With oil prices set to soar after the midterms as the SPR drain ends and markets no longer have desperate democrats to help fulfill their immediate energy needs, moments ago the WSJ unveiled another potential oil price powder keg, so to speak, when it reported that according to Saudi and U.S. officials, Saudi Arabia has shared intelligence with the U.S. warning of an imminent attack from Iran on targets in the kingdom, putting the American military and others in the Middle East on an elevated alert level.

The report goes on to note that Iran is poised to carry out attacks on both the kingdom and Erbil, Iraq, in an effort to distract attention from domestic protests that have roiled the country since September.

In response to the warning, Saudi Arabia – which until recently was on the Biden admin “naughty list” after the crown prince snubbed Biden’s demands for no OPEC+ output cut – the U.S. and several other neighboring states have raised the level of alert for their military forces, the officials said. They didn’t provide more details on the Saudi intelligence.

Separately, the White House National Security Council said it was concerned about the warnings and ready to respond if Iran carried out an attack.

“We are concerned about the threat picture, and we remain in constant contact through military and intelligence channels with the Saudis,” said a National Security Council spokesperson. “We will not hesitate to act in the defense of our interests and partners in the region.”

It wasn’t exactly clear how attacking Saudi Arabia and launching a war with a far better armed opponent would “distract attention” from Iran’s internal troubles, but what is very clear is that if Saudi Arabia wanted to send the oil price soaring, it wouldn’t use another OPEC+ cut but would simply take production offline indefinitely; and if it can arrange Iran to help out… well, why not.

Iran has allegedly attacked northern Iraq with dozens of ballistic missiles and armed drones in recent weeks, one of which was shot down by a U.S. warplane as it headed toward the city of Erbil, where American troops are based. Tehran has publicly blamed Iranian Kurdish separatist groups based there for fomenting the unrest at home.

Iranian authorities have also publicly accused Saudi Arabia, along with the U.S. and Israel, of instigating the demonstrations.

While there is no indication at this point that this report is anything more than just Intel agency jawboning and propaganda, if it does in fact escalate into another Persian Gulf powderkeg, watch how high the price of oil will shoot to.

By Simon White, Bloomberg Markets Live reporter and analyst

Stocks will be stuck in a bear market for several more months even with a peak in Fed hawkishness.

Peak global inflation is likely here, allowing global central banks, including the Fed, to begin a gradual tempering of their hawkishness. The Fed will announce Wednesday the outcome of its rate-setting meeting, with a 75 bps hike expected. (To be clear, even while global inflation may have peaked, there are likely still several countries that will see another inflation peak later in this cycle.)

This might be taken as an all-clear for stocks and a swift end to the bear market, but current formidable headwinds and history suggest otherwise.

First, a distinction needs to be made between peak Fed hawkishness and the Fed pivot. A peak in hawkishness does not mean an immediate flip-flop to dovishness. Instead, it means the peak Fed Funds rate should stop rising – which we have seen – and be maintained. As the market starts to price this in, the front of the very steep Fed Funds curve should flatten, and the back of the curve – where the pivot is – should disinvert, taking the pivot out.

The negative correlation between the front and the back of the Fed Funds curve – pivoting around the peak in the Fed Funds rate – is very unusual. The last time was during the aggressive Fed hiking cycle in 1994, and then in again in the late 1990s.

The pricing out of the Fed pivot has implications for volatility as the relative price of crash insurance has a strong relationship with expected Fed cuts. No pivot likely means more expensive out-of-the-money S&P puts, and hence a higher VIX.

The end of the 1994 rate-hike cycle set the stage for a multi-year equity rally into the tech bubble. However, that is not the typical case. In median terms, the S&P moves sideways for about six months after the last Fed hike before putting in a pronounced rally.

Given we likely have three (perhaps more) rate moves to go before the Fed pauses – along with an increasingly likely earnings recession – any sustainable rally in equities and an end to the bear market is a way off.

Less than a month after the most recent JOLTS report (for the month of August, recall JOLTS is 2-months delayed) showed a near record plunge in job openings – in line with Fed hopes for a slowing economy and the reality of the slowing labor market – moments ago the BLS, perhaps carried away by next week’s midterms and the relentless taps on the shoulder from various Biden appartchiks, reported that in September – some two months before the midterms – job openings shockingly soared by 437K from a (upward revised) 10.280MM in August (10.053MM pre-revision) to 10.717MM. This was the second highest monthly increase of 2022 and the highest since  the 511K added in March!

And with expectations of a notable drop back under 10MM, this was the third biggest beat of expectations on record!

According to the BLS, the largest increases in job openings were in accommodation and food services (+215,000); health care and social assistance (+115,000); and transportation, warehousing, and utilities (+111,000). The number of job openings decreased in wholesale trade (-104,000) and in finance and insurance (-83,000

Coming a time when the number of unemployed workers allegedly continue to shrink, the surge in job openings meant that we are back to 5 million more job openings (10.717MM) than unemployed people (5.753MM), just shy of the all time high 5.9 million hit in March of 2022.

This means that there were almost 2 job openings for every unemployed worker, or – alternatively – the number of workers competing for every job opening slumped again, and was down to just shy of record lows, at 0.54.

Curiously, while job openings soared, hiring tumbled and in September the BLS reported that total hires dipped to 6.082 million which was the lowest since Feb 2021. The trend here is clear: down and to the right. According to the BLS, hires decreased in durable goods manufacturing (-57,000) and in state and local government education (-40,000).

Needless to say, while last month’s huge JOLTS miss sparked a frenzied rally, today’s shocking beat is not helping risk sentiment because if anything, the Fed will have to once again come out as hawkish, as the Fed’s WSJ mouthpiece was quick to remind us.

The number of job openings in September rose by 437,000 to 10.7 million (and the August figure was revised up by 200,000).

The Fed would like to see the ratio of vacancies to unemployed workers decline, and it ticked up in September to 1.86 from 1.68.https://t.co/RwwwVqBmFp

— Nick Timiraos (@NickTimiraos) November 1, 2022

Despite better-than-expected US macro data in the last few weeks, the ‘soft’ survey data on the Manufacturing side of the economy has been rapidly losing momentum.

However, according to this morning’s final October print for S&P Global’s PMI, things improved throughout the month from a 49.9 (contractionary) preliminary print to a final of 50.4 (still notably down from September’s final print of 52.0). That is the weakest print since June 2020.

The ISM Manufacturing survey also printed slightly better than expected at 50.2 (50.0 exp) but was lower than the September print of 50.9. That is the weakest since May 2020.

Source: Bloomberg

This comes after the overnight session saw China and UK PMIs remain in contraction (deepening in the latter).

The PMI data showed the sharpest drop in new orders since May 2020, but on the positive side, inflationary pressures softened further.

On the ISM side none of the major components are in expansion with new orders at 49.2 and employment at 50.0, but, like PMI, prices plunged to 46.6…

Source: Bloomberg

Inventories and production added very marginally to PMI…

Source: Bloomberg

ISM Respondents did not sound upbeat at all:

• “Flat business activity: continued electronics market challenges.” (Computer 8 Electronic Products]

• “Customers are canceling some orders. Inventories of finished goods increasing. Expect some bounce back as some customers may be waiting for commodity prices to decline (further).” (Chemical Products]

• “Challenges with labor and parts delivery are easing. Order levels are slowing down after pent-up demand in the previous month.” [Transportation Equipment]

• “Growing threat of recession is making many customers slow orders substantially. Additionally, global uncertainty about the Russia-Ukraine (war) is influencing global commodity markets.” (Food. Beverage 8 Tobacco Products]

• “We have seen a general pullback in available capital budgets from our customers, and that is having a significant impact on our sales in the fourth quarter.” (Machinery]

• “Housing market is down, so our business is affected. Capacity has increased over the last two years due to high orders of consumer goods and appliances, so now we re trying promotions to get our orders up to where we can use all our capacity.” [Electrical Equipment. Appliances 8 Components]

• “Customer demand has been slower for two months. Production is decreasing our inventory and (we are) implementing forecasts carefully. The headwind seems to be very strong, so we need to be prepared for that.” (Fabricated Metal Products]

• “International conditions loom large and seem very foreboding. Overall, we still think 2023 will be a positive year, with at least some moderate growth.” (Nonmetallic Mineral Products]

• “Lead times are improving. Plastic prices are coming down.” [Plastics 8 Rubber Products]

• “Prices are continuing a slight decline. Suppliers are trying to hold off decreases, but competition is increasing.” [Miscellaneous Manufacturing]

Looking forward, things are bleak as output expectations for the coming 12 months weakened in October. Although still generally upbeat, the degree of confidence was the lowest since May 2020 as firms expressed concerns regarding inflation and overall demand conditions.

Siân Jones, Senior Economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence, said:

“October PMI data signalled a subdued start to the final quarter of 2022, as US manufacturers recorded a renewed and solid drop in new orders. Domestic and foreign demand weakened due to greater hesitancy among clients as prices rose further and amid dollar strength. As such, efforts to clear backlogs of work, rather than new order inflows, drove the latest upturn in production.

“Confidence in the outlook waned as underlying data also highlighted efforts to cut costs and adjust to more subdued demand conditions in the coming months. Input buying fell sharply and resilience in employment stumbled, as the pace of job creation eased to only a marginal rate.

“On a more positive note, input costs rose at the slowest pace in almost two years amid signs of reduced disruption in supply chains. Lower demand for inputs was a contributing factor to this, however. Nevertheless, softer hikes in costs were reflected in a slower uptick in output charges, as firms sought to pass on cost savings where possible to try and boost sales.”

Finally, this ISM print is important as JPMorgan warned this morning:

“The Fed may have comments on economic risks becoming more balanced between growth and inflation; in that regard, ISM numbers matter as once the US falls into contractionary territory, the market will increasingly look for a change to the Fed’s hawkish behavior.“

The question is – are these ISM/PMI prints on the day the FOMC begins its deliberations enough to spook Powell into pausing or ‘stepping down’?

by Michael Every of Rabobank

The times are not just a-changin’ – they have changed. Let’s take six of the top seven headlines in the Financial Times this morning in Asia as Exhibit A:

• ‘Biden claims oil companies are ‘war profiteering’ as he floats windfall tax’
• ‘The Long View. Is Europe winning the gas war with Russia?’
• ‘Military Briefing: Russia and Ukraine prepare for the rigours of winter war’
• ‘The Big Read. Egypt and the IMF: will Sisi take the economy out of the military’s hands?’
• ‘The nuclear threats that hang over the world’
• ‘Live news updates: Putin says grain deal ‘suspended’ not terminated’’

Do you spot a pattern? War; economic war; war; military; war; economic war. Are you incorporating them into your forecasts? I can assure you that the vast majority of analysts still aren’t because this is apparently ‘exogenous’. If so, what is endogenous is irrelevant. Anyway, on we go into those murky waters, via a mini-edition of the Global D’Oily.

The White House has come out all guns blazing against Big Oil, calling them war profiteers (which the US is no stranger to: **cough** The 2003 Iraq War **cough**), and threatening windfall taxes. President Biden gave a public address and specifically tweeted that: “The oil industry has a choice. Either invest in America by lowering prices for consumers at the pump and increasing production and refining capacity. Or pay a higher tax on your excessive profits and face other restrictions.” Recall when in 2016 I talked of geopolitical ‘Thin Ice’ we could fall through, after which markets would no longer operate the way they used to? Well, it wasn’t just about tariffs: the US is now laying down the law to not only the Russian energy industry, but its own.

Public anger at firms making huge profits during periods of high inflation and low growth is understandable: just wait for high unemployment too and then see how angry the atmosphere gets. Yet saying a private firm can make a fixed % return on the nominally-priced volume of a product it sells –until it exceeds an unclear threshold that is no longer “a fair return on hard work”– is not neoliberal laissez-faire. The last time we saw that in the US was 1980. (And if we saw it again now, who might be next, as commodity trading house profits echo those of Big Oil?)

The way the tweet is worded, could we see the use of the Defence Production Act to force Big Oil to build more refineries, which will take years to come on line, or key pipelines, including the one which the White House put the kybosh on early in this administration? The industry itself claims aggressive federal regulations aimed at preventing it growing, and in favour of a green transition, are the real culprit. Or is Big Oil expected to directly subsidise energy prices from current profits, as well as to increase production against a backdrop of lower prices? Or might we see export bans, which would make energy cheap in the US, but extortionate elsewhere? Or is this just a sham?

Since the news broke, oil has failed to fall back – which is what has happened in most other economies where governments lean on their energy sectors to “step up” and help the public by “lowering prices at the pump”. Indeed, the Saudis are still pressing ahead with their 500km-long, glass-walled, linear city called Neom, which looks like something from Logan’s Run. (But, I suspect, won’t age as well as the inhabitants of that movie’s city.)

That is despite the looming COP27 summit in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, who got that FT mention today, and are hosting the Green Team while building a new Pharaonic capital city that includes a vast public park in the middle of a desert, backed by earnings from LNG exports. Saint Greta of Thunberg says she, like UK PM Sunak, will not be attending this year because, in so many words, she sees it as ‘Sham el-Chic’ (hat tip to Michael Magdovitz for that one).   

Also in the energy mix, the US is to exempt Russian oil loaded before 5 December from its price cap (just to clarify, that’s a price cap on Russian, not US oil), with a deadline of 19 January 2023 before it is imposed on unloaded cargo. How this will all work out in practice also remains to be seen. Sham is very much the word on the energy street.

More deliberate shambles, 90% of Kyiv is now reportedly without running water and/or electricity – and winter is coming. Are we really going to see a modern European city of millions having to see its population melt snow with firewood to get by? Perhaps, yes; or millions of refugees.

On the upside, several ships departed from Ukraine laden with grain yesterday despite the Russian threat of a blockade: that’s some relief for food prices, if so – but let’s wait and see.

Yet given the Eurozone inflation numbers yesterday –October headline CPI was 1.5% m-o-m, taking the y-o-y rate up to a record high of 10.7% vs. consensus estimates of 10.3%, and even core CPI was 5.0% y-o-y– there may yet be some other Europeans having to rely on firewood in 2023 too.

Sadly, those who think of this is as ‘exogenous’ sadly includes ECB President Lagarde, who gave an interview on Irish television in which she stated the “energy crisis is causing massive inflation,” and that said inflation came from “pretty much nowhere”.

European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde: “Inflation came from nowhere”
Source: https://t.co/xk4sNujsDU pic.twitter.com/YMNNuKBA7L

— Wittgenstein (@backtolife_2023) October 30, 2022

I guess that’s true if you don’t understand the real physical economy, or economic theory, or economic history, or geopolitics, which is true of most of the economics trade. They too specialise in Sham el-Chic

Update (0950ET):

Both boosters have successfully landed. 

*  *  *

Update (0946ET):

The SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket’s side boosters have separated. 

Falcon Heavy’s side boosters separate: pic.twitter.com/QqDYgRiqja

— Michael Sheetz (@thesheetztweetz) November 1, 2022

*  *  *

Update (0942ET):

The SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket has lifted off the launch pad at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. 

The world’s most powerful rocket carries a classified payload for the Space Force. 

You can watch the Falcon Heavy launch live here:

*  *  *

The launch of a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket is expected at 0941 ET from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. If all goes well, a classified payload for the US Space Force will be catapulted into low-Earth orbit. 

All systems and weather are looking good for Falcon Heavy’s launch of USSF-44; the 29-minute launch window opens at 9:41 a.m. ET → https://t.co/EDwAlAYGuI

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) November 1, 2022

“Falcon Heavy rolling up the ramp ahead of tomorrow’s targeted launch of the USSF-44 mission; weather is 90% favorable for liftoff,” SpaceX tweeted Monday evening. 

Falcon Heavy rolling up the ramp ahead of tomorrow’s targeted launch of the USSF-44 mission; weather is 90% favorable for liftoff pic.twitter.com/ZhLHUkSPKV

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) October 31, 2022

SpaceX then tweeted a video of the Falcon Heavy being lifted into a vertical position around midnight. 

Falcon Heavy going vertical at Launch Complex 39A pic.twitter.com/4rOUg5q2tY

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) November 1, 2022

Space Launch Delta 45, the official account of Patrick Space Force Base and Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, warned of a “double sonic boom” during this morning’s launch. 

“Please be advised, tomorrow morning’s launch will be followed by a double sonic boom. This will occur shortly after launch, as the boosters land on landing zone 1 and landing zone 2 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station,” the space agency said. 

Please be advised, tomorrow morning’s launch will be followed by a double sonic boom.

This will occur shortly after launch, as the boosters land on landing zone 1 and landing zone 2 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station. pic.twitter.com/2wAHkyyx3q

— Space Launch Delta 45 (@SLDelta45) October 31, 2022

USSF-44 will be just the fourth-ever Falcon Heavy mission and its first since June 2019. The world’s most powerful rocket in operation can lift a 140,000-pound payload to low-Earth orbit and beyond. There were no further details on the classified payload for the Space Force. 

The ranks of rebellious treasonous Democrats willing to meddle in the “independent” machinations of The Fed is growing as the countdown to the midterm meltdown continues to accelerate.

Who could have seen this coming?

In early September, we warned that The Fed’s actions mean millions of Americans are about to lose their jobs… and Democratic lawmakers will not just quietly sit by:

…due to the recency bias of Biden’s trillions in stimmies, and a world where workers – whether working form home or the office – have virtually all the leverage, few today can conceive of a world where inflation is zero or negative and is instead replaced with millions in unemployed workers, an outcome which one could (or rather should) say is even worse for the ruling democrats than roaring inflation. At least, with runaway prices, most people have a job and their wages are rising (at least nominally, if not in real terms).

However, the higher rates rise, the closer we get to that inevitable moment when the BLS – unable to kick the can any longer – admits what has been obvious to so many for months: the US is facing a labor crisis of epic proportions with millions and millions of mass layoffs.

In “Inflation and the Scariest Economics Paper of 2022“, Furman summarizes a paper written by Johns Hopkins macroeconomist Larry Ball with co-authors Daniel Leigh and Prachi Mishra of the International Monetary Fund released by the Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, whose conclusion is as follows: “To bring price increases down to 2%, we may need to tolerate unemployment of 6.5% for two years.“

What does this mean in absolute numbers? 

Assuming a modest increase in the US labor force, a 6.5% unemployment rate in 2024 would translate into no less than 10.8 million unemployed workers, an 80% increase from the 6 million today!

Still think that politicians – and especially Democrats – will sit quietly and blindly ignore how high the Fed is hiking rates if it means that to normalize inflation back to 2% it means nearly doubling the number of unemployed Americans (and a crushing recession to boot). Spoiler alert: no, they won’t, and this may be one of the very rare occasions when Elizabeth Warren is actually right to worry about what the coming mass layoff wave means for Democrats… and the 2024 presidential election.

Well, surprise, surprise, here comes Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Rashida Tlaib and the rest of the progressive panderers to pressure The Fed to take its foot off the throat of the “strong as hell” economy.

Building on what Senate Baking Committee Chair Sherrod Brown recently warned last month:

“For working Americans who already feel the crush of inflation, job losses will make it much worse. We can’t risk the livelihoods of millions of Americans who can’t afford it. I ask that you don’t forget your responsibility to promote maximum employment and that the decisions you make at the next FOMC meeting reflect your commitment to the dual mandate.”

Warren et al. slam the implications of The Fed’s projected job losses from its official projections and its intention to continue raising interest rates at an “alarming pace”:

“You continue to double down on your commitment to ‘act aggressively’ with interest rate hikes and ‘keep at it until it’s done’…”

The lawmakers remind Powell that his tools are limp in the face of Putin’s price-hikes and corporate gouging…

Your “overarching focus” on “using [the Fed’s] tools to bring inflation back down to our 2 percent goal” no matter the cost is particularly troubling given the limits of interest rate hikes in addressing key drivers of today’s inflation, including lingering supply chain snarls, corporate price gouging, and the war in Ukraine.

Then they conclude with the same language that Brown used:

“These statements reflect an apparent disregard for the livelihoods of millions of working Americans, and we are deeply concerned that your interest rate hikes risk slowing the economy to a crawl while failing to slow rising prices”

They end with a series of questions that pointedly highlight the economic impact (and inequity) of The Fed’s actions, awkwardly bring up former Fed Vice Chair Richard Clarida recent comments that “Until inflation comes down a lot, the Fed’s really a single-mandate central bank,” asking Powell “Do you agree with that assessment?”

“Failure is not an option for Jay Powell,” says Former Fed Vice Chair Richard Clarida. “I think they’re going to 4% hell or high water. Until #inflation comes down a lot, the Fed is really a single mandate central bank.” pic.twitter.com/4hfLCVWZDP

— Squawk Box (@SquawkCNBC) September 9, 2022

Circling back to our initial thoughts, remember The Fed is apolitical and independent and anyone who tries to sway them is a treasonous traitor.

When President Trump publicly spoke about The Fed cutting rates, some former Fed officials were not happy:

“I am not pleased,” said Carl Tannenbaum, a former Chicago Fed official and chief economist at Northern Trust.

“The remarks certainly aren’t an immediate threat to Fed independence, but they break with the tradition of respectful distance.”

Randall Kroszner, a former Fed governor, said the central bank has withstood political pressure before and will continue to do so under Mr. Powell’s leadership.

“The Fed has often faced political pressures — from Congress, presidents, Treasury secretaries and innumerable outside groups,” said Mr. Kroszner, an economics professor at the University of Chicago.

“My experience at the Fed is consistent with what Jay Powell recently said — being non-political is deep in the Fed’s DNA — and I believe that Jay will keep it that way.”

But hey, it’s different this time… because “this economy is strong as hell”…

For now the market is reacting ‘with’ the politicians and shifting rate-trajectory expectations dovishly:

Read the full letter below:

At a moment the US says it is nearing its longtime goal of closing the Guantanamo Bay prison facility which once held hundreds of suspected terrorists during the so-called Global War on Terror, the White House is mulling to expand the Migrant Operations Center located at the same US Naval base off Cuba.

In particular, the administration is looking at housing fleeing Haitians at Guantanamo Bay amid spiraling unrest on the Caribbean island-nation – part of a broader plan the US has been pushing for UN military intervention to stabilize the country as its government faces collapse at the hands of armed gangs.

The migrant facility is separate from the notorious prison for terror suspects and has been in operation for over three decades. It typically houses migrants intercepted by the US Coast Guard in regional waters and off the southern US coast. 

But now it could serve as a crucial hub for US efforts to help stabilize the security situation in Haiti, as NBC describes: 

The White House National Security Council is asking the Department of Homeland Security what number of Haitian migrants would require the U.S. to designate a third country, known as a “lily pad,” to hold and process Haitian migrants who are intercepted at sea and what number would overwhelm a lily pad country and require Haitians to be taken to Guantánamo, according to the document.

A series of National Security Council meetings have reportedly been held to focus on the emerging crisis over the last several days, as a new flood of Haitian migrants and refugees are expected along the southern US border.

It was actually mostly Haitian migrants present among the large caravan of some 12,000 which camped under an international bridge in Del Rio, Texas in September 2021. 

We previously reviewed the chaotic and unpredictable situation in Haiti as follows: 

Armed groups have sized control of several key trade and distribution hubs in Haiti, creating dire shortages in basic necessities, such as water, and even forcing a significant number of hospitals, businesses and other institutions to close their doors.

Haiti’s descent into chaos accelerated in July 2021 after the assassination of President Jovenel Moise. In the weeks following his death, then-acting PM Claude Joseph briefly took over as president, but was soon forced from power under international pressure after a bloc of countries led by the United States declared their support for Henry. The new leader reportedly has close ties to a suspect in Moise’s assassination, and even continued contact with him after the murder.

NBC says the Biden administration is bracing for the moment there’s a mass exodus from the island as the chaos spreads and resources dwindle, and as people grow more desperate.

Haitians are protesting their government’s request to bring U.S. troops into Haiti.

Haiti has been subject to foreign intervention at least three times. The last intervention brought a UN peacekeeping mission, which has since faced multiple allegations of abuse. pic.twitter.com/KSRPhRLxm3

— AJ+ (@ajplus) October 21, 2022

“The Biden administration predicts that when the fuel is no longer blocked and migrants are able to buy gas to power boats, there could be a mass exodus of Haitians trying to make the dangerous journey to the U.S. by sea, the U.S. officials said,” according to NBC.

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

The UN has an interesting report on investments needed to address climate change. Let’s tune in…

Finance Flows from UN Report

Scaremongering Continues

The Guardian reports UN finds ‘no credible pathway to 1.5C in place’

The UN environment report analysed the gap between the CO2 cuts pledged by countries and the cuts needed to limit any rise in global temperature to 1.5C, the internationally agreed target. Progress has been “woefully inadequate” it concluded.

Current pledges for action by 2030, if delivered in full, would mean a rise in global heating of about 2.5C and catastrophic extreme weather around the world. A rise of 1C to date has caused climate disasters in countries from Pakistan to Puerto Rico.

If the long-term pledges by countries to hit net zero emissions by 2050 were delivered, global temperature would rise by 1.8C. But the glacial pace of action means meeting even this temperature limit was not credible, the UN report said.

A study published this week found “large consensus” across all published research that new oil and gas fields are “incompatible” with the 1.5C target.

What Would It Cost?

Hooray! Only $4 trillion to 6 trillion per year.

“A global transformation from a heavily fossil fuel- and unsustainable land use-dependent economy to a low-carbon economy is expected to require investments of at least US$4–6 trillion a year,” stated the UN report (page 26 of 132).

Q: US$4–6 trillion a year for how many years?
A: Based on figure ES.6 (lead chart) least eight years.

Q: What Percent of GDP?
A: 4 to 9 percent for developing countries, and 2 to 4 percent for developed countries.

And developing countries will gladly fork over up to 9 percent of GDP every year for eight years.

Yeah, right. 

Meanwhile, the EU is burning more trees and coal. Burning trees is magically deemed environmentally neutral.

What a hoot.  

Exploring the Massive Clean Energy Boondoggle of Burning Trees as Carbon Neutral

Please consider Exploring the Massive Clean Energy Boondoggle of Burning Trees as Carbon Neutral

To the shock of everyone with any semblance of common sense, we are clearcutting forests and burning the trees based on the idea the process is carbon neutral.

26 of France’s 56 Nuclear Reactors are Offline for Pipe Corrosion or Maintenance

Also note 26 of France’s 56 Nuclear Reactors are Offline for Pipe Corrosion or Maintenance

Gear up for a cold Winter in France. The protests have started already.

*  *  *

Like these reports? I hope so, and if you do, please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Fans of Star Trek: The Next Generation may recall the episode where extra-dimensional dickhead “Q” is stripped of his powers for spreading chaos throughout the universe.

Well, Elon Musk just did that to Twitter’s content moderation thought police with just weeks to go before midterms – cutting the number of employees who can access censorship tools from hundreds to around 15 people last week, and reducing their ability to influence discussion on the platform.

According to Bloomberg, Musk and his ‘war cabinet‘ have frozen some employee access to internal tools used for content moderation and the enforcement of other policies, neutering staff’s abilities to ‘alter or penalize accounts that break rules around misleading information, offensive posts and hate speech.’

They also won’t be able to banish highly credentialed doctors and researchers posting divergent Covid-19 narratives.

All but the most ‘high-impact violations set for manual review’ will remain on the platform, according to people familiar with the matter.

Twitter staff use dashboards, known as agent tools, to carry out actions like banning or suspending an account that is deemed to have breached policy. Detection of policy breaches can either be flagged by other Twitter users or detected automatically, but taking action on them requires human input and access to the dashboard tools. Those tools have been suspended since last week, the people said.

This restriction is part of a broader plan to freeze Twitter’s software code to keep employees from pushing changes to the app during the transition to new ownership. Typically this level of access is given to a group of people numbering in the hundreds, and that was initially reduced to about 15 people last week, according to two of the people, who asked not to be named discussing internal decisions. Musk completed his $44 billion deal to take the company private on Oct. 27. -Bloomberg

On Sunday,Twitter employees had limited access to the internal tools to police Brazil’s presidential election.

Meanwhile, the company is still using automated enforcement technology as well as third-party contractors.

The restricted ability to restrict free speech has given Twitter’s Trust and Safety Team the vapors – with employees worried that the company will be short-handed during the runup to the Nov. 8 midterm election. Recall the Trust and Safety Team was headed by now-fired Vijaya Gadde – who would have had a large role (perhaps even the final decision) to ban ZeroHedge in February, 2020 for suggesting that Covid-19 was the result of a lab leak (and that we ‘doxxed’ a Wuhan lab employee using publicly available data – aka not doxxing).

Internally, employees say, Musk has raised questions about a number of the policies, and has zeroed in on a few specific rules that he wants the team to review. The first is Twitter’s general misinformation policy, which penalizes posts that include falsehoods about topics like election outcomes and Covid-19. Musk wants the policy to be more specific, according to people familiar with the matter.

Musk has also asked the team to review Twitter’s hateful conduct policy, according to the people, specifically a section that says users can be penalized for “targeted misgendering or deadnaming of transgender individuals.” -Bloomberg

On Monday, Yoel Roth, Twitter’s head of safety and integrity, tweeted on Monday that the company was addressing an increase in offensive posts.

“Since Saturday, we’ve been focused on addressing the surge in hateful conduct on Twitter. We’ve made measurable progress, removing more than 1500 accounts and reducing impressions on this content to nearly zero,” he wrote, adding “We’re primarily dealing with a focused, short-term trolling campaign.”

In short: