3D Chess Or 52-Card Pickup

3D Chess or 52-Card Pickup?

3D Chess always makes me think of Star Trek and wonder who the heck thinks that we need a game more complex than chess? 52-Card Pickup is a game most frequently played by siblings, and even then, only once or twice. Typically, the older sibling asks the younger one if they want to play 52-card pickup. Without knowing the game, but excited that their older sibling wants to do anything with them, the younger one instantly agrees. At which point the older sibling throws a deck of cards across the room and yells – there you go, 52-card pickup!

Depending on who you listen to, talk to, or follow, in its first full week, the Trump team is either playing an incredible game of 3D Chess, or is playing the equivalent of 52-Card Pickup with the nation.

It is far too early to say which side is right, and the final answer will likely fall somewhere in the middle. Having said that, there are a few things that have come up consistently in meetings, calls, and interactions with clients.

There are various processes in place to effectively protect the system. Could they be bypassed by using Recess Appointments? I have to admit that Congress getting recess, like schoolchildren, has always amused me, but recess appointments would be a very aggressive tactic. They allow Trump to bypass the confirmation process (for up to a year) for some positions, presumably the most difficult/contentious ones. For some reason, this is also “part of the system and process,” so someone must have thought that there was a need for this. To me, this, like many things (including the 2+ month timeframe between the election and the inauguration) is likely a function of how difficult it was to travel across the country back in the day. It will be interesting to see how the appointments go, to say the least.
If you are going to try to radically change D.C., often described as “draining the swamp,” it does make sense that non-traditional candidates would be selected. Yes, there are people with more experience than some of the nominees, but are they too close to the system to try and change it?
D.O.G.E (the Department of Government Efficiency) has generated a lot of buzz. It seems to be the one thing that everyone is curious about and wants to see how it all plays out (even with a tinge of optimism that some spending can be cut without reducing or hurting services). It is also quite clear that Musk, one of the richest people on the planet, will play a major role in this administration, as a key advisor to President-Elect Trump.

Thinking about this dovetails well with last weekend’s Learning to Speak Trump Again. For better or worse, we should expect D.C. headlines to continue to create volatility for the markets.

Having said that:

The 10-year Treasury is back to 4.44%, basically where it closed on November 7th. We’ve had some pretty big swings on a daily and even intraday basis, but wound up unchanged. I remain firmly in the camp that the deficit fears (and concerns about inflation from tariffs) are more than priced in right now.
The S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 are both below where they closed on November 7th (for all the “growth” hype, that certainly grabs your attention). Maybe even more surprising, given the attention, is that the Russell 2000 is back to below its November 7th close, having dropped over 5% since it hit a high on Monday (maybe a good reminder that equity markets should shut down along with the bond market on Veterans Day).
Gold was strong into the election, but has faded hard since then. Copper, which should benefit from growth if the “Dr. Copper” people are correct, is down over 12% since the start of the month. Oil has struggled, but energy stocks have done well, with XLE holding onto its gains. This makes some sense (see “Drill Baby Drill” from Fox Business this summer) as energy production should increase, helping to keep energy prices at bay, but creating some potentially strong profit growth.
Bitcoin. Bitcoin has been incredibly strong. Yes, some volatility, but it has clung to the idea that a Trump administration will be very positive for crypto in general and Bitcoin (and Dogecoin) in particular. Given how many of the people in Trump’s inner circle are very positive on Bitcoin, it makes sense. On the other hand, Trump doesn’t control Bitcoin at all, and he does seem to like to control things, which may tarnish his current love affair over time. Also, for all the chatter about the U.S. government building up a “Bitcoin reserve” (it is hard to miss it, if you spend any time at all on X), I have not heard from anyone that this is really feasible. Most, which includes me, think that there will be an immense amount of resistance to government adoption (yes on clearer and helpful rules and regulations, but no on adoption by the government). You cannot fight this rally right now and maybe it is 3D Chess being played out, but it has the smell of 52-Card Pickup to me.
Many of the Commercial Real Estate ETFs have done poorly. In some cases, they are much closer to their annual lows than highs, even as stocks in general perform well. I think that this is actually a very interesting opportunity as yield fears are overdone, and Work From Home is really going to struggle next year. More and more companies are limiting work from home as they push for a return to the office. That momentum feeds on itself. Many who were afraid to push for work from office will be emboldened. I cannot see a world where the Department of Government Efficiency (I’m not sure it is an actual department, but that doesn’t really matter given the attention that it’s getting) won’t be looking at getting more government workers back into the office. Everyone has focused on the potential for layoffs dragging down D.C.-focused real estate valuations, but I think that net/net over time, it will turn out to be good for D.C. commercial real estate. I see CRE as where I have the biggest difference of opinion with consensus views right now.

One Chart That I Cannot Stop Thinking About

We included this chart in our NFP reaction, but I feel a sense of urgency to highlight it again. Maybe this is our attempt to play 3D Chess, or maybe we are getting ourselves overly wound up about a non-event. Since we often discuss how dubious the Jobs Available calculation is for the JOLTS report, it may seem weird that the QUIT rate, from that same report, has grabbed our attention. My take on the QUIT rate is that it is “crowd sourced” data. Every individual has a pretty good idea about their own job prospects and that gets reflected in the QUIT rate.

During the financial crisis, the QUIT rate didn’t get this low until May 2008. If I remember correctly, we technically were not in a recession at the time, and only later did the powers that be declare that we actually were in a recession. That fits with my view that this rate is important and may have a predictive element to it.

I certainly think that when anyone and everyone felt like they could quit and get a better job, it was extremely difficult for management to take away work from home. I suspect that plans to offer severance packages to reduce the workforce voluntarily (one idea floated around by DOGE) won’t be that effective when workers don’t see outside opportunities readily available (that is my interpretation of the QUIT rate).

If we see a lot of progress made on the “Make America Great” front, this could change abruptly. There might be plenty of new jobs created. There might be jobs that were being done by undocumented workers becoming available. A lot could happen, but so far, I think the outlook on jobs is following the same path as stocks – initial jubilation has turned into a wariness about what might actually be achievable, let alone accomplished.

Bottom Line

Expect more volatility. We are going to get headlines and announcements that are difficult to interpret. What do they really mean? How likely is it to get accomplished? We know this administration is looking for CHANGE, but exactly what type of change they want is still a bit unclear in many areas. What they can achieve is even more unclear.

There is a clear sense of “urgency” as I cannot recollect any other election winner coming out so quickly with so many announcements!

I think we want to “fade” growth. We can buy dips in Treasuries and sell rips in stocks.

Maybe we will get a clearer picture, but I suspect in the coming days and weeks, the market will have more questions than answers. The fact that the original reaction to the election was so strong (with so many shorts being taken out, and so many newly minted bulls emerging) leaves us with potentially treacherous positioning. While legend has it that Wall Street likes to Climb a Wall of Worry, I don’t think it likes the current level of uncertainty. Maybe it is all 3D Chess, and we are just too naïve to see the master plan, or maybe we are all seeing enough things to question how effective this master plan will be?

While I like being overweight duration and underweight equities, I would not be a very aggressive overweight or underweight. It is more of an attempt to trade the volatility that is likely to continue.

On Bitcoin, if I hear one more $1 million price target, my head might explode, but for now, I can’t think of what will slow this down given the team around Trump, but then again, Trump himself might say something showing that he has had a change of heart (which is what I suspect will happen, but it seems too early for that to occur).

I did not focus on inflation, jobs, or other economic data (except to highlight the QUIT rate). I think that the data of the past few months will likely be irrelevant early next year as policies become clear and we can focus on what those policies will do to the economic data, and not worry about economic data that probably reflects a set of policies that will no longer be relevant.

We do get the most important earnings report for the AI story this week. Everything seems rosy in the space, but it is increasingly difficult to guess what has already been priced in.

Good luck and don’t stray too far from the desk, because you never know what headline might come out next! If you missed our Around the World Podcast from earlier in the week, it is a good listen.

Loading…

Originally Posted at; https://www.zerohedge.com//

zerohedge
Economics , News , Politics , Science
December 7, 2024
2 views

The Miserable Cost Of An Open Border

Authored by Seth Barron via RealClearPolitics,

The Biden-Harris experiment in dissolving the U.S. border has wrought massive changes to American society, most of which will not be understood for years, if not decades. Since 2021, U.S. border officials have had at least 10 million “encounters” with migrants, many of whom were allowed to enter the country. There is no telling how many more aliens entered the country without encountering enforcement agents. The population of the United States may have increased by as much as 15 million people in just a few years.

This massive flow of humanity crosses multiple national borders, involves every mode of transportation, accounts for billions of dollars paid in fees to smugglers, and describes a fantastically complex economy of suffering and hope. In an effort to get a handle on this human tide, noted muckraker James O’Keefe – known for his hidden camera “gotcha” interviews with abortionists, media executives, progressive nonprofit executives, and other degenerate types – traces the migrant onrush from its source, and seeks to trace the machinery of profit and influence that is conducting it from great removes.

“Line In The Sand,” the resulting documentary, is a remarkable and humane exposition, revealing perspectives and images American audiences have mostly been prevented from seeing. O’Keefe and his intrepid team begin on the U.S. side of the Mexican border, where we witness migrants crossing the border through holes that their guides have cut in a fence that serves as a target as much as a barrier. Infrared cameras show dozens of illegal aliens streaming toward “pick-up” vehicles on the U.S. side while smugglers – presumably cartel members – a few feet away taunt O’Keefe and his group. “What if I were to run up to them right now, what would happen?” O’Keefe asks his guide. “I would highly advise you against that,” he is told, in a classic understatement.

The fact that coyotes and other human traffickers are paid to assist northbound migrants with their passage is no scandal; we all know what their motivations are and why they are doing what they do. But O’Keefe documents multiple examples of U.S. Border Patrol agents standing idly by while illegal aliens cross, virtually under their noses. “Why aren’t you doing anything?” he asks. “Have a good day, guys,” a border agent desultorily responds before driving off in the general direction of the episode. Later, a migrant stands in front of a Border Patrol truck, clearly trying to alert the agents of his intention to surrender, but is studiously ignored until O’Keefe and his team call their attention to him.

There is a kind of sad comedy in the operations of U.S. border security, and O’Keefe is not unsympathetic to the absurd position that border agents have been put in. Trained to defend the national border and to serve as the first line of defense of American soil, these agents have been recommissioned as a perverse Welcome Wagon for illegal aliens, charged with making their undocumented and uninvited entrance to the United States as commodious as possible.

Looking to get deeper into the heart of this migratory avalanche, O’Keefe went deep into Mexico, to the city of Irapuato, about 150 miles northwest of Mexico City. Irapuato is a popular railway junction where thousands of migrants climb aboard “La Bestia,” or “The Beast,” a cargo train that chugs northward toward the United States. In the film’s most remarkable footage, O’Keefe and his team join with migrants, mostly from South and Central America, to ride The Beast, also known as “el Tren del Muerto,” or the Train of Death. O’Keefe talks to the migrants without condescension, asking them their destinations and what they plan to do when they get there, and their concerns about the perilous nature of the journey. We see the film crew race to jump on a moving train and clamber on top to sit in a pile of coal; O’Keefe is shocked at how truly dangerous this small element of the trip is and sympathizes with the migrants’ difficult choices. These scenes are among the film’s most affecting, along with the crew’s random encounter with a little girl who had just crossed the border after journeying from Guatemala by herself. There is a human dimension to illegal immigration, and O’Keefe does not ignore it.

However, there is also an impersonal dimension to this massive population transfer, and O’Keefe determinedly aims to uncover it – to put a face to the institutions and administrators that benefit from the rough injection of millions of people into American society. From government agents to bus companies to nonprofit resettlement groups to private contractors running huge, walled compounds housing thousands of children, O’Keefe doggedly tries to penetrate the mechanics of a system that resolutely hides itself behind a screen of silence, usually in the name of “safety” and “privacy.”

Some of the film’s more comical moments pertain to these segments, such as when the team follows some just-arrived Chinese migrants in San Diego to an employment agency, where other Chinese aliens, already in the country for several months, complain that it’s much harder to live in the United States than they had imagined. O’Keefe tries to sniff out a connection between the owner of the agency and more powerful actors, but it emerges that there really isn’t much going on; in fact, the owner asks O’Keefe if he knows of a way to apply for government grants.

Elsewhere, O’Keefe tries to get information about the operations of several huge residential centers for unaccompanied minors and tries to spin their refusal to give him access to the centers or submit to interviews as evidence of the existence of vast, government-funded child sex trafficking networks. But it seems more likely, though no less troubling, that the open borders policy of the last four years has created a tremendous humanitarian crisis of alien children roaming the continent by themselves, and the government is probably trying to keep them from becoming prey to sex traffickers while they sort out where to send them. Though O’Keefe does not uncover a salacious network of child predators, his vigorous pursuit of the truth does reveal the existence of a large, shadowy, government-funded, and lucrative system of child “welfare.”

So, “Line In The Sand” is correct in the larger sense that billions of dollars are being spent managing this human flow, and many people are getting rich off of it. The last thing these parasitical administrators of the nonprofit industrial complex want is for the border to close. O’Keefe does a great job of capturing in real time the corruption of a local New York City nonprofit called La Jornada, whose leader, Pedro Rodriguez, evidently perpetrates fraud, demanding fees for services that the city provides for free. O’Keefe also sends a Spanish-speaking reporter undercover into the Roosevelt Hotel, New York City’s main processing center for newly-arrived migrants, which offers him free housing, medical care, and even airplane tickets, even though the reporter explains that he has no identification of any sort. How, O’Keefe asks, in our post 9/11 security-obsessed era, are we to make sense of a system that admits millions of unvetted foreigners into the country, and then offers to fly them anywhere they care to go?

“Line In The Sand” is rough in parts, but intentionally so. Its subject is so sprawling and tangled that a neat and clean representation would be a lie. Even with a nine-figure budget – which this film assuredly did not have – a documentary about the border and the 30 million-footed human swarm that has crossed it would be messy and incomplete. But James O’Keefe and his small team have done something remarkable. They have taken on the decade’s biggest story, given it form, and preserved the humanity of its subjects. It is worth watching.

Seth Barron is a writer in New York and author of the forthcoming “Weaponized from Humanix.”

Tyler Durden
Sat, 12/07/2024 – 17:30