Morning Report – Strong ADP number 7/2/14

Vital Statistics:

 

Last Change Percent
S&P Futures 1967.0 1.2 0.06%
Eurostoxx Index 3259.1 0.4 0.01%
Oil (WTI) 104.8 -0.6 -0.55%
LIBOR 0.235 0.003 1.21%
US Dollar Index (DXY) 79.97 0.156 0.20%
10 Year Govt Bond Yield 2.60% 0.03%
Current Coupon Ginnie Mae TBA 106.3 -0.1
Current Coupon Fannie Mae TBA 105.6 -0.2
BankRate 30 Year Fixed Rate Mortgage 4.17

 

Stocks are higher (and bonds are lower) after an unusually strong ADP report.
The ADP Employment Report estimated the economy added 281,000 jobs in June, versus expectations of 205,000. The official jobs report comes out tomorrow, and the consensus forecast is 215,000. The ADP number supports the forecast coming out of Markit last week of about 280,000 jobs as well. Construction added 36,000 jobs. More on the increase in hiring.. Maybe, finally, “recovery summer” will not be the running joke it has been since 2009.

Mortgage Applications fell .2% last week, according to the MBA. Purchases were down .7%, while refis were up .1%.  Disappointing print given that the 10 year dropped 9 bps last week and the Bankrate 30 year fixed rate mortgage fell from 4.22% to 4.14%.
Home prices rose 1.4% in April, according to CoreLogic. Prices are 13.5% below their April 2006 peak. This increase in prices has been a double-edged sword – it has pulled many people out of negative equity, but it has decreased affordability, especially with the first time homebuyer. CoreLogic expects price appreciation to cool over the next year.

82 Responses

  1. Like

  2. In the replies everybody referenced Cool Hand Luke.

    Like

  3. This has to be quote of the day:

    “You seem to think that governing is about compromise. It’s not. It’s about sticking it to the opposition to the best of your ability. And right now, Obama is getting schooled by a bunch of clowns.

    – NoVAHockey”

    Like

  4. Ouch.

    The picture that emerged from Scheiber’s reporting wasn’t just a Democratic Party that was ready for Hillary, but one then had grown cynical under Obama — and thus would be less susceptible to a charismatic newcomer like Elizabeth Warren.

    The AA community ain’t gonna like this.

    http://www.vox.com/2014/7/2/5861888/how-obama-helped-hillary-clinton-fend-off-elizabeth-warren?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=ezraklein&utm_content=wednesday

    Like

    • McWing;

      and thus would be less susceptible to a charismatic newcomer like Elizabeth Warren.

      I must be missing something. I’ve seen Elizabeth Warren and charismatic is not a term that comes to mind.

      Like

  5. Thanks JNC.

    Like

  6. Elizabeth Warren is the Ted Cruz of the left…

    Like

  7. @McWing: “and thus would be less susceptible to a charismatic newcomer like Elizabeth Warren”

    Elizabeth Warren is charismatic?

    Low standards for charisma.

    Like

    • So Kevin, JNC, and I all went to PL today. Also Brent and ‘Goose, but I think they go all the time and maybe JNC does too. I admit that I did it out of curiousity because Shrink had reportedly been banned. There is now a commenter who is called “Ned.Stark” who I think is “Don John” “banned”. There is a relatively conservative commenter there now who is reviled by the current incrowd but who seems reasonable and detached to me. So I had a pleasant exchange with him/or/her.

      Also I called JNC on incompleteness and he responded that he had completed the thought later, which I had not seen, because the site is so buggy. So I withdraw my suggestion of incompleteness, JNC, here, because I just cannot go back there.

      Like

      • Yes Ned Stark is John/banned. There are still some very good con/lib commenters there, but the lefties remain ensconced in surreality. Tick was banned as well, which I find very amusing. She is such a despicable and hateful being, and not too smart.

        Like

  8. No problem Mark. I do believe that Ruk thought that there was a legal requirement for employers to offer health insurance itself.

    Like

  9. QB I cut her some slack on account of her being a veteran and from what I can discern a history of being abused first as a child and then in her relationships.

    Cao on the other hand….

    Like

    • I remember when we got Chris [Cao] banned from The Fix. It was for incessantly calling for death to almost everyone else, it seemed. He kept bouncing back with a new name and even a new IP apparently. Cillizza finally gave up. He would brag that he could leg press 1700# [I do not lie here but I think he did]. He described himself repeatedly as a “top” – I took it to mean a suckee. He bragged about all the blogs he had destroyed. Not much to recommend there, JNC.

