Morning Report: Debt ceiling reprieve

Vital Statistics:

  Last Change
S&P futures 4,391 35.2
Oil (WTI) 77.02 -0.49
10 year government bond yield   1.55%
30 year fixed rate mortgage   3.20%

Stocks are higher this morning after yesterday’s rebound rally. Bonds and MBS are down.

 

It looks like we have a deal on the debt ceiling to move the deadline to December. “Two months seems like plenty of time and (we) think the debt ceiling would be raised through reconciliation by then and do not expect to experience the past week come December,” NatWest analysts wrote in a research note on Wednesday.

I don’t think the markets ever really thought the US would default on its debt – this is something more like theater for the DC crowd. I think the issue here is that the reconciliation process can only be used a limited number of times, and if Democrats punch their reconciliation ticket on the debt ceiling, they won’t have one for their $3.5 trillion spending plan. Mitch McConnell also knows that the closer we get to the 2022 elections the harder it will be to pass major legislation.

 

There were 17,895 job cuts in September, according to outplacement firm Challenger, Gray and Christmas. For the third quarter, there were 52.560 cuts, which was the lowest number since 1997.

“Companies are in hiring and retention mode, and job seekers have a lot of power to make demands at the moment,” said Andrew Challenger, Senior Vice President of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc. “We know there are millions of open positions, but many employers are having trouble keeping up with their applicants, taking too long to reach out, not making offers fast enough, or losing out to more attractive offers,” he added.

Health care is experiencing an acute shortage as employees are burned out from the never-ending workload. Hiring is increasing as the big retailers staff up for seasonal demand.

 

Separately, initial jobless claims fell to 326,000 last week. Below is a chart of the last year’s initial claims. While we have made some big improvements, initial claims are still 50% higher than they were pre-COVID

 

High home prices are weighing on homebuyer sentiment, according to the Fannie Mae Homebuyer Sentiment Index. The most notable statistic was the percentage of people who thought it was a good time to buy, which fell from 32% to 28%. The percentage of those who thought it was a bad time to buy increased from 63% to 66%. Respondents are also getting less bullish on housing prices going forward, however they are quite sanguine about their job prospects, with 82% saying they are not concerned about losing their job.

26 Responses

  1. ” I think the issue here is that the reconciliation process can only be used a limited number of times, and if Democrats punch their reconciliation ticket on the debt ceiling, they won’t have one for their $3.5 trillion spending plan. ”

    I don’t think this is true. Apparently the parliamentarian ruled that they can do a stand alone debt ceiling bill in addition to the spending plan under reconciliation.

    Like

    • There is the ultra-progressive (almost always caucasian) lefty belief that you can group every marginalized group together and have them think and behave uniformly on all things. The idea is that a strict focus on the evil of straight white men (even when you have to make black people and women into “straight white men”) will somehow magic away all other differences.

      They are also of the opinion that they have the resources to cancel everybody for daring to disagree on anything–in areas where they, in fact, are treating unpopular and disputed opinions as if they are proven scientific fact–and maybe they do. But it’s a gamble to take on Chapelle. And the question after that is and always should be–whose next?

      Eventually there will be reasons why superwoke entertainers and their superwoke entertainment will be wrong and bad for some reason, then the folks enabling all this nonsense will suddenly be in the crosshairs.

      Eh, we shall see.

      Like

    • Did you watch Chappelle’s latest? I watched it last night. Wasn’t as funny as I had hoped.

      The trans people who are going after him are complete loons, of course. But I actually think that both his detractors and his supporters are misreading him, and he doesn’t really deserve the kudos that he tends to get from the anti-wokeness crowd. What he made pretty clear in this latest show is that it isn’t cancel culture as such that he objects to, but rather he objects when it effects a black person. Despite his mention of JK Rowling, he ultimately seems to think that cancel culture is just another tool used to oppress black people. Hence, he ends his show with a deal for his trans detractors: I’m done with the trans jokes, and you stop “punching down” on “my people”.

      He even explicitly says at one point that his detractors should go back and listen closely to what he has been saying…his problem isn’t with trans people, it is with “white people”. That one actually surprised me a bit.

      Like

    • “The thought of a gay or trans black person is foreign to him. We don’t exist. We are outside of his experience and therefore, a white experience.”

      I don’t think Dave Chapelle exudes whiteness, although he imitates us pretty well.

      Like

  2. Taibbi is always at his best when critiquing his own profession.

    https://taibbi.substack.com/p/the-cult-of-the-vaccine-neurotic

    This lunacy started with the Great Lie Debate of 2016, when reporters and editors spent months publicly anguishing over whether to use “lie” in headlines of Donald Trump stories, then loudly congratulated themselves once they decided to do it. The most histrionic offender was the New York Times, previously famous for teaching readers to digest news in code (“he claimed” for years was Times-ese for “full of shit”) but now reasoned a “more muscular terminology,” connoting “a certain moral opprobrium,” was needed to distinguish the “dissembling” of a politician like Bill Clinton from Trump’s whoppers. “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” could be mere falsehood, but “I will build a great great wall” required language that “stands apart.”

    The key term was moral opprobrium. Moralizing was exactly what journalists were once trained not to do, at least outside the op-ed page, but it soon became a central part of the job. When they used they word “lie,” the Times explained, they wanted us to know that was because “from the childhood schoolyard to the grave, this is a word neither used nor taken lightly.” Put another way, the Times didn’t want people reading about something Donald Trump said, grasping that it was a lie, and, say, chuckling about how ridiculous it was. If the New York Times sent the word “lie” up the flagpole, they now expected an appropriately solemn salute.

    This was the beginning of an era in which editors became convinced that all earth’s problems derived from populations failing to accept reports as Talmudic law. It couldn’t be people were just tuning out papers for a hundred different reasons, including sheer boredom. It had to be that their traditional work product was just too damned subtle. The only way to avoid the certain evil of audiences engaging in unsupervised pondering over information was to eliminate all possibility of subtext, through a new communication style that was 100% literal and didactic. Everyone would get the same news and also be instructed, often mid-sentence, on how to respond.

    Like

    • good piece. i liked the line about child-proof caps.
      that and totalitarian nitwits. which is a great band name.

      Like

    • This also applies to coverage of the debt ceiling and the insistence on calling everything a “default” lest readers get the idea that there is some nuance there.

      Like

      • jnc:

        This also applies to coverage of the debt ceiling and the insistence on calling everything a “default” lest readers get the idea that there is some nuance there.

        Yep. I have forwarded the Taibbi piece on to the editor I was in contact with yesterday with exactly that message.

        Like

        • I don’t think they care, or if they do, it’s from the opposing side, i.e. in favor of propagandizing.

          Worth noting:

          Like

        • You are correct, I am sure. They don’t care. But I can’t help myself.

          Like

  3. But Trump destabilized NATO.

    Europeans will fight the Russians down to the last American.

    Like

  4. Good read:

    Like

    • The elephant in the room is that the people who overwhelmingly control the D party are loathed by a lot of the country.

      And his discussion of “messaging” and a “game of telephone” misses the fact that most of the country isn’t buying the gaslighting in the media any more.

      Like

      • Largely true but I think there’s a non-trivial chunk of folks who would loathe the progressives in charge if they were
        More aware of what’s going on … it takes a doubling of gas prices to wake some up, havinf the local economy collapse due to green energy policies or vaccine mandates ruin things to wake others … and even then it may take someone they’ll listen to to break down that “y caused x cause a and these people know that—but they don’t care” in a way they might actually hear.

        Still there’s nothing like being entirely detached from the consequences of policy to be blissfully unaware what’s coming from those directly impacted by said policy.

        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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: