Brent Nyitray
Fairlington Blade
Let the mutherfuker burn!
jnc4p
Kevin S. Willis
Michigoose
lmsinca
markinaustin
Memetrics
novahockey
quarterback
ScottC
yellojktVital Statistics:
| Last | Change | |
| S&P futures | 4,169 | 7.4 |
| Oil (WTI) | 63.52 | -0.04 |
| 10 year government bond yield | 1.58% | |
| 30 year fixed rate mortgage | 3.16% |
Stocks are higher this morning on strong economic numbers out of China. Bonds and MBS are up.
Housing starts jumped 19% MOM and 34% YOY to a seasonally-adjusted annual rate of 1.74 million units. This is certainly a good number, however remember the base case issue – in March of 2020, the economy was shut down, and in February we had a lot of bad weather. Still, it is an encouraging number. In the grand scheme of things, 1.7 million is not that huge of a number; in fact it is just about average.
Note that chart goes back to the 1950s, and the US population has increased substantially since then. If you take the series and divide it by the US population, you get a sense of how much the US has underbuilt over the past decade.
Building Permits rose 30% YOY to 1.72 million. On a month-over-month basis, they rose 2.7%.
As the starts divided by population chart shows, the US needs a lot of housing immediately. Existing home sales data shows a dearth of inventory, and home price appreciation is soaring. In the fourth quarter, just about every homebuilder was reporting fat gross margins, so the builders have every incentive to build, especially since work-from-home has made the exurbs more attractive. The exurbs, with cheaper land will attack some of the affordability issue. Housing will finally do some of the heavy lifting for US economic growth.
Congress is also introducing a bill to encourage more building near transit stops. My guess is this is primarily a messaging bill since local communities really call the shots with zoning and environmental statements, etc. With all of the headaches of building in the cities, with workers heading outwards, along with eviction moratoriums, I can’t see developers getting too excited about this, but you never know.
The Biden Admin is planning a first-time homebuyer bill. It would provide $25,000 cash, usable at closing, for certain first-time homebuyers. It would be available only to first-generation and economically disadvantaged homebuyers. It will be means-tested and will be available only to people who make less than 120% of area median income, and their parents could not have owned a home in the past 3 years (although if the parents lost their home in a foreclosure or short sale, it won’t apply). The base-case grant is $20k, but if you are part of a group that has been “subjected to racial or ethnic prejudice” you get an extra $5k. It sounds like there will be a lot of moving parts here, so it will be interesting to see how much of an impact it really makes.
Consumer Sentiment improved in April, according to the University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment Survey. The improvement was driven more by current economic conditions than it was by future expectations, which is also encouraging.
Filed under: Economy, Morning Report |
All Things in Moderation 
Another piece from the new guys:
“Why did Facebook censor the New York Post’s article on BLM founder’s home-buying spree?
The company claims the article goes against its “community standards.”
Shant Mesrobian and Zaid Jilani”
https://www.inquiremore.com/p/why-did-facebook-censor-the-new-york
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Social media companies, fearful of regulation from the Democrats who were about to take control of the government in Washington, seemed to collude to suppress a story that would’ve reflected poorly on the family of the Democratic candidate for president.”
Bullshit. Occam’s Razor. Social media companies want Democrats elected because they are Democrats themselves.
LikeLike
I actually think Zuckerberg doesn’t want to do content moderation if left to his own devices.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Perhaps, but his employees sure as hell do
LikeLike
Which is a big part of the problem. These organizations are filled with people who want to exercise power, be part of the upper rungs of a fuedal class, and decide what is fit material for the peasants to consume.
LikeLike
I tend to concur. There may be some concern about regulation and feel the Democrats are more purchasable or more malleable or that the GOP represents a toothless threat. But on the whole they are largely made up of fellow travelers. And even Zuckerberg is persuadable. By his friends, his social circle, his wife, his immediate employees.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The left has never gotten over losing sole possession of the megaphone.
LikeLike
I liked this take:
LikeLike
Oregon’s main newspaper, The Oregonian, notes that a recent victim of a police shooting was white in order to indicate that rioting and protests are not needed.
I noticed an interesting detail that no one else seems to be talking about. It describes the victim as a “white” man, which it then contrasts with “Black” victims. Is it now style policy that whether or not to capitalize the name of a race depends upon which race you are talking about? WTF?
edit: Apparently this is just one more victory for the CRT diversity loons.
https://www.cjr.org/analysis/capital-b-black-styleguide.php
LikeLike
They’ve been doing that for a while. It started after the George Floyd incident last year.
The Post makes them capitalize both:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/03/27/numbers-undercut-myths-about-mass-shootings-white-men/
LikeLike
I noticed that for a while everywhere I looked was capitalizing Black but not white. Now I’m seeing more publications capitalizing both.
Which reinforces my belief this is ultimately about expanding identity politics and tribalism … the way to get there is it make “white supremacy” the ultimate evil but ultimately it’s about reconstructing color-blind/individual inalienable rights/Western enlightenment thinking.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The shit going on at Dalton, an elite prep school, is something else.
https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/i-refuse-to-stand-by-while-my-students
A recent faculty email chain received enthusiastic support for recommending that we “‘officially’ flag students” who appear “resistant” to the “culture we are trying to establish.”
When I questioned what form this resistance takes, examples presented by a colleague included “persisting with a colorblind ideology,” “suggesting that we treat everyone with respect,” “a belief in meritocracy,” and “just silence.” In a special assembly in February 2019, our head of school said that the impact of words and images perceived as racist — regardless of intent — is akin to “using a gun or a knife to kill or injure someone.”
Meaning that “suggesting we treat everyone with respect” is racist and that’s what they are teaching in this retarded school that costs $50k a year.
LikeLike
He also talks how he was told he couldn’t assign the reading of a center-right thinking who was also black. Basically because he was not allowed to confuse the students with a black political or philosophical thinker who did not agree with critical race theory—because being exposed to the idea that not all black people subscribe to CRT would “confuse” the students.
LikeLike
The way the left runs culture is a perfect blueprint of how they would govern without the guardrails we have.
LikeLike
I wrote this [between the lines] response to a WaPo editorial comment on why we should not “abandon” Afghanistan.
—————-
While it has always been the thought that supporting the Afghan martial forces would lead to standing them up on their own that has not apparently been the case.
From this distance, and admittedly through a glass darkly, an argument can be made that the NATO presence has enabled the locals to do little for themselves, rather than having encouraged them to “stand up and own their responsibilities”. If there is truth in that, nothing will be more bracing than announcing withdrawal, just long enough in advance to allow the locals to accept their role as the legitimate protectors of their own people.
—————
Withdrawal was of course a Trump initiative, with which I agreed in theory, and in practice, although coupled with draw down in Germany it did not sit right with me. Now that it has morphed into an agreed NATO policy coupled with redeployment to Germany my support has grown more comfortable.
Am I missing something here? If the majority of Afghans don’t want the Taliban shouldn’t they be well enough trained and equipped by now to deal with Taliban, with only minimal logistical and arms support from NATO/USA to counter the logistical/arms support from Pakistan for Taliban?
LikeLike
“If the majority of Afghans don’t want the Taliban”
I’m not sure that’s the case.
LikeLike
The argument from the right that wants to remain is one of strategic value based more on the countries that Afghanistan borders than Afghanistan itself. But also worry over 9/11.
LikeLike
Kev – Ihave read that the US intends to increase our presence in the “Stans”.
Joe – of course, if the majority want the Taliban the enterprise would be fruitless anyway.
I think 10K NATOs remain of which 3K are US. The best argument for staying is if that relatively inexpensive andlowrisk level of training and support works to help a popular anti-Taliban force of locals maintain fighting trim.
I don’t know what are the true facts, frankly, which is why I have hedged every statement I have made about it and asked questions.
LikeLike
I don’t see any evidence that anything the US is prepared to do will make a difference at this point.
LikeLike
You know more than I do. 😉
LikeLike
Fascinatingly true
LikeLike
LikeLike
Someone should @BobIger and ask what Disney thinks of its networks doxxing people.
That said, the press is now the front-row girl in grade school who tells the teacher that Bobby shot a rubberband when the teacher’s back was turned.
LikeLike
He’s probably fine with it. Disney has moved pretty far left and takes political sides now when it used to avoid doing such things like the plague. There are multiple cases of their employees directly attacking their customers and nothing happens, but if an employee says vaguely conservative things on social media they are fired.
And they’ve removed all gender requirements from cast member descriptions at the park, so as not to exclude transmen and transwomen amongs other wokeness.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.clickorlando.com/news/local/2021/04/13/disney-changes-look-for-cast-members-in-effort-to-create-more-inclusion-at-parks/%3FoutputType%3Damp
They are part of the corporate resistance.
LikeLike
I wonder if that will change if someone gets attacked.
LikeLike
Worth a read:
“Leniency for defendants in Portland clashes could affect Capitol riot cases
After President Joe Biden’s inauguration, federal prosecutors agreed to probation deals for charges related to last summer’s unrest in Oregon.
By JOSH GERSTEIN
04/14/2021 04:30 AM EDT”
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/14/portland-capitol-riot-cases-481346
LikeLike
Shouldn’t everyone who agitated or voted for Trump’s 2nd impeachment be demanding Maxine Waters’ expulsion from the House?
https://nypost.com/2021/04/18/maxine-waters-attends-protest-over-police-killing-of-daunte-wright/
LikeLike
No. At least not from what I read there. She has always seemed a dumbass and probably crooked as well
[wasn’t she the one who built a foundation that gave scholarships to her own family members?]If I am right about that she is a Trump analog and should be gone. Probably should have been impeached for that, if she did as I recall. But like Alcee Hastings, who had no business in public office after he was impeached as a federal judge for taking bribes, she will have to die, I suspect.
It was Eddie Bernice Johnson who pulled the scholarship scam. Waters got investigated at that same time for channeling bailout money to her husband’s bank. Waters was only as bad as Bachmann, apparently.
Waters is in her 80s.
LikeLike
Does Maxine write mean tweets? No? Then no expulsion!!
LikeLike
Mark:
No. At least not from what I read there.
Why not? How is the case against Trump for incitement different than one against Waters?
LikeLike
I think neither she nor Trump were guilty of incitement at a rally. I wrote that here, IIRC.
It takes an explicit call to violence to be an incitement.
But then Trump left the entire Capitol exposed for hours and would not take phone calls from Kevin McCarthy, etc. You cannot really be surprised that a lot of Congresscritters were pissed off, and then “connected” the rally, as well, and decided that his inaction was evidence of his motivation.
If violence results here and Waters does not immediately call it down I will be more sympathetic to your point. She is dumb enough that she might publicly relish or excuse any resulting violence, in which case I will cheerlead for your view.
Wait for it.
LikeLike
Mark:
If violence results here…
Violence has already been going on here for literally days.
LikeLike
For me, Maxine Waters has already gone far enough. And not just this time. Meaning if I was in her district I wouldn’t vote for her. But apparently, that’s what her constituents want.
LikeLike
I don’t think Waters incitement has ever included anything like this: “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
Compared to Maxine Waters, who said:
Given what happened over the summer, what does “more confrontational” mean in this case?
Before the Capitol riot, Trump said everyone should be peaceful, and there was no previous example of Trump supporters doing anything close to a riot. Why was he supposed to assume, based on previous history, that him telling them to go protest at Capitol Hill would turn into a riot? He also said nothing about becoming more confrontational. And Waters uses the same “we have to fight” kind of language. But also “more confrontational”, with the history of the summer riots to look back on.
Fun fact, she did the same sort of think around the Rodney King trial:
https://www.thecut.com/2020/06/maxine-waters-on-police-violence.html
AND she referred to the protests then not as riots but as “an insurrection”. Back when insurrections were good!
And she said this: “If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them, and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere.”
And members of the cabinet got harassed accordingly. If it’s not intentional incitement it’s certainly skirting the line.
Although Trump probably should have known what was likely to happen after that speech he gave. And was taking unnecessary risks in terms of laying the groundwork for bad actors to incite a riot in order to make Trump supporters look like violent insurrectionists, whether or not such a thing happened–that’s still an opening large enough to drive a riot control van through.
But given the example of last summer AND the example of Trump’s own incitement–which they agree was incitement–I don’t understand how what Maxine Waters is doing can be excused. And if it is, why in the world wouldn’t you also excuse what Trump did?
Eh, the modern era. It’s just nuts.
LikeLike
I would also note, Trump said the election was stolen and that’s why people should protest.
Maxine Waters is saying the police are trying to murder you, and that’s why you need to “protest”.
I feel there is a qualitative difference, both in what she’s arguing is the justification for protest and in knowing what those protests will entail, given the previous history.
That being said I have a hard time imagining Biden would be happy with her here.
LikeLike
KW:
I don’t understand how what Maxine Waters is doing can be excused. And if it is, why in the world wouldn’t you also excuse what Trump did?
I find it quite fascinating to watch people try to reconcile their obviously contradictory approaches to Trump vs Democrats.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There’s also this:
I think Pelosi squelched it, but if they are going to start considering expelling members of the House who object to Presidential election results, they should probably start with her as she has the longest record of doing it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting comments from Legal Insurrection today:
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/04/live-chauvin-trial-day-15-closing-arguments-and-jury-instructions/#more-351078
There’s more…worth reading it all.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Presumably this would be witness intimidation as well:
https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2021/04/19/george-floyd-derrick-chauvin-defense-witness-vandals-smear-pig-blood-home-santa-rosa/
LikeLike
There can also be juror intimidation, IMO. From the likes of CBS.
I get a real “we know or will find out where you live” vibe from that.
LikeLike
There won’t be an acquittal, there is no way any jurist will risk their life on this. I also predict rioting regardless of the verdict.
LikeLike
McWing:
There won’t be an acquittal, there is no way any jurist will risk their life on this.
Probably right. It’ll be interesting to see what happens on appeal. From what I have been reading, there seems to be lots of fertile ground on which to seek to have a guilty verdict overturned.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It will be years as I think it will have to get to the 8th Circuit.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jury’s in already. He’s toast.
LikeLike
Yup.
And for your amusement:
LikeLike
And he was!
Kind of what I expected.
LikeLike
No way was anything other than the maximum going to happen. Ditto for sentencing is my prediction.
LikeLike
Oddly, I find myself agreeing with Jake Tapper on this.
LikeLike
This quite unbelievable, actually. How can that be?
LikeLike
I have no idea. But apparently the judge can make the decision and allow or not allow the transcript to be made available, and I’m guessing in this case chose not to.
LikeLike