      Like

    • Jnc, baloney. Tick is a hateful bigot, dumb as a rock, and a liar.

      Like

  10. Guess what guys? We apparently have our own festival now.

    “Inside the libertarian version of Burning Man: Guns, booze and bitcoin
    By Ben Terris July 2 at 9:16 AM”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/inside-the-libertarian-version-of-burning-man-guns-booze-and-bitcoin/2014/07/01/74d9d996-ffcf-11e3-b8ff-89afd3fad6bd_story.html?hpid=z1

    Like

  11. “How the Collapse of the State is Inevitable”

    hilarious:

    One popular ice cream flavor: Open-Carry Cherry. (Or, playing on the big in-joke here, that without government nothing can get done: “Who Will Build the Rocky Roads?”).

    Like

  12. That guy freaks me out, mark. I think he means every word.

    Like

  13. Cao is sociopathic, at least as far as his Internet existence is concerned. He may mean things when he says them, but, if so, he misremembers thing. My first interaction with Cao involved him attacking me and reviling me, and then recently he gave me a “You used to be a cut above other conservatives. Not anymore.” Which reflected nothing he had ever said, ever.

    If he was leg pressing 1700 lbs he’s got knee joints and hip joins made from titanium.

    Like

    • titanium EXACTLY

      I did 330# on free weights leg press in HS when I played baseball. I do 315# on the resistance equipment now at the Y – which I think translates to about 270# on free weights. I saw a guy do 600# on free weights. I have seen a lot of guys bench what I can only leg press. But the limitation is ultimately the joints. I CAN do 360# on the machine but the time I did it I hurt myself.

      Like

    • There used to be a web page describing how Cao, known as Cheopys, caused the whole forum to be shut down. I did some googling back when he started using different names including that one. He at times was using three names to hold “conversations.” He is definitely psychotic. There also used to be a video of him on YouTube being “interviewed” and spouting bitter conspiracy theories about employee treatment at Microsoft.

      He also frequently spouts off about things he knows nothing about. He claims to have some form of perfect pitch, but when we discussed the topic I found he is totally ignorant of the phenomenon. Crackpot of the century.

      Like

  14. Bernie is apoplectic over Shrink’s banning. He says many people will leave over it, but I can’t think of a single one. More likely Bernie and cao will go to Greg and beg on bended knee.

    Like

    • Greg will readmit shrink unless he is unable. Greg himself has never, ever banned a lefty. He slobbered all over Cao while Cao was posting endless streams of vile insults and slanders.

      Like

  15. Sigh, I never got my own deathwish from cao, I had to share it with QB.

    And if I was being completely honest it was more directed at him then me.

    And I goaded that freak like a motha!

    #IGetNoRespect

    Like

  16. Troll and Mark, something weird was happening. I think I accidentally deleted two of your comments above, so I restored them. Weird stuff.

    Like

  17. McWing:

    Sigh, I never got my own deathwish from cao, I had to share it with QB.

    I believe I hold the honor of being his first ever PL death wish. Something about getting hit by a car and bleeding to death in a ditch as people walked by.

    BTW, I once saw a YouTube video of ex-Microsoft employees complaining about Microsoft in which he featured. At least I believe it was him. Can’t remember how I came across it.

    Edit: corked by QB. Now I guess I know how I came across it!

    Like

  18. Sigh, I never got my own deathwish from cao, I had to share it with QB.

    I undoubtedly was the king of Cao death wishes and insults in general. #likeaboss

    The funniest period of time was when I fastidiously ignored him for months, while he was claiming to have me on Troll Hunter but in reality posted strings of 3-4 insult comments in reply to every comment I posted. It absolutely drove him insane(r) to be ignored. Psycho for sure. I seriously hope he never comes back to the USA.

    Like

  19. He wished death on us in a thousand ways. Gas, fire, disembowelling, being ground up for fish food, shot, etc.

    Like

  20. BTW, I once saw a YouTube video of ex-Microsoft employees complaining about Microsoft in which he featured. At least I believe it was him. Can’t remember how I came across it

    Yes it was him. Real name Chris Fox. He was bragging about himself and using his real name. He even linked his FaceBook page once (ick). I think I found the video because I started to think the guy is really dangerous and wanted to find out what I could about him.

    You have to be careful, though, because there is another Chris Fox out there who is a Microsoft programming guru for real. That Chris Fox is presumably a normal human being.

    Like

  21. I saw a nutjob bodybuilder at the gym a while back leg pressing 1100 pounds. There is no chance Cao is stronger than that guy, and he was straining and howling like a banshee doing 3-inch reps.

    Before he did it, he wrapped some flimsy elastic tape around his knees. It was all I could do not to laugh at the idea that it would keep his knees from blowing out.

    When I was young, I had extremely powerful legs, but 1700 pounds for legit leg presses would have been way out of reach. It is laughable for a 60+ pudge like Cao. But then he also claims perfect pitch and all sorts of other powers that he clearly doesn’t have. (Oh, he says Whitney Houston was a terrible singer and couldn’t hit a pitch. lol)

    Like

  22. I did however, find him to be a considerate and tender lover.

    With really crackling prose.

    Like

  23. Some of the female PL’s would defend cao by saying how gentle he was (when talking with them.) i always assumed it was in off-line conversations. It’s just a play on that.

    #AtLeastThat’sWhatITellMyself

    Like

    • McWing:

      Some of the female PL’s would defend cao by saying how gentle he was

      I think 12bar was a big fan.

      Like

  24. 12bar dragged that piece of filth over from the Fix. Another fake and phony.

    Like

    • I like 12bar and have had many “conversations” with her off line. She continued to defend Chris Fox to me no matter what excerpts I would send her. I could not understand how she could be so blinded to someone who was venting sociopathy. She eventually would not discuss him with me.

      Like

      • Her loyalty to him is bizarre. That is among marks against her that leave me with zero respect for her.

        Like

  25. George, we can help the Kurds by not hurting the Kurds.

    Apparently we agreed with Malaki to boycott Kurdish oil piped through Turkey b/c the Kurds were not paying Bagdad for the privilege. Meanwhile, Bagdad had not sent any revenue to the Kurdish region in 6 months. Which led to the Kurds now holding an independence referendum. Also, the new AQ ISIS “caliphate” is the Kurds neighbor, not the former nation of Iraq. The Iraqi troops quit on them and the only reason Kirkuk and the oil of the north is not in the hands of terrorists is the Kurdish militia.

    We need to recognize who our friends are.

    Like

  26. “how she could be so blinded to someone who was venting sociopathy”

    I’ve seen this play out countless times.

    “why are you with that guy. he’s rude and treats people poorly.”
    “he is misunderstood and I can help him.”

    Like

    • NoVA, you’ve noticed this too?

      I’m glad we men have no such blind spots toward – WOW! LOOK AT THAT!

      Like

  27. WP not letting me post this morning…

    Like

  28. wordpress, not wapo

    Like

  29. Ha. too true Mark.

    Like

  30. I’m surprised to see no mention of my favorite surrealistic commenter back from the Fix days. He originally started as 37th and O Street, which made me think that he was a Georgetown student (that being an entrance to the university). He got banned as many times as Chris Fox (whose favorite handle for me was gold & tanzanite).

    Then there’s one fellow whose handle fails me at the moment. A prolific poster, commenting on every political article on the Post. Then Obama was re-elected and he disappeared. The only case of which I am certain was a paid blogger.

    BB

    Like

  31. “37th and O Street”

    That wasn’t the same person as RainForestRising was it?

    Like

  32. obama is bitching about wall street pay again…

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-03/obama-calls-big-bonuses-at-bank-trading-desks-too-risky.html?cmpid=fb.campaign

    Fuck him. Seriously. Fuck him.

    Like

  33. jnc – Yup. Also Dorchester and something. I finally engaged him in a friendly way and he seemed to be a gentle soul (albeit a skewed one).

    Brent – I read the link. Gotta say I’m with you on this one.

    BB

    Like

  34. I still mourn for Bilgy.

    Like

  35. Like

  36. “Innerestin’.”

    Explains why the bond market got back most of its losses during the morning…

    Like

    • Jesus freaks

      Well, you voted for Patrick against Patterson, so I have you pegged with them.

      I gave money to Patterson, so you know I couldcouldn’t care less about jesusfreakdom. FIXED

      I didn’t read the article but way too much is being made of the HL decision, and I am sure QB agrees. It is probably b/c RBG made such a blowout dissent. But Alito wrote an opinion that cannot be seriously faulted, considering that the feds already made an accommodation to churches.

      There is a strong libertarian legal argument to the effect that RFRA is itself unconstitutional, but no one raises it.

      Like

      • Mark:

        I gave money to Patterson, so you know I couldcouldn’t care less about jesusfreakdom.FIXED

        Grrr…it’s couldn’t care less.

        There is a strong libertarian legal argument to the effect that RFRA is itself unconstitutional, but no one raises it.

        If libertarian arguments held sway, there wouldn’t have been a need for RFRA in the first place.

        Like

      • I don’t know what the libertarian argument is that RFRA is unconstitutional. Come to think of it, I don’t know what a libertarian constitutional argument really is.

        One aspect of the HL hullabaloo that frustrates me is the harping on the left that the Court should not be weighing free exercise claims–the same thing Ginsburg lamented at the end of her tirade. That argument is deeply disingenuous. Weighing claims of free exercise against regulation is precisely what RFRA requires. Ginsburg’s lament would be no different if the court had decided the other way, but does anyone think she would have complained? Of course not. This was a fight picked entirely by the left, and now they weep bitter tears and complain that the court shouldn’t be making such decisions. Their complaints are complete disingenuous and ridiculous.

        It all shows again that liberals–and I deliberately use that term–reject the fundamental American ideas of freedom and rights in favor of class and group entitlements.

        Like

        • QB:

          It all shows again that liberals–and I deliberately use that term–reject the fundamental American ideas of freedom and rights in favor of class and group entitlements.

          Yes, I very much agree with this. They use the same language of freedom and rights, but the ideas they are expressing are totally alien to the historical American understanding of terms.

          Like

        • As pretty much unassailable except by indirection as was Alito’s HL opinion, this case strikes me as procedurally extremely unusual [under the All Writs power] and probably wrong on the merits.

          http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/13A1284-order-7-3-14.pdf

          Here, I think the dissent is correct. QB?

          Like

        • I will ck in later. Happy 4th and read the Declaration today, wherever you are. Print it out for everyone at the pool or BBQ pit and take parts. It is worth it, even if the drunks stumble over the long middle of remonstrances.

          Like

        • Mark:

          I just read Sotomayor’s dissent on the Wheaton ruling. She either doesn’t understand, or is deliberately misreading, the ruling in the HL case.

          She says of the current accommodation under question, “the accommodation is permissible under RFRA because it is the least restrictive means of furthering the Government’s compelling interests in public health and women’s well-being” and then goes on to suggest that this claim is supported by the HL decision, implying that this new ruling is somehow inconsistent with HL.

          But the HL decision did not claim, and did not rest on the notion, that the accommodation now under question was the least restrictive means available to the government, only that it was less restrictive than compelling HL to pay for the coverage. By definition the availability of a less restrictive means of advancing the government’s interest means that compelling HL was not the least restrictive means, and is therefore a violation of RFRA, even if the means identified as less restrictive turns out not to be the least restrictive available, and is therefore even itself a violation of RFRA.

          Like

        • Scott, yes, your analysis is exactly correct. A key that people miss is that the government had the burden of proof on compelling interest and least restrictive means. And it isn’t possible that the three dissenters do not know all this. It was all doubtlessly aired in conference and memos. They are being deliberately obtuse and deceptive.

          Like

        • QB:

          They are being deliberately obtuse and deceptive.

          Which just strengthens my suspicions regarding the motives of Sotomayor et al. They are not honestly trying to engage arguments in a good faith attempt to understand and apply the law. They are political partisans who will engage in whatever it takes, including dishonesty and manipulation of words and concepts, in order to achieve the politically preferred outcome.

          Like

        • It is an unfortunate conclusion but one I think is unavoidable, because the point had to have been thoroughly discussed in chambers but is not addressed in her dissent. She simply misstates Hobby Lobby.

          Like

        • Alito in HL:

          “In fact, HHS has already devised and implemented a system that seeks to respect the religious liberty of religious nonprofit corporations while ensuring that the employees of these entities have precisely the same access to all FDA-approved contraceptives as employees of companies whose owners have no religious objections to providing such coverage. The employees of these religious nonprofit corporations still have access to insurance coverage without cost sharing for all FDA-approved contracep-tives; and according to HHS, this system imposes no net economic burden on the insurance companies that are required to provide or secure the coverage.

          Although HHS has made this system available to religious nonprofits that have religious objections to the contraceptive mandate, HHS has provided no reason why the same system cannot be made available when the owners of for-profit corporations have similar religious objections. We therefore conclude that this system constitutes an alternative that achieves all of the Government’s aims while providing greater respect for religious liberty. And under RFRA, that conclusion means that enforcement of the HHS contraceptive mandate against the objecting parties in these cases is unlawful.”

          Kennedy in HL:

          “The accommodation works by requiring insurance companies to cover, without cost sharing, contraception coverage for female employees who wish it. That accommodation equally furthers the Government’s interest but does not impinge on the plaintiffs’ religious beliefs.”

          Having both blessed the accommodation for its not impinging [Kennedy] and approving the accommodation alternative [Alito] they gutted the procedure for the accommodation on an All Writs preliminary injunction matter reversing a denial of the prelim, which is ridiculous, historically. Now, I understand the facial argument [not yet supported by a fact finding] that filing a letter is “easier” than notifying the govt and the carrier on a form. But QB and Scott, this Wheaton case, on All Writs, throwing out the extremely easy and practical notification method of a system they blessed two days ago, is a ludicrous elevation of form over substance without even a fact finding to support it.

          If the lower court had found that the form notice requirement was “impinging” I would have no difficulty with this case. Absent that, this case is wrong.

          Like

        • Mark, you excerpted from the summary at the beginning of Alito’s opinion. The text at notes 39 and 40 refutes your argument. He specifically said that they were not deciding that issue, which was not before them. The government lost because there was a less restrictive means, by its own admission. Not before the court was the question of whether that less restrictive means was the least restrictive.

          In fact, Ginsburg criticized the majority for failing to rule on that question. It is the dissenters who are hypocritical in Wheaton. They criticized the majority in HL for not deciding the question, then turned around and attacked them in Wheaton for supposedly going back on their decision.

          Like

        • He specifically said that they were not deciding that issue,

          Understood. But Kennedy’s concurrence [“…does not impinge”] would lead an appellate lawyer and a lower court to believe that one of the majority justices really and truly meant that the HHS accommodation does not impinge.

          Like

        • Mark:

          If the lower court had found that the form notice requirement was “impinging” I would have no difficulty with this case. Absent that, this case is wrong.

          I don’t know whether this case was decided correctly, but I do wonder, if Sotomayor is correct, why she found it necessary to be dishonest about the HL decision. As QB points out, it explicitly did not conclude what she pretends it concluded.

          Like

  37. As a reminder, RFRA was Congress overturning an opinion written by Justice Scalia.

    Like

    • Jnc, absolutely correct. I keep reminding liberals that they are now rejecting the position of Ted Kennedy and advocating the position of Sclia that outraged liberals 24 years ago. What is the difference? Peyote, abortion, and socialism versus Christianity. The former are sacred to liberals, while the latter is reviled by them.

      Like

  38. Peyote is sacred to liberals? I must have been going to the wrong places.

    BB

    Like

    • Liberals were outraged that Native American drug counselors were not exempted by free exercise from drug laws; now they are outraged that Christians are exempted from paying for abortions. If there is some principle involved, perhaps FB can be the first person to identify it. Until then, I say they hold peyote, absorption, and entitlement socialism sacred while reviling Christianity and Christians.

      Like

  39. Is there anything Clinton signed into law that Hillary still supports?

    Like

  40. Peyote was a weird trip

    Plus I puked.

    Like

  41. New thread.

    Move it or I cut a bitch.

    Like

  42. Sounds like a post in the making.

    Not really. Think Bing Me The Head of Alfredo Garcia.

    Like

  43. Understood. But Kennedy’s concurrence [“…does not impinge”] would lead an appellate lawyer and a lower court to believe that one of the majority justices really and truly meant that the HHS accommodation does not impinge.

    That seems like a serious overreading of once sentence in a concurrence by a Justice who joined the main opinion and wrote simply to add some remarks (how typically prima donna of Kennedy). That is, he joined the opinion that explicitly states that they were not deciding the issue. His loose remarks in that sentence in his concurrence seem to me best understood as just that: loose remarks.

    Like

  44. Boy, Greece sucks.

    The demands are outrageous, and include a requirement that the business pay taxes in advance equal to 50 percent of estimated profit in the first two years. And the taxes are collected even if the business suffers a loss.

    The government do take a bite, don’t she?

    http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/07/03/opinion/greek-recipes-for-survival.html?smid=tw-share&_r=1&referrer=

    Like

Be kind, show respect, and all will be right with the world.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: