Authorities in Ireland are set to be given access to private social media conversations in order to spy on anti-mass migration sentiment following the riots in Dublin.
After an Algerian migrant stabbed three children outside a primary school, fiery but mostly peaceful protests broke out in the Irish capital.
Authorities reacted by being more outraged at the protesters than the actual would-be child murderer, who should have been deported 20 years ago and was previously released after being arrested for carrying a knife.
Now Irish people who share spicy memes in WhatsApp chat groups are going to be under government surveillance should this new ‘hate speech’ legislation pass.
“Gardai will be able to access and intercept private conversations on social media sites under new legislation, as the Justice Minister promised to crack down on crime following the riots in Dublin,” reports the Irish Times.
🚨🚨🚨
I told you how Irish Justice Minister Helen McEntee implemented mass surveillance of the Irish population last year.
Well now she’s trying to pass legislation to allow government and Gardaí access to private conversations on X and Facebook etc. @elonmusk. pic.twitter.com/XxtDS6dH57
The new legislation will also empower authorities to demand “cell site location data” from cellphone companies to help them locate dissidents.
According to the critics, the new law would create “de facto mass surveillance of the entire population.”
The new law would also fulfil Elon Musk’s warning that Irish citizens could be arrested and imprisoned for having a meme on their phone.
As we previously highlighted, Conor McGregor’s X posts are already under official investigation after he expressed anger at the stabbings, despite him condemning violence in the aftermath.
Meanwhile, in an extraordinary clip, barrister Joe Brolly described the Algerian migrant who stabbed three children as a “gentleman” and noted how “three women took it upon themselves to protect him and probably saved his life” from the anger of the mob.
Joe Brolly refers to the man who stabbed children on the streets of Dublin as a “gentleman”. pic.twitter.com/TOQF6Y0yxt
Ackman Flip-Flops, Now Sees First Rate Cut As Soon As March
Two weeks ago, in the immediate aftermath of the Nov 14 Fed dovish decision to keep rates on hold which even Powell’s own WSJ mouthpiece Nikileaks, aka Nick Timiraos, admitted killed any chance for more rate hikes, we said that with July now the Fed’s last rate hike, “it takes 8 months on average from the last rate hike to the first rate cut. So March“
Fast forward to Tuesday when none other than the Fed’s (formerly?) uber-hawkish governor Chris Waller, yanked the carpet from under the herd of “higher for longer” sheep, when he pivoted the Fed’s messaging on its latest dovish trajectory, saying that he is “increasingly confident that policy is currently well positioned to slow the economy and get inflation back to 2%. I’m encouraged by what we’ve learned in the past few weeks – something appears to be giving, and it’s the pace of the economy.”
And then there was this “If you see this [lower] inflation continuing for several more months, I don’t know how long that might be –3 months? 4 months? 5 months?–you could then start lowering the policy rate because inflation’s lower.“
Addressing this shocker, Nomura’s Charlie McElligott wrote that Waller “lent the most credible voice to the scenario… that with the current pace of the disinflationary trajectory being way ahead of schedule, that the Fed will likely need to CUT RATES as the next move, simply in order to prevent policy from being either overly restrictive, or even worse, “tightening” further via “real rates” as inflation craters…and critically now, legitimizing the Fed “cutting” rates even WITHOUT a Recession being required, which I’d posit is a scenario that most outside of the Macro Rates space didn’t really know had any Delta.”
In-doing so, Waller also put a time horizon on this sea-change (potentially requiring “just” three to five more months of current disinflation trend to confirm), which to McElligott means that “we could hypothetically get said “soft landing cuts” as soon as March / May 2024—which then ushered in a whole new distribution of implied Fed policy rate projections” as we saw 115-120bps of cuts now priced-in, and pulling-forward the first full cut into May from June.
So, yeah, suddenly March emerges as an all too likely first rate cut day… just as we first said two weeks ago.
But it wasn’t only a Fed governor agreeing with us: none other than billionaire Bill Ackman, best known for his staunchly bearish Treasury position (borne by his conviction that inflation and rates are going higher) which he only covered just a few weeks ago, flip-flopped overnight, when speaking to David Rubenstein, he said that “I think they’re going to cut rates sooner than people expect.” Ackman then clarified that such a move could happen as soon as the first quarter… i.e, March.
“We’re betting that the Federal Reserve is going to have to cut rates more quickly than people expect,” Ackman said in an upcoming episode of The David Rubenstein Show: Peer-to-Peer Conversations. “That’s the current macro bet that we have on.”
Ackman then paraphrased Waller saying that “what’s happening is the real rate of interest, which is what impacts the economy, keeps increasing as inflation declines.” The Pershing Square boss, who has a penchant to appear in tears on CNBC any time a trade doesn’t quite go his way, said that if the Fed keeps rates in the roughly 5.5% range when inflation trends below 3%, “that’s a very high real rate of interest.”
Ackman also told Rubenstein he’s not convinced the US economy is headed for a so-called soft landing, a scenario where the Fed raises interest rates without triggering a recession. “I think there’s a real risk of a hard landing if the Fed doesn’t start cutting rates pretty soon,” said Ackman, noting that he’s seen evidence of a weakening economy.
Of course, not everyone agrees that a rate cut is coming and this morning, the OECD warned that inflation could force central banks in western Europe to keep interest rates higher next year than financial markets expect, despite some of the weakest global growth rates since the financial crisis.
In its latest economic outlook, the Paris-based organisation said it expected the European Central Bank and the Bank of England to hold benchmark rates at their current peaks until 2025 — much longer than the markets are expecting — because of persistent inflationary pressures.
Clare Lombardelli, OECD chief economist, said that, while the organisation expected a “soft landing”, it was too soon to cut borrowing costs.
“Monetary policy is going to have to remain restrictive for a period of time — we are still worried about inflation persistence,” she told the Financial Times. “You are going to need real rates to be high.”
Ironically, the OECD also made the dovish case, when it forecast that growth in the world economy would weaken to 2.7% next year, the most sluggish rate since the financial crisis except for the first year of the pandemic, and in danger of sliding into recession absent more rate cuts.
And while the Fed cutting rates is a certainty, and a matter of when not if, the real question is what crisis will the central bank throw into the mix to also greenlight what the catastrophic US fiscal situation truly needs: not rate cuts (which will lower rates on Treasuries and thus trim demand for them further) but QE, because in a country where the debt rises by $1 trillion every 3 months and where taxpayers are increasingly unwilling to hand over their money to either Zelenskyy or Netanyahu via the Biden administration’s spending like a drunken sailor, only the Fed’s unlimited monetization of record US deficits will keep this particular circus going.
Remember: cutting rates without restarting QE won’t help the fiscal picture where the US now adds $1 trillion in debt every 3 months. Someone has to buy it (especially if rates drop). So the Fed will need a crisis.
WTI Extends Losses After Across-The-Board Inventory Builds, Record Crude Production
Oil prices are sliding this morning (after yesterday’s gains) as traders anxiously await tomorrow’s high-stakes OPEC+ meeting (supply), and weighed signs that the Fed is done raising interest rates (demand).
“The anxiety brewing in the crude market heading into tomorrow’s meeting is palpable,” said Rebecca Babin, a senior energy trader at CIBC Private Wealth.
“Positioning suggests that trades fear the downside more than the fear of missing out on a rally.”
The producer group is expected to set policy for 2024, but has yet to resolve a dispute over output quotas for some African members, according to delegates.
API reported overnight that crude inventories declined (and so did Cushing stocks) for the first time in six weeks.
API
Crude -817k (-700k exp)
Cushing -465k
Gasoline -898k (+200k exp)
Distillates +2.81mm (-100k exp)
DOE
Crude +1.61mm (-700k exp)
Cushing +1.85mm
Gasoline +1.76mm (+200k exp)
Distillates +5.22mm (-100k exp) – biggest build since Dec 2022
The official data opposed API’s with Crude and Cushing stocks building (and Gasoline stocks also rising vs API’s draw). Distillates saw a huge 5.2mm inventory build too…
Source: Bloomberg
The Biden admin took advantage of low oil prices and refilled the SPR with 313k barrels. That is the first ‘build’ at the SPR in 7 weeks…
Source: Bloomberg
Stockpiles at Cushing rose to their highest since August…
Source: Bloomberg
US crude production continues to hover at record highs 13.2mm b/d (ignoring the trend lower in rig count)….
Source: Bloomberg
WTI was hovering around $76 ahead of the official data and extended losses after the across the board builds…
Finally, the weak market is pressuring Saudi Arabia, the de facto leader of OPEC Plus, to push to continue and perhaps even deepen production cuts.
“There is a good chance the group will agree to some sort of additional cuts,” said Richard Bronze, head of geopolitics at Energy Aspects, a research firm.
But, as Gary Ross, chief executive of Black Gold Investors, pointed out:
“We are getting not far from the point where quotas are becoming unrealistically low.”
Operators outside OPEC generally have an interest in producing oil rapidly to recoup their investments and earn profits.
“The pipeline of non-OPEC projects alone appears sufficient to meet all global demand growth in the next few years at least,” analysts at Morgan Stanley wrote in a recent research note.
Of course, events could scramble forecasts. The picture would look very different if the now-suspended fighting in Gaza spread to the wider Middle East, which has some of the world’s largest producers around the Persian Gulf along with sea lanes that carry their oil to customers.
A senior official at the CIA posted a pro-Palestine photo on her Facebook page amid Israel’s bombardment of the Gaza Strip but later deleted the post and other pro-Palestinian content after it was reported by the media.
The Financial Times reported on Tuesday that the CIA associate deputy director for analysis changed her Facebook cover photo on 21 October to an image of a man waving a Palestinian flag.
The official also published a selfie with a sticker saying “Free Palestine” superimposed on the photograph, which the Financial Times reported was posted to Facebook years before the ongoing war, citing an unnamed person familiar with the image.
The images were deleted on Monday after the Financial Times contacted the official, the report said. Middle East Eye reached out to the CIA associate deputy director for analysis on LinkedIn for comment but didn’t receive a reply by the time of publication.
While CIA officials like those in the directorate of operations mainly work undercover with their identity obscured, others who provide analysis for the agency can have a more public profile. It is extremely rare, however, for officials working in government intelligence, particularly senior officials, to share their political views on current events.
The associate deputy director for analysis at the CIA reviews and studies the raw intelligence that field officers collect from foreign sources abroad. That intelligence goes into a highly classified document known as the President’s Daily Brief, which the US leader receives almost daily.
The revelation that a senior US intelligence official was posting images widely seen as supportive of the Palestinian cause comes at a sensitive time for the Biden administration, which has faced pushback from officials over its unconditional support for Israel.
Middle East Eye reported in October that State Department officials had penned dissent cables calling for the US to push Israel for a ceasefire. The Biden administration’s stance has also pitted senior officials within the National Security Council against younger staffers, particularly those from diverse backgrounds, who have expressed concern over the support to Israel.
A former US official was recently filmed advocating for killing Palestinian children. New York police arrested Stuart Seldowitz, a former US State Department official, earlier in November after he was captured on video calling an Egyptian halal food street vendor a terrorist and saying the death of 4,000 Palestinian children “wasn’t enough”.
Seldowitz was deputy director in the US State Department’s Office of Israel and Palestinian Affairs. He was later National Security Council advisor to President Barack Obama.
The Financial Times report is notable because it is the first to suggest that a senior US official within the intelligence community has expressed pro-Palestinian sentiment since the outbreak of war on 7 October.
The CIA official was later identified by name in a Washington Free Beacon report…
JUST IN: High-Ranking CIA Officer Found Sharing Pro-Palestinian Material on Social Media..
Amy McFadden, the Associate Deputy Director for Analysis at the CIA, altered her social media cover photo to one supporting Palestine, which occurred two weeks after Hamas, recognized as a… pic.twitter.com/cMlfUXu0oD
The CIA prides itself on being apolitical and delivering unbiased intelligence to the US president regardless of the political views of its officers and staff. It is extremely rare for a senior intelligence officer to make personal political statements.
The disclosure comes as the head of the spy agency, Bill Burns, takes on a leading role in managing the administration’s response to the conflict. The CIA director has met with leaders from Egypt, Jordan, Israel, and Gulf states to discuss Israel’s battle plans and the release of hostages. On Tuesday, he was in Doha for talks with his Israeli counterpart and Qatari officials serving as mediators with Hamas.
GM Shares Surge Over 10% After Announcing $10 Billion Buyback, Raising Dividend By 33%, Updating 2023 Guidance
General Motors shares are surging more than 10% in the pre-market session on Wednesday after the company said it is set to boost its quarterly dividend by 33% to 12 cents per share in the coming year.
Additionally, the company is launching a swift $10 billion share buyback, according to CNBC. “GM will immediately receive and retire $6.8 billion worth of its common stock,” the report said.
In its 2023 projections, it has also reincorporated expectations, factoring in an anticipated impact of $1.1 billion in EBIT-adjusted earnings due to approximately six weeks of labor strikes by the United Auto Workers union in the U.S.
“The long-term plan we are executing includes reducing the capital intensity of the business, developing products even more efficiently, and further reducing our fixed and variable costs,” CEO Mary Barra said in a statement.
GM’s new 2023 guidance includes:
Net income attributable to stockholders of $9.1 billion to $9.7 billion, compared with a previous outlook of $9.3 billion to $10.7 billion.
Adjusted EBIT of $11.7 billion to $12.7 billion, compared with the previous outlook of $12 billion to $14 billion.
Adjusted earnings per share of roughly $7.20 to $7.70 including the stock buyback, compared with the previous outlook of $7.15 to $8.15.
EPS in the range of $6.52 to $7.02, including the stock buyback, compared with the previous outlook of $6.54 to $7.54.
Adjusted automotive free cash flow of $10.5 billion to $11.5 billion, compared with the previous outlook of $7 billion to $9 billion.
Net automotive cash provided by operating activities of $19.5 billion to $21 billion, compared with the previous outlook of $17.4 billion to $20.4 billion.
Before the UAW strikes, CFO Paul Jacobson indicated the company was on course to meet the higher end of its earnings forecast. However, new U.S. and Canadian labor agreements are now set to raise costs by $9.3 billion, adding roughly $575 to each vehicle’s cost, primarily due to the UAW deal expiring in April 2028, the report says.
Recall, in late October, GM agreed to a deal that included 25% hourly pay raises plus cost-of-living allowances over the more-than-four-year contract.
CNBC reported that, to mitigate these costs, GM plans to reduce 2023 capital spending to $11.0-$11.5 billion, down from the previously expected $11-$12 billion, by delaying certain new products and investments, especially in EVs.
CEO Barra expressed disappointment in this year’s production of Ultium EVs but remains optimistic about increased production and improved EV margins. Despite recent challenges, GM’s long-term EV profitability goals remain unchanged, aiming for low to mid-single-digit EBIT-adjusted margins by 2025, ahead of its 2035 target to exclusively offer electric vehicles.
Regarding the company’s autonomous driving unit, Cruise, GM said it is “addressing challenges” in the segment. Recall, just days ago we wrote that the automaker would likely be slashing its spending on the initiative after a pedestrian accident last month that led the company to suspend its testing.
The spending cuts have people questioning the economics of Cruise as a business. GM had bought out Softbank’s minority share in the segment for $2.1 billion last year and now owns 80% of Cruise. It has invested “billions” in total into the company.
“These strategies are designed to keep our margins and free cash flow strong, and we are well-positioned as we head into 2024. I’m confident we’ll be able to execute our plan and excited about what the future holds. We look forward to sharing our progress with you,” Barra concluded.
Positive Peak Real Rates Show Easier Financial Conditions On Way
Authored by Simon White, Bloomberg macro strategist,
The peak in real short-term rates is now positive across the US, Europe and UK.
This allows central banks to soften their hawkish stances and points to a further forthcoming easing in global financial conditions. On its own that’s supportive for assets, but there are several risks to bear in mind.
The US got there first, with the peak in the real SOFR rate (based on the SOFR futures curve) going positive earlier this year. Europe and the UK lagged, but they too now have positive peak real rates.
If that can be considered some sort of “mission accomplished” for central banks (any celebrations are likely to be premature – more below), then they are beginning to show it by more explicitly countenancing the likelihood rates are at their terminal level, and therefore the market can – as is its wont – proceed with pricing in what it thinks will happen next, i.e. rate cuts next year.
Federal Reserve Board Member Christopher Waller’s comments on Tuesday flick in that direction, stating that a continued slowing in inflation of at least several months’ duration may open the door to rate cuts, while the ECB’s Stournaras said today that the first cut in Europe could come in the middle of 2024.
Financial conditions have eased recently with lower yields, higher stocks, tighter credit spreads and falling asset volatility.
But they are set to ease further as central banks dial back on higher for longer, which will implicitly blunt the effectiveness of their policy rate.
The chart below shows the Global Financial Tightness Index (GFTI; black line in chart), essentially a diffusion of global central-bank rate hikes.
It has started to rise as banks step away from hiking and some start to cut, easing financial conditions.
The Advanced Global Financial Tightness Index (AGFTI; brown line in chart) uses central-bank rate expectations to lead the GFTI by about six months. As we can see, softening of central-bank hawkish rhetoric is allowing the AGFTI to rise, pointing to the GFTI continuing to rise also, i.e. financial conditions should keep easing.
On its own, that’s supportive for risk assets, already enjoying tailwinds from buoyant liquidity conditions.
How long this can continue is another matter.
Some of the main risks to consider are:
the depletion in the Fed’s reverse repo (RRP) facility (a next-year problem);
the US Treasury skewing issuance away from bills again (watch the next quarterly refunding announcement in late January);
a US recession (looking less likely over the next six months);
and a re-acceleration in inflation which next year would put central banks right back where at the moment it is clear they don’t expect to be.
Q3 GDP Revised Higher To 5.2% As Soaring Government Spending Offsets Lower Private Consumption
While few will bother with today’s extremely stale 1st revision of Q3 GDP data, now that the discussion has turned from how high and how long the Fed will hike, to when the first rate cut will come, moments ago the Biden BEA reported that in its second estimate of third quarter GDP, the revised print was even higher than initially reported, and instead of the original 4.880% number it was actually 5.160% (rounded to 5.2%), the highest since Q4 2021 and above the 5.0% estimate.
Compared to the second quarter, the acceleration in GDP in the third quarter primarily reflected accelerations in government consumption and inventory investment offset by a reduction in consumer spending. Here are the full details:
Personal consumption contributed 2.44% to the bottom line GDP print in Q3, down from the pre-revision number of 2.69% but well above Q2’s 0.55%
Fixed Investment was revised higher, from 0.15% to 0.42%, which however was more than 50% below the 0.90% Q2 print of 0.90%
The change in Private investments was modestly increased also, rising to 1.40% in the revised print from 1.32% originally.
Net trade was again a wash, as the contribution of exports of 0.65% offset the reduction from imports of -0.69%, netting a -0.04% impact to the bottom line GDP.
The biggest delta between the pre and post-revision numbers came from government consumption, which rose to 0.94%, up from 0.79% in the pre-revised print.
Of the above, government spending contributed a whopping 0.94% to GDP, or a 5.5% contribution. This was the highest in almost three years and one of the highest prints on record. Or in other words, “presenting Bidenomics.”
Or as Trump’s former chief economist Joe Lavorgna puts it…
Why is growth so strong? One factor has been government spending which grew an unsustainably 4.7% in real terms over the last year. Outside the pandemic, this is one of the fastest rates in decades and works at a cross purpose with monetary policy objectives
Elsewhere, Gross domestic purchases prices, the prices of goods and services purchased by U.S. residents, increased 3.0% in the third quarter after increasing 1.4% in the second quarter. Excluding food and energy, prices increased 2.7% after increasing 2.1%.
More importantly, while the headline GDP price index came in at 3.6% or just higher than expected, the core PCE of 2.3% was both below the expected 2.4%, and below last month’s 2.4% original print.
Elsewhere, real disposable personal income (DPI) increased 0.1 percent in the third quarter after increasing 3.3 percent (revised) in the second quarter. Current-dollar DPI increased 2.9 percent in the third quarter, following an increase of 5.8 percent (revised) in the second quarter. The increase in the third quarter reflected increases in compensation, proprietors’ income, and personal income receipts on assets that were partly offset by an increase in personal current taxes. Personal saving as a percentage of DPI was 4.0 percent in the third quarter, compared with 5.1 percent (revised) in the second quarter.
Finally, turning to corporate profits, we find that these increased 3.3% at a quarterly rate in the third quarter after increasing 0.2% in the second quarter.
Profits of domestic financial corporations increased 4.2 percent after decreasing 10.9 percent.
Profits of domestic nonfinancial corporations increased 3.4 percent after increasing 1.8 percent.
Profits from the rest of the world (net) increased 2.1 percent after increasing 4.5 percent.
Corporate profits decreased 0.7 percent in the third quarter from one year ago.
A federal district court in Rhode Island on Monday rejected a bid to disqualify former President Donald Trump from candidacy in the 2024 presidential elections, citing an earlier ruling by an appeals court that rejected a similar claim.
Chief Judge John J. McConnell of the U.S. District Court in Rhode Island on Monday summarily dismissed a complaint by John Anthony Castro, a lesser-known Republican presidential candidate from Texas, who sought to disqualify President Trump from the ballot.
That marked another defeat for Mr. Castro, who has filed lawsuits in more than two dozen states over the past few months, including the one in Rhode Island that was dismissed today, to disqualify Trump from the ballot for the 2024 presidential election.
Mr. Castro has argued in his filings that President Trump engaged in insurrection against the United States by virtue of his actions and words related to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach, and must be disqualified from holding federal office by Section Three of the 14th Amendment. The Section Three provision bars officials who have “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” from holding office, and, around its passage in the 19th century, pertained to members of the Confederacy in the American Civil War.
In recent months, courts in Florida, Colorado, New Hampshire, Minnesota, and Michigan have dismissed his claims, mostly for procedural or jurisdictional reasons, such as a lack of standing or the courts’ refraining from ruling on a political question.
Judge McConnell’s Monday ruling followed a Nov. 21 ruling (pdf) on the same matter (also brought by Mr. Castro) by a higher court, the Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit. The appeals court has appellate jurisdiction over the Rhode Island District Court, so its rulings are binding on the lower court.
In that earlier ruling, the appeals court affirmed a lower court’s ruling and rejected Mr. Castro’s bid to remove President Trump from the New Hampshire ballot for the 2024 presidential election. The judges reasoned that Mr. Castro failed to show that he suffered “injury in fact”—a required component for bringing the case under Section Three—by Trump’s candidacy, because Mr. Castro’s claim that his votes would be taken away during the 2024 election (should President Trump run) is “too speculative” as of the time Mr. Castro filed his complaint.
The appeals court also affirmed the lower court’s reasoning that the case is a political subject that falls out of the types of matters that a court can adjudicate, but did not elaborate on this point.
President Trump’s spokesperson, Steven Cheung, touted Monday’s ruling as a victory for the former president’s campaign.
“Earlier today, a federal judge in Rhode Island dismissed yet another frivolous 14th Amendment challenge to President Trump’s ballot eligibility in 2024,” Mr. Cheung wrote in a statement on President Trump’s campaign website.
“The American People have the unassailable right to vote for the candidate of their choosing at the ballot box, something the Democrats and their allies driving these cases clearly disagree with. President Trump believes the American voters, not the courts, should decide who wins next year’s elections and we urge a swift dismissal of all such remaining bogus ballot challenges.”
Mr. Castro did not immediately return a request for comment on Monday.
Legal Scholars Diverge
Legal scholars have disagreed on whether President Trump, the front-running Republican presidential candidate, should be disqualified from running by Section Three.
In August, two scholars associated with the Federalist Society, William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen, argued in a paper that Section Three “disqualifies former President Donald Trump, and potentially many others, because of their participation in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 presidential election.”
Alan Dershowitz, who taught at Harvard Law School for nearly five decades, interpreted the provision differently in an article published in the Compact Magazine in August.
“A fair reading of the text and history of the 14th Amendment makes it relatively clear, however, that the disability provision was intended to apply to those who served the Confederacy during the Civil War,” Mr. Dershowitz wrote, echoing his comments to The Epoch Times earlier this year that “the only way [Trump] can be disqualified is if they can prove that he actually fought in the Civil War for the South.”
Andrew Gould, a former judge at the Arizona Supreme Court, predicted in an interview with The Epoch Times earlier this year that the disqualification issue would likely end up in the U.S. Supreme Court. In October, the country’s highest court already rejected an appeal by Mr. Castro without a recorded vote or rationale, which arose from Mr. Castro’s failed disqualification case against Trump in Florida.
The Colorado Lawsuit
Courts from around the country, citing jurisdictional issues, have generally refrained from commenting on the merits of Mr. Castro’s disqualification case against President Trump; that is with the exception of a court in Colorado, where District Judge Sarah B. Wallace wrote that President Trump, despite having “engaged in insurrection,” still should not be disqualified because his prior role as president falls out of the scope of Section Three of the 14th amendment.
Judge Wallace’s opinion prompted both Mr. Castro and President Trump to appeal to the Colorado Supreme Court—for separate reasons. President Trump’s lawyers took issue with Judge Wallace’s interpretation that the former President had engaged in insurrection, while Mr. Castro disagreed with her ruling that Section Three does not apply to President Trump.
The Colorado Supreme Court agreed to take up the case and has scheduled oral arguments for Dec. 6.
The world’s biggest asset manager, BlackRock, says that significant reforms in the public sector and public financial institutions could close the gap in climate financing in the emerging markets and free up to $4 trillion more in decarbonization investments by 2050.
The BlackRock Investment Institute (BII) published a paper on Tuesday that found that transition-related investment in emerging markets “will likely be notably lower than what they need across a range of scenarios.”
According to BII, closing the gap would “require significant public sector reforms and private sector innovation, resulting in greater “blending” of public and private capital – or blended capital.”
Some of the reforms include evolving the mandates and toolkits of multilateral development banks and public financial institutions like the World Bank, BlackRock’s economists and researchers wrote.
“We think public funding has been ineffective in mobilizing private capital at scale – and that’s where the multilateral development banks (MDBs) and public financial institutions can play a key role,” BlackRock’s researchers noted.
If reforms are successful, low-carbon investments in emerging markets could jump by an additional $200 billion a year – or $4 trillion overall – above BlackRock’s base view of a major increase in investment between 2030 and 2050.
But if reform efforts prove less durable or effective than in the base case, BlackRock expects investment levels reduced by about $50 billion a year, along with lower economic growth, lower energy demand, and a more divergent global transition.
Emerging markets excluding China have seen very little growth in low-carbon transition investment in recent years as most spending has been in the U.S., Europe, and China, BlackRock notes, citing IEA data that annual clean energy investment in emerging markets has flatlined since at least 2015 at around $250 billion per year.
The capital shortfall for the energy transition in emerging markets will likely persist, according to BlackRock.
“We think transition investment needs across EM are enormous – and not close to being met. Based on today’s investment trends, this shortfall will likely persist no matter how quickly or slowly the transition accelerates.”
Yesterday, Deutsche Bank’s Jim Reid published his 2024 World Outlook titled “The race against time” (which we will discuss shortly), and which refers to the fact that funding has dried up or tightened considerably over the last couple of years for various parts of the economy as rates have risen. So can central banks loosen, and can yields fall quickly enough to avoid a funding accident that could lead to contagion? Those are some of the questions Reid and his team try to answer.
One interesting mention in the report is a point that BofA’s Michael Hartnett has repeatedly made in his Flow Show notes, namely that 2024 will see elections in countries covering around half the world’s population.
In today’s Chart of the Day by the DB strategist, he looks at this back over 220 years and shows that this is set to be the year with the biggest percentage of elections across the globe. Also interestingly, it will be the polar opposite of 2023 which was one of the lightest years in the last four decades. In fact, this time last year DB was shighlighting here how 2023 was set to be the first year of the 21st century with no major G7 election.
So 2024 will be a big change from 2023. Clearly many elections will be relatively routine affairs, but as we saw from the Dutch election last week, there can be surprises.
The mains ones to watch are:
The US Presidential Election in November. A Trump victory, assuming he is the Republican nominee, plus a Republican sweep in Congress, could bring substantive policy changes.
The Taiwanese election in January 2024 could help shape US-China relations over the next few years.
European Parliamentary elections in June. Given the relatively high polling numbers for the far right across parts of Europe and the recent Dutch result, this election could test the capacity of the traditional mainstream parties to maintain a majority and the Commission’s ability to push further EU integration, such as with the “open strategic autonomy” agenda.
Indian elections in April/May. Political stability is behind our view that their economy will double in size out to 2030
So, to paraphrase Reid, stand by for the busiest political year ever.
