food price data for New Zealand in the early morning. Following that is Japan Q2 GDP, the PBOC’s 1-year MLF decision, Aussie labour market figures for July (+20k employment and an unchanged unemployment rate of 4% being the consensus) and July industrial production and retail sales data for China. Later in the day we get UK Q2 GDP, the results of the Empire manufacturing survey and the US retail sales report, where growth of 0.1% m-o-m is expected for the control group. We will also see the US weekly jobless claims data, which might be important this time around. The Fed’s Patrick Harker and Alberto Musalem will be speaking.
Data: US July retail sales, industrial production, import and export price indices, capacity utilisation, August Empire manufacturing index, Philadelphia Fed business outlook, NAHB housing market index, June business inventories, total net TIC flows, initial jobless claims, China July retail sales, industrial production, new home prices, property investment, UK June monthly GDP, Japan Q2 GDP, June capacity utilisation, Canada July existing home sales, June wholesale sales ex. petroleum
Central banks: Fed’s Musalem and Harker speak, Norges decision, China 1-yr MLF rate
Friday: New Zealand’s manufacturing PMI and Q2 PPI is out. We will also see more remarks from RBNZ Governor Orr and then it’s over to the UK for July retail sales (+0.6% m-o-m incl fuel expected). Following that we have Canadian housing starts and manufacturing sales for June, and then US housing starts for July, the New York Fed’s Service Business Activity Survey and the University of Michigan’s Consumer Sentiment report where a modest improvement is expected. The Fed’s Austan Goolsbee will also be speaking in a ‘fireside chat’.
Data: US August University of Michigan consumer survey, New York Fed services business activity, July building permits, housing starts, UK July retail sales, Japan June Tertiary industry index, Italy June general government debt, Eurozone June trade balance, Canada July housing starts, June manufacturing sales, international securities transactions
Central banks: Fed’s Goolsbee speaks
Finally, focusing on just the US, Goldman notes that the key economic data releases this week are the CPI report on Wednesday and the retail sales report on Thursday. There are several speaking engagements from Fed officials this week.
Monday, August 12
There are no major economic data releases scheduled.
Tuesday, August 13
06:00 AM NFIB small business optimism, July (consensus 91.5, last 91.5)
08:30 AM PPI final demand, July (GS +0.2%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.2%); PPI ex-food and energy, July (GS +0.2%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.4%); PPI ex-food, energy, and trade, July (GS +0.2%, consensus +0.2%, last flat)
01:15 PM Atlanta Fed President Bostic (FOMC voter) speaks: Atlanta Fed President Raphael Bostic will speak on the economic outlook in a moderated conversation at the Conference of African American Financial Professionals. A Q&A is expected.
Wednesday, August 14
08:30 AM CPI (MoM), July (GS +0.17%, consensus +0.2%, last -0.1%); Core CPI (MoM), July (GS +0.16%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.1%); CPI (YoY), July (GS +2.93%, consensus +3.0%, last +3.0%); Core CPI (YoY), July (GS +3.20%, consensus +3.2%, last +3.3%): We estimate a 0.16% increase in July core CPI (month-over-month SA). Our forecast reflects further declines in used car prices (-1.5%) and airfares (-2.5%), as well as a modest decline in new car prices (-0.1%) after a rebound in incentives following last month’s disruptions to dealer software systems. We expect another firm increase in the car insurance category (+0.7%) based on continued—albeit decelerating—increases in premiums in our online dataset. We expect modest boosts from tobacco prices related to new taxes in Colorado and Maryland and from the partial-month impact of a postage price hike on July 14th. After last month’s step lower, we assume another moderate increase in OER (+0.29%) and a partial rebound in primary rent (+0.33%), reflecting payback for the January spike in OER and drop in rent. We estimate a 0.17% rise in headline CPI, reflecting higher food (+0.15%) and energy (+0.4%) prices.
Thursday, August 15
08:30 AM Empire State manufacturing survey, August (consensus -5.5, last -6.6); 08:30 AM Retail sales, July (GS +0.1%, consensus +0.4%, last flat); Retail sales ex-auto, July (GS flat, consensus +0.1%, last +0.4%); Retail sales ex-auto & gas, July (GS flat, consensus +0.2%, last +0.8%); Core retail sales, July (GS -0.2%, consensus +0.1%, last +0.9%): We estimate core retail sales declined 0.2% in July (ex-autos, gasoline, and building materials; month-over-month SA). Our forecast reflects a boost from another record Amazon Prime Day but sequentially slower credit card spending growth and a potential headwind from seasonality. We estimate a 0.1% rebound in headline retail sales, reflecting flattish gasoline prices but sharply higher auto sales following disruptions from cyberattacks in the prior month.
08:30 AM Philadelphia Fed manufacturing index, August (GS 3.9, consensus 5.0, last 13.9): We estimate that the Philadelphia Fed manufacturing index pulled back 10pt to 3.9 in August, reflecting downward convergence toward other surveys.
08:30 AM Initial jobless claims, week ended August 10 (GS 230k, consensus 236k, last 233k): Continuing jobless claims, week ended August 3 (consensus 1,870k, last 1,875k)
08:30 AM Import price index, July (consensus -0.1%, last flat): Export price index, July (consensus flat, last -0.5%)
09:10 AM St. Louis Fed President Musalem (FOMC non-voter) speaks: St. Louis Fed President Alberto Musalem will speak on the US economy and monetary policy at Greater Louisville Inc.’s Regional Economic Development Update. A Q&A is expected. On July 11, Musalem said “I will be looking for more evidence that inflation can be expected to return to 2% going forward.”
09:15 AM Industrial production, July (GS -0.1%, consensus -0.3%, last +0.6%); Manufacturing production, July (GS -0.1%, consensus -0.3%, last +0.4%); Capacity utilization, July (GS 78.6%, consensus 78.5%, last 78.8%); We estimate industrial production decreased 0.1%, as weak electricity production likely outweighed strong oil and gas and mining production. We estimate capacity utilization decreased to 78.6%.
10:00 AM Business inventories, June (consensus +0.3%, last +0.5%)
10:00 AM NAHB housing market index, August (consensus 42, last 42)
01:10 PM Philadelphia Fed President Harker (FOMC non-voter) speaks: Philadelphia Fed President Patrick Harker will give a speech on the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia’s Center for the Restoration of Economic Data (CREED). Speech text is expected. On July 17, Harker said that he expects “economic growth to slow but remain above trend and the unemployment rate to increase modestly” this year.
Friday, August 16
08:30 AM Housing starts, July (GS -1.5%, consensus -1.3%, last +3.0%); Building permits, July (consensus -1.5%, last +3.9%)
10:00 AM University of Michigan consumer sentiment, August preliminary (GS 65.9, consensus 66.9, last 66.4); University of Michigan 5-10-year inflation expectations, August preliminary (GS 2.9%, consensus 2.9%, last 3.0%)
01:25 PM Chicago Fed President Goolsbee (FOMC non-voter) speaks: Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee will participate in a fireside chat at the Angeles Investors’ Q3 Summit & Awards Event. A Q&A is expected. On August 6, Goolsbee said “I’ve been saying for a long time that we’ve been in a restrictive posture… the real fed funds rate is as high as it’s been in a long time and we’re at the peak even in this cycle as inflation comes down. And you only want to be that restrictive if you think there’s fear of overheating. These data, to me, do not look like overheating.”
By Benjamin Picton, Senior Market Strategist at Rabobank
Friday saw equities continue their recovery from steep selloffs early last week and the preceding Friday. The S&P500 and the NASDAQ both rose by around half a percentage point and the Treasury curve flattened. 10-year yields sank by 5bps, and 2-year yields rose marginally as markets continued to price out hysterical calls for large emergency rate cuts. Nevertheless, the futures curve still has 38bps of cuts to the Fed Funds rate priced in for the September meeting, so starting an easing cycle with a supersized cut is still very much on the minds of traders.
Michelle Bowman, perhaps the most hawkish of the Fed Governors, gave a speech to the Kansas Bankers Association over the weekend where she mentioned that she may not be ready to support any cut at all in September. Bowman said that recent progress in disinflation was a “welcome development” but cautioned that much of the past progress had come courtesy of supply side factors that are now largely behind us. Bowman warned that inflation still remains uncomfortably above the Fed’s 2% target, and that latent inflation risks from new supply side pressures and big fiscal deficits make the case for caution.
Bowman’s Fed colleague Tom Barkin also sent the message that the Fed shouldn’t be panicked into cutting too hard too fast. Barkin said that he is optimistic that future inflation readings will be “good”, and intimated that the Fed has “some time in a healthy economy” to normalize policy rates in a “steady, deliberate way.” The Boston Fed’s Susan Collins struck a similar tone, saying that it would be appropriate to begin cutting “soon”, and that the pace of easing will remain contingent on the flow of data. Market pricing suggests that traders remain nervous about the steady-as-she-goes assessment of policy rates, and the volatility of last week perhaps serves as a warning that we could be only one or two bad prints away from further turmoil.
Of course, this week will throw up a number of opportunities to upset the narrative and allow volatility to rear its ugly head again. The key focus for markets will be Wednesday’s release of the July CPI report for the USA, but we also have PPI the day before and both July retail sales and the weekly jobless claims figures on Thursday. Those weekly claims numbers are generally considered to be second-tier data, but they have taken on increased importance since the release of the July non-farm payrolls report the Friday before last. That softer-than-expected report triggered the ‘Sahm Rule’ recession indicator and became one of the catalysts for the sharp price action in the days following. So, expect markets to remain particularly sensitive to fresh hints pertaining to labour market conditions.
Elsewhere today we have the news that US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin has ordered the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group to hasten its transit to the Middle East, and has also ordered the Omaha-class ballistic missile submarine USS Georgia to deploy to the region. Austin’s press release says that the Lincoln strike group will add to the capabilities already provided by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, which seems to imply that it will not simply be relieving the Roosevelt as was previously reported. At least not straight away.
Having sold off in sympathy with equities last Monday, Brent crude futures have crept higher this morning after posting four-straight days of gains at the back end of last week. Latent nervousness about the timing and scale of Iranian (and allies) retaliation for Israel’s assassination of Hamas political leader Haniyeh and Hezbollah #2 Fuad Shukr remains, but in light of the soft demand outlook our energy analyst Joe DeLaura believes that a substantial move higher would require actual interruptions to the flow of energy supplies through the Persian Gulf.
Elsewhere this week we are expecting UK CPI, Aussie labour market figures for July, and a policy rate meeting from the Reserve Bank of New Zealand. That meeting is a coin toss as to whether the RBNZ cuts its policy rate or not. Rabobank had held a forecast of an August 2024 rate cut since all the way back in November of 2023, but we recently pushed that back by one meeting to October after non-tradeable inflation in Q2 printed a little higher than expected.
Like the Fed, the RBNZ won’t want to leave it too long to easy policy. Central bankers continue to stress their data-dependence when making policy decisions, but it’s a game that does require some degree of forward projection. To borrow from Nietzsche: If you gaze too long into the data, the data also gazes into you.
