Month: November 2018

Pets now impacted by climate change – who knew??

There is no better example of how climate change activists create more fairytales to keep the alarmism going. This article found its way into the Mosman Daily. In a suburb where there are more SUVs per square metre than any other in Sydney, what better audience to publish an article to warn owners of Fifi & Pookie there is an elevated risk of climate change!

The dog psychology units should expect to be on standby with a deluge of visits from Lucy the miniature schnauzer and her friends who have become depressed by the changed weather cycles. Canine coiffure salons will be inundated with strict instructions to make sure that organic pet shampoos with natural menthol give them the sensation of feeling cooler to prevent them being triggered.

All those Mosman mothers should cut back on skim flat whites and Lululemon leotards because of the high amount of man-made fibers made from fossil fuels. Let’s not even begin to consider the make up and Chanel No.9 de parfum derived from minke whale blubber they slap on much less the three cans of hairspray used before meeting the girls for tennis…

Shame on those teachers that pushed students to hold a climate change rally in Martin Place today. They missed a huge opportunity to give a voice to the pooches of Mosman to prove that a lower incidence of tail wagging is solely caused by climate change even though the reality is the $1,000 silk cushion from House & Home was torn to shreds when mum was sipping macchiatos and gluten free muffins on Avenue Road.

Shame on the author for not demanding that McIntosh Mercedes, Audi & BMW Mosman be forced out of their Military Road dealerships for their unconscionable corporate greed. Rich Mosman husbands are lining up to buy gas guzzling two door sports cars which gives them the right to exploit the T3 lane when they pick up their mistresses on Cowles Road.

Reading articles like this reinforce the hysterics of the climate alarmists. Should make anyone sleep more soundly at night. By the way, don’t tell anyone but seaside properties in Mauritius continue to make higher highs. The teachers have missed that tidbit too. Then again it doesn’t fit the narrative.

Maybe the teachers need to sit outside the headmaster’s office

If kids want to strike and learn to protest, shouldn’t we the public be able to see whether the children are being constructively taught both sides of the argument in class before they paint placards? CM has a strong feeling that only “one” side of the climate story is being pushed – the alarmist one. Skeptical kids should live in fear of detention.

Perhaps that should be the litmus test – if teachers are proud of getting kids to form such demonstrations, they should not be afraid to allow open access to what they’re teaching. Something tells me they wouldn’t dare because it would prove their own bias beyond doubt.

Here are three things CM would do:

Make the kids debate both sides of the argument in detail. Make them think. Research. Investigate.

Conduct an ethics class to show the countless lies, scandals and whistleblowers outing even government agencies on fabricating data. Kids know what happens when they lie. Perhaps they would grow up to be questioning about what bias they’re fed.

Do an economic feasibility study on renewables vs fossil fuels. Let students decide on whether investing their futures in renewables for zero outcome by 2100 makes sense. Teach them that renewables aren’t cheaper than fossil fuels for two reasons – first, fossil fuel prices are plummeting and second renewable calculations are based on 100% operating capacity which is unrealistic in the extreme. Put them at 20% and renewables are 5x more expensive relatively speaking.

If after thorough and rigorous debate the kids still believed they’re doomed then they can protest their little hearts out.

What it proves is that school faculties are pushing political agendas rather than education. We teach kids that lying is bad and there are consequences for doing so. Shouldn’t teachers be put on the naughty step for doing the same?

CM worries about their future indeed. Oh and it won’t be global warming that kills them. Their dreams have a far higher risk of being killed off through the activism peddled by their teachers. Say, have the teachers told the kids about those alarmists warning childbirth as a cause for future warming?

Karl Marx would be proud.

Double Standard

After 20 years in Japan, there is a wish buried deep down that the locals consult foreigners when dabbling with the use of English to prevent misinterpretations, especially at a corporate level. The company, Double Standard has recently been promoted to the 1st Section of the Tokyo Stock Exchange.

Double Standard Inc. principally provides business improvement and supportservices based on the big data technology.  Let’s hope it doesn’t live up to the namesake when dealing with customers.

Japan’s Sun City once highlighted to foreigners back in 2008 that it was ‘puking property inventories’ in its English press release after it ran into financial difficulties after Lehman Brothers collapsed.

The ultimate irony of the misfortunate name of Double Standard is it accurately assesses the way the authorities continue to apply the law with respect to corporate malfeasance.

Save James

As Tasmania looks to remove gender from birth certificates, take note of a 6yo boy named James who is facing chemical castration when he hits 8yo in America.

The father claims his son has always identified as a boy when with him and has testimony from others that proves his stance. He always chooses to dress as a boy when with his father.

Yet his mother has dressed him as a girl since the age of 3, calls him Luna, enrolled him as a girl at his local school and takes him to social transitioning therapy which the courts are requiring his father to pay. The bills will be extended to transgender surgery and sterilization drugs when he is of age.

The mother is seeking to remove custody from the father – who challenges her assertion – for child abuse in her divorce proceedings.

Walt Heyer, author of Trans Life Survivors and former transgender female, warned a misdiagnosis could ruin the boy’s life. Heyer claims he was secretly cross-dressed by this grandmother as a young boy. He went on to say

The diagnosis is critical, because labeling a child with gender dysphoria can trigger a series of physical and mental consequences for the child and has legal ramifications in the ongoing custody case. Get it wrong and the boy’s life is irrevocably harmed…[and] hinges purely on the diagnosis of gender dysphoria by a therapist who wraps herself in rainbow colors, affirms the diagnosis of gender dysphoria, and dismisses evidence to the contrary,”

Putting an acrimonious divorce to one side, should courts be determining the life of a 6yo kid based on a therapist’s diagnosis? Has the therapist got decades of scientifically backed research and proof to back her assertions? Or is this a case of confirmation bias? If we think about it, a therapist’s repeat business thrives more from confirmation than rejection of gender dysphoria. This is also a question of ethics.

Coming out as transgender is one thing. If the child reaches an age when they are biologically fully formed and can decide for themselves then they should be free to choose. There is no question everyone should have equal rights under the law but allowing parents the right to chemically castrate kids at age 8 before they can possibly understand the ramifications of those actions is criminal.

There is no 100% guarantee every child won’t switch back to identifying as their birth gender, but once the hormone sterilization begins the child has been permanently damaged. What will James’ mother say if she is wrong about him? “Mommy’s sorry”? Legally she bears no risk.

Let’s pray the right thing happens for James’ sake.

How many canaries in the coalmine do we need?

SAAR.png

CM has said for ages that President Trump risks being hoisted by his own petard if he continues to attribute the stock market to his leadership. It works both ways. Stock markets are suffering. Suck it up.

GM has announced it is pulling the plug on over 14,000 US workers (8,000 white collar, 3,300 blue-collar workers in Canada and another 2,600 in the US) and potentially closing  5 plants. Is this a surprise? The chart above shows the % year over year change of US car sales. It has been stepping down clearly since GFC. In September this year GM’s sales slumped 19% in before falling 5.5% in October. The brutal storm activity is unlikely to help November either.

This quote will live to haunt in the coming downturn – CEO Mary Barra said the company doesn’t predict an economic downturn any time soon and is making the cuts “to get in front of it while the company is strong and while the economy is strong,

50% of US corporations have a credit rating of BBB or less. We are at the sharp end of massive government sector recapitalization crowding out and companies with dodgy balance sheets (that have levered up to conduct massive buybacks to flatter EPS masking anemic earnings growth) won’t be given the same tight interest rate margin spreads come the next refinancing. Await the implosion.

Rising interest rates don’t help and credit markets wait like vultures over the likes of GE which is having a reality check over its $115bn of debt, negative equity and troubled restructuring. Credit rating downgrade have booted it from some funds so the stock is in the cross hairs. If it had any sense it would file for Chapter 11 to buy breathing space.

If you want to put some perspective on it, GE’s market cap in 2000 was $592bn and now is $65.8bn. Tesla is now worth $56bn.

GM is yet another canary in the coalmine

 

Brexit – the EU explained by bridges

Many may not be aware of this folly of the EU but it starts with the euro currency itself. All of the bridges that are printed on euro notes do not exist in Europe. The debate was had to put existing bridges on the notes but was rejected for fear of causing offence to EU nations who ‘missed out’ or were on lower denomination bills. Surely if a matter as trivial as this cannot be bridged (no pun intended) what hope has real integration got?

Good to see the English stuck the old war-horse Sir Winston Churchill on their new machine washable GBP5 note with the quote “I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat” . PM Theresa May would do well to heed this.

Begs the question why Baroness Thatcher isn’t due on a note. Perhaps they couldn’t fit

“(A unified) ‘Europe’ is the result of plans. It is, in fact, a classic utopian project, a monument to the vanity of intellectuals, a programme whose inevitable destiny is failure: only the scale of the final damage done is in doubt.”

“What we should grasp, however, from the lessons of European history is that, first, there is nothing necessarily benevolent about programmes of European integration; second, the desire to achieve grand utopian plans often poses a grave threat to freedom; and third, European unity has been tried before, and the outcome was far from happy.”

Not even this was short enough but boy was she so right!

“During my lifetime most of the problems the world has faced have come, in one fashion or other, from mainland Europe, and the solutions from outside it.”

We shouldn’t forget the EU’s Brexit bully Guy Verhofstadt openly said that the problem with member states is they are reluctant to yield sovereign power to the EU. His view was the only way out of the crisis is to cede more power and control to the EU. What a great idea. Give unelected bureaucrats more power to dictate to sovereign nations.

PM Theresa May might do well to build bridges with her own constituents rather than sign a deal which forces one way tolls. At the moment she sings to Verhofstadt’s tune. No doubt if she got her way then she would have a cushy job in Brussels.

Why are the 99.6% required to opt in for gender on birth certificates?

7D3A8E2F-A916-4B8E-B9EF-3CA73B95674D.jpeg

So Tasmania’s lower house has passed the motion to remove gender from birth certificates allowing people to choose what they identify with from age 16. Apart from the biological and genetic implications, one question is why must the majority opt in as opposed to the minority opting out? It can only be viewed as a form of constructed  re-education.

According to the ABS Census of 2016, only 0.4% identify as other than male or female. 10,000 out of 24 million. Therefore 99.6% are comfortable with traditional biologal gender.

What are the risks? At what point will legislation be tied to the use of puberty blockers? We can’t rule out some parents might try to encourage their young child to associate with the opposite gender?  It has already happened in the US. Parents will know that it is not hard to manipulate a 10yo. It is not to rule out completely that a child may truly identify as the opposite of biological gender but statistically it would be improbable to suggest it is a majority or all. So to dispense puberty blockers under false pretenses is a dangerous risk. Assuming a 10yo is of sound peace of mind to take such drugs, why not give them the ability to vote?! Effectively that is the decision making process being put forth. It is ludicrous.

Assume a child is coerced by guardians/parents (even if a small subset) into believing they are the opposite sex than biological gender and get government permission to take puberty blockers. We do not have enough empirical evidence to know if terminating these drugs will automatically lead to a natural resumption of puberty.

Scientific research has noted that side effects of puberty suppression hormones can lead to arrested bone growth, decreased bone accretion, can prevent full organization and maturation of the brain, cause sterility, coronary/cardiovascular disease, elevated blood pressure and lead to breast cancer. Hey, it is worth it for inclusion, right?

That’s a horrible set of risks to put on a child who might potentially grow out of gender dysphoria. That child’s life could be irrevocably ruined for the sake of ideology determined by those who shouldn’t be in a position to enforce such directives.

The Gender Identity Development Service in the United Kingdom saw a 2,000% increase in referrals over seven years—from 94 children in 2009/2010 to 1,986 in 2016/2017. Is this a case of creating a market to allow people to file for  gender dysphoria? Note this is not to cast aspersions on those who may properly suffer from the condition.

Hruz, Mayer, and McHugh wrote in a Supreme Court brief filed in the Gavin Grimm case that most-cited studies conclude most children with gender dysphoria come to embrace their birth sex but caution hormone therapy often solidifies a child’s gender dysphoria.

800 children in the UK aged as young as 10 are taking puberty blockers. Are we buying time or merely arresting development? The risks seem more like a concerted  push for institutionalized child abuse.

Ultimately who is the arbiter to determine between whether a child might be confused or properly gender dysphoric? Get it wrong and that life might be irreparably damaged. But hey, as long as it was done for the sake of progressive goals, such sacrifices are all in the name of diversity, no?

Obama solves climate change conundrum

https://youtu.be/fNrSEH4WVBw

E81AF6C9-59A1-4F4F-85F6-9C7BE5447CC7.jpeg

Obama has cut the Gordian Knot on climate change. Who knew?

“…the reason we don’t [invest in climate change policies] is because we are still confused, blind, shrouded with hate, anger, racism – mommy issues…”

Call me a sceptic, but even if I believe that 97% of scientists were correct on climate change, I should be more intrigued why the 3% don’t agree. Could I be missing something? After all 97% of economists believed it was a new paradigm right before the GFC almost sent us back to the financial Stone Age.

Perhaps Mr Obama should check the following study from Professor Valentina Zharkova. It might not be racism.

She explains and confirms why a “Super” Grand Solar Minimum is upon us:

Principia Scientific wrote,

Professor  Zharkova gave a presentation of her Climate and the Solar Magnetic Field hypothesis at the Global Warming Policy Foundation in October, 2018. Even if you believe the IPCC’s worst case scenario, Zharkova’s analysis blows any ‘warming’ out of the water.

Lee Wheelbarger sums it up: even if the IPCC’s worst case scenarios are seen, that’s only a 1.5 watts per square meter increase. Zharkova’s analysis shows a 8 watts per square meter decrease in total solar irradiance (TSI) to the planet.

The information she unveiled should shake/wake you up. Zharkova was one of the few that correctly predicted solar cycle 24 would be weaker than cycle 23 – only 2 out of 150 models predicted this. Her models have run at a 93% accuracy and her findings suggest a SuperGrand Solar Minimum is on the cards beginning 2020 and running for 350-400 years.

The last time we had a little ice age only two magnetic fields of the sun went out of phase. This time, all four magnetic fields are going out of phase. 
Would you ignore the 1 in 75 contrarian view whose model has predicted accurately or the 74 in 75 that have missed? It’s probably just racists with mommy issues that’s to blame…After all if Obama says it’s true, it must be right. Right?

Nothing to see here

ntsh.png

Aussie bank mortgage lending continues to reach ever dizzier heights. What is probably lost on many is that Westpac & CommBank have outstanding mortgage loans extended to as many Aussies as the colossal Bank of America (BoA) is lending to Americans.

Shareholder equity as a % of real estate loans looks like this. Note how post GFC  the US banks have shored up the balance sheet to avoid a repeat of the disastrous contagion when Lehmans collapsed. Note Citi, BoA and Wells Fargo each took $20-45 billion in TARP to prevent a collapse.

ntsh2.png

Westpac & CommBank have shareholder equity vs R/E loans of 16%. That means if the aggregate loan value get smacked  by 16% or more via defaults or a sharp slowdown then these banks would be in negative equity. Extreme?

In 2009 the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) had turned over 16% of BoA’s residential mortgage portfolio into either NPLs, mortgage payments over 90-day in arrears or impaired (largely from the shonky lending practices of Countrywide (which BoA bought in 2008). Countrywide’s $2.5bn acquisition price turned out to cost BoA shareholders a further $50bn by the end of the clean-up. Who is counting?

In 2018, Australia’s GDP is likely to be around A$1.75 trillion. Our total lending by the banks is approximately $2.64 trillion which is 150% of GDP. At the height of the Japanese bubble, total bank lending as a whole only reached 106%. Mortgages alone in Australia are near as makes no difference 100% of GDP.

Japan ended up wiping out Y90 trillion ($A1.1 trillion) or 17% of its GDP at the time. The only thing that springs to mind with the Aussie banks is complacency and the RBA minutes today only reinforced that view. At least 3 years behind the curve. Yes of course people will lob stress tests as a reason not to worry (we were told in 2007 that everything would be fine until the whole edifice collapsed) but CM doesn’t buy it for a second.

Aussie banks are still beholden to global wholesale markets. In a world where rates are rising overseas and companies like GE are facing a massive wall of higher funding costs due to credit downgrades, risk is about to be priced properly. The Aussie dollar is likely to be hit too.

A recent ME Bank survey in Australia found only 46 per cent of households were able to save each month. Just 32 per cent could raise $3000 in an emergency and 50 per cent aren’t confident of meeting their obligations if unemployed for three months.

The Weekend AFR reported that according to Digital Finance Analytics, “there are around 650,000 households in Australia experiencing some form of mortgage stress. If rates were to rise 150 basis points the number of Australians in mortgage stress would rise to approximately 930,000 and if rates rose 300 basis points the number would rise to 1.1 million – or more than a third of all mortgages. A 300 basis point rise would take the cash rate to 4.5 per cent, still lower than the 4.75 per cent for most of 2011.”

Do you know how many homes NAB has under repossession on its books at the latest filing? Around 300.

Poverty shaming

Now poverty shaming is the next thing that must be stopped. Putting aside the parenting issues of spoiling teenage kids with $1,000 down jackets, are such school regulations truly necessary? What a condescending slap in the face for those supposedly in poverty to have the school openly show some sense of pity on them. Did the low-income parents ask en masse for this or was it the typical arbitrary decision driven by overhearing a school gate grizzle by one parent having a bad day blown out of proportion by the faculty to signal virtue? To put a question to the school faculty – would they prefer the poor were poorer provided the rich were less rich? Seems like a lot of self-loathing rather than driving positive behaviours.

How many times have we seen the activists arrogantly categorize groups as one homogeneous voice. Do all lower income parents despise all middle class parents and vice versa?

What if a kid from a lower income bracket sweated over the holiday season as a casual worker and earned the ability to buy a Moncler jacket? Wouldn’t that be a great lesson? Surely something to be commended, encouraged and supported. Should the school take an inventory check on smart phones to make sure that some richer kids with iPhones aren’t memory shaming those with last year’s model of a Huawei?

Supposedly the school jacket ban idea was brought up because, “Poverty-proofing enables schools to identify and overcome the barriers to learning that children and young people from families with less financial resources face.”

Where does it end? Why not ban parents from dropping their kids off at school in any vehicle from a European luxury brand so parents don’t poverty shame other parents?  If the kids are supposed to learn how to break down barriers, won’t little Henry pulling up to school in the passenger seat of his mother’s Range Rover enforce the same poverty shaming problems when confronting Johnny alighting his father’s clapped out  Ford Fiesta hatchback as he would by wearing a Moncler down jacket? Best force the richer parents to drop their kids at the back gate to protect against the odds of Johnny’s deep seated envy getting triggered.

Or perhaps the school should up the ante and dispense with the poverty shaming edict and just mark the richer kids exams down by 25% to account for their supposed privilege.

Is it any wonder kids are becoming more neurotic when they have identity and ideology thrust down their throats rather than learn about respect and individual responsibility? Best make the kids that don’t fit the apparatchik’s value set share in collective misery.