from Financial Repression Authority:
by Ian Jenkins, via The Daily Sheeple:
A new technology is here that has the potential to reshape lithium production like fracking reshaped oil.
The global battery market is set to hit $120 billion in less than two years, and there’s a massive investor opportunity here in lithium—but this isn’t a mining play, it’s a tech play all the way.
As lithium continues to enjoy status as the hottest metal on the market, and as producers race to the finish line to bring new supply online, one little-known company just might hold technology that will give it a big edge.
In the swarm of new entrants on the lithium playing field, International Battery Metals (CSE:IBAT; OTC: RHHNF) stands out—front and center—because it’s sitting on a proprietary advanced technology that could push lithium into the production stage rapidly. It has signed an LOI with North American Lithium (NAL) to acquire all its lithium extraction process intellectual property and be restructured with NAL becoming an integral part of the company.
Where traditional solar evaporation technology takes up to 24 months to extract lithium from the brine, IBAT incoming CEO Burba says he can do it in 24 hours. That would put IBAT on the front line of new lithium coming online to meet the battery demand. And that demand is supplying our energy transition for everything from mainstreamed electric vehicles (EVs) to massive energy storage solutions and consumer electronics market that grows leaps and bounds.
The lithium game isn’t about exploration, it’s about innovation—and IBAT’s proprietary technology to be acquired from NAL was invented by the same game-changing inventor that came up with a similar tech for FMC Corp. (NYSE:FMC), one of the world’s four top lithium producers.
Lithium is currently produced through a grueling 24-month solar evaporation process that entails slowly extracting all other elements from the brine until only lithium remains.
IBAT’s technology is designed to remove evaporation ponds from the equation. As inventor-CEO John Burba puts it: “Our tech has such a high specificity for lithium that it can directly take the lithium out.”
With its eye on the lithium prize, IBAT is going for fast production and commercial scalability, at a time when lithium prices per metric ton are fantastic:
Disruptive technology changes everything, and if the deal with NAL completes and IBAT’s tech breaks through successfully, it could potentially do for lithium what fracking did to unlock shale for the U.S. oil and gas industry.
Here are 5 reasons to keep a close eye on International Battery Metals (CSE:IBAT; OTC: RHHNF)
#1 Big Lithium Doesn’t Hibernate in Evaporating Ponds
The technology IBAT has an LOI to acquire, and on acquisition is considering for licensing to third party lithium producers could be a significant key to unlocking $84 billion in lithium brine resources—by making it faster and cheaper to produce.
Production capacity is now at a critical juncture. It takes a minimum of 4 years for an average Lithium brine mine to come online–and another 3-4 years to reach full capacity.
The ambitious targets for EV deployment and energy storage applications require massive Lithium mining capacity to be built much sooner than current technologies allow.
That’s the chief reason why companies are aggressively pursuing new resources such as oil field brines, jadarite and hectorite clay. Lithium brine deposits are estimated to contain 66 percent of the world’s 14 million metric tonnes (MT) of Lithium. That’s Lithium worth $84 billion at current prices.
Unfortunately, recovery of Lithium from brine deposits is a painfully slow process. Traditional solar evaporation technology is an extremely time-intensive process, with a lengthy production cycle that can exceed 18 months.
Oilfield brines solve some of these problems due to their high Lithium concentrations. But, there’s a kicker here as well– oil field brines contain very high concentrations of dissolved ions (>100,000 mg/L), making commercial recovery of Lithium exceedingly expensive.
The technology IBAT is acquiring from NAL is based on a process that has been extracting lithium continuously in Argentina for almost 20 years.
Instead of going the traditional route of trying to isolate Lithium by removing all of those complex ions, the IBAT tech removes the Lithium directly.
According to IBAT CEO John Burba, the mastermind of this technology, the process takes the lithium out on a continuous basis. As the brine goes by, it collects lithium and lets the other impurities continue on and go straight back into the ground. The end-product is a diluted stream of lithium chloride and water that comes out as the brine goes by. That original solution has few impurities which are easily removed through an evaporation process.
The whole extraction process takes–24 hours, period—so it would mean the end of 18-24-month residencies.
Read More @ TheDailySheeple.com
by Dimitri Speck, Acting Man:
The prospect of steep market declines worries investors – and the month of October has a particularly bad reputation in this respect.
Bad juju month: Statistically, October is actually not the worst month on average – but it is home to several of history’s most memorable crashes, including the largest ever one-day decline on Wall Street. A few things worth noting about 1987: 1. the crash did not presage a recession. 2. its extraordinary size was the result of a structural change in the market, as new technology, new trading methods and new hedging strategies were deployed. 3. Bernie (whoever he was/is) got six months.
Regarding point 2: in particular, the interplay between program trading and “portfolio insurance” proved deadly (the former describes computerized arbitrage between cash and futures markets, the latter was a hedging strategy very similar to delta-hedging of puts, which involved shorting of S&P futures with the aim of making large equity portfolios impervious to losses – an idea that turned out to be flawed). Too many investors tried to obtain “insurance” by selling index futures at the same time, which pushed S&P futures to a vast discount vs. the spot market. This in turn triggered selling of stocks and concurrent buying of futures by program trading operations – which put more pressure on spot prices and in turn triggered more selling of futures for insurance purposes, and so on. The vicious spiral produced a one-day loss of 22.6{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} – today this would be equivalent to a DJIA decline of almost 5,000 points. Due to circuit breakers introduced after 1987, very big declines will lead to temporary trading halts nowadays (since 2013 the staggered threshold levels are declines of 7{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}, 13{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} and 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}; after 3:25 pm EST the market is allowed to misbehave as it sees fit). Interestingly, program trading curbs were scrapped again. We mention the case of 1987 because we believe today’s markets will eventually be faced with a “positive feedback loop” problem as well. Many new trading strategies and products that have become popular during the Bernanke/Yellen echo bubble era have yet to be truly stress tested. There are numerous new systematic strategies (almost all of which use leverage in some shape or form), there are now more listed ETFs and ETNs than listed stocks, high frequency trading is responsible for a very large share of trading volume, and open derivatives positions have grown extraordinarily large relative to trading volume in the underlying cash instruments. Market volatility has all but disappeared over the past 18 months or so, but this is reminiscent of a pressure cooker. It seems highly likely that lot of “pent-up volatility” will eventually be unleashed (there is a very good reason to expect this to happen; extended periods of low volatility tend to go hand in hand with the gradual buildup of ever larger speculative positions which depend on its continuation; and this is usually accompanied by a steady increase in leverage with the aim of boosting returns. As an aside, lately we quite often come across articles that explain why the market cannot go down, no matter what (here is a recent example that reminds us a bit of the “keiretsu argument of stock market invulnerability” that was popular in Japan in the late 1980s). [PT]
Although the month of October delivers an acceptable performance in seasonal terms if one disregards outliers like the crashes of 1987 and 2008, these particularly strong declines over such short time periods are nevertheless scary: what use is it to anyone if the market performs well in October several times in a row, but then generates such a large one-off loss that all previous gains evaporate? And what about intermittent losses?
Let as examine these extreme market moves more closely. The following chart shows the 20 largest one-day declines in the Dow Jones Industrial Average. Crashes that occurred in October are highlighted in red.
The 20 Biggest One-Day Declines in the DJIA – extremely strong one-day declines happen particularly often in October
9 of the 20 strongest one-day declines occurred in October. That is an extremely disproportionate frequency. In other words, October has a strong tendency to deliver negative surprises to stock market investors – in the form of sudden crashes.
Things look quite differently in the first half of the year. Only two of the 20 largest historical declines have taken place in these six months.
Investors must not allow themselves to be deceived. Such extreme price declines may be rare, but they exhibit seasonal tendencies as well. In most years it is more likely that gains rather than losses are generated, but as noted above, the losses frequently turn out to be exceptionally large.
October, it is actually not a particularly weak month on average. This is illustrated by the seasonal chart of the Dow Jones Industrial Average shown below, which encompassing a very long time period. Seasonal charts are different from standard charts; they don’t depict actual prices over a specific, definite time period.
Read More @ Acting-Man.com
by Harvey Organ Blog, Harvey Organ Blog:
GOLD: $1274.25 down $8.25
Silver: $16.60 down 8 CENT(S)
Closing access prices:
Gold $1271.10
silver: $16.60
SHANGHAI GOLD FIX: FIRST FIX 10 15 PM EST (2:15 SHANGHAI LOCAL TIME)
SECOND FIX: 2:15 AM EST (6:15 SHANGHAI LOCAL TIME)
SHANGHAI FIRST GOLD FIX: $n/a DOLLARS PER OZ
NY PRICE OF GOLD AT EXACT SAME TIME: $n/a
PREMIUM FIRST FIX: $8.24 (premiums getting larger)
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
SECOND SHANGHAI GOLD FIX: $n/a
NY GOLD PRICE AT THE EXACT SAME TIME: $/na
Premium of Shanghai 2nd fix/NY:$13.00 (PREMIUMS GETTING LARGER)
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
LONDON FIRST GOLD FIX: 5:30 am est $not important
NY PRICING AT THE EXACT SAME TIME: $not important
LONDON SECOND GOLD FIX 10 AM: $1283.10
NY PRICING AT THE EXACT SAME TIME. 1283.10
NOTICES FILINGS TODAY FOR SEPT CONTRACT MONTH: 28 NOTICE(S) FOR2800OZ.
TOTAL NOTICES SO FAR: 439 FOR 43900 OZ (1.3654 TONNES)
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
end
Let us have a look at the data for today
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In silver, the total open interest FELL CONSIDERABLY BY 1464 contracts from 184,424DOWN TO 182,960 CORRESPONDING TO ANOTHER RAID THAT SILVER UNDERTOOK IN FRIDAY’S TRADING (DOWN 14 CENTS ). WITH GOLDEN WEEK IN CHINA STARTING FRIDAY SEPT 29, OUR CROOKS BECOME EMBOLDENED TO CONTINUE THEIR WHACKING KNOWING FULL WELL THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT PHYSICAL DELIVERIES FOR AT LEAST A WEEK.
RESULT: A FAIR SIZED FALL IN OI COMEX WITH THE14 CENT PRICE RISE. IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAD A SMALL AMOUNT OF BANKER SHORTS COVERING AND THUS THEY HAD MILD SUCCESS.
In ounces, the OI is still represented by just UNDER 1 BILLION oz i.e. 0.152 BILLION TO BE EXACT or 131{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of annual global silver production (ex Russia & ex China).
FOR THE NEW FRONT OCT MONTH/ THEY FILED: 19 NOTICE(S) FOR 95,000OZ OF SILVER
In gold, the open interest FELL BY A SMALLER THAN EXPECTED 1800 CONTRACTS WITH THE FALLin price of gold ($3.75 ) WITH YESTERDAY’S COMEX TRADING. The new OI for the gold complex rests at 530,883. WEHAVE NOW ENTERED GOLDEN WEEK (ONE WEEK OF CHINESE HOLIDAY)..SO EXPECT TORMENT FOR THE REST OF THE WEEK AS THE CROOKS DO NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT PHYSICAL DELIVERIES FOR A WEEK.
Result: A SMALL SIZED DECREASE IN OI WITH THEFALL IN PRICE IN GOLD ($3.75)
we had: 28 notice(s) filed upon for 2800 oz of gold.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
With respect to our two criminal funds, the GLD and the SLV:
GLD: WOW
Tonight , NO CHANGESin gold inventory at the GLD AGAIN DESPITE THE CONTINUAL DRUBBING GOLD HAS TAKEN THESE PAST FEW WEEKS
Inventory rests tonight: 864.65 tonnes.
SLV
Today: a no changes in inventory:
INVENTORY RESTS AT 326.757 MILLION OZ
end
.
First, here is an outline of what will be discussed tonight:
1. Today, we had the open interest in silver FELL BY1464 contracts from 184,424DOWN TO 182,960 (AND now A LITTLE FURTHER FROM THE NEW COMEX RECORD SET ON FRIDAY/APRIL 21/2017 AT 234,787) . IT SEEMS THAT A TINY FRACTION OF OUR BANKERS WERE SUCCESSFUL IN COVERING THEIR SHORTS. WITH GOLDEN WEEK IN CHINA, EXPECT THE BANKERS TO HAVE CONSTANT TORMENT THROUGH THIS COMING WEEK AS THEY TRY AND COVER AS MANY AS POSSIBLE OF THEIR SILVER/GOLD SHORTS.
RESULT: A GOOD SIZED DROP IN SILVER OI AT THE COMEX WITH THE FALL IN PRICE OF 19 CENTS IN FRIDAY’S TRADING. EXPECT CONSTANT TORMENT FOR THE REST OF THE WEEK.
(report Harvey)
.
2.a) The Shanghai and London gold fix report
(Harvey)
2 b) Gold/silver trading overnight Europe, Goldcore
(Mark O’Byrne/zerohedge
and in NY: Bloomberg
i)Late SUNDAY night/MONDAY morning: Shanghai closed /Hang Sang CLOSED / The Nikkei closed UP 44.50 POINTS OR 0.22{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}/Australia’s all ordinaires CLOSED UP 0.81{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}/Chinese yuan (ONSHORE) closed/Oil DOWN to 50.30 dollars per barrel for WTI and 55.60 for Brent. Stocks in Europe OPENED GREEN . ALL YUAN FIXINGS CLOSED
Read More @ HarveyOrganBlog.com
by Jim Rickards, Daily Reckoning:
Janet Yellen maintains a persistent belief in the Phillips curve, which assumes an inverse relationship between unemployment and inflation.
As unemployment goes down, labor scarcity leads to wage increases above growth potential, which leads to inflation.
The only problem with the Phillips curve is that it has no empirical support. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, we had high unemployment and high inflation. Today, we have low unemployment and low inflation. Both results are the exact opposite of what the Phillips curve would predict.
In a recent speech, Fed governor Lael Brainard, an ally of Yellen, said the Phillips curve today is “flat.” That’s a polite way of saying there is no curve.
Yellen is also confused about what causes inflation other than the Phillips curve. She believes that monetary ease, acting with a lag, feeds inflation. Therefore, it is necessary to tighten policy before inflation appears to avoid getting behind the curve.
But money supply does not cause inflation. It may add fuel to a fire, but it’s not the spark. The Fed has created $3.5 trillion of new money since 2008 and there’s no inflation in sight.
What causes inflation is not money supply but psychology, expressed as velocity. Velocity is the speed at which money turns over through lending and spending. It depends on behavioral psychology, what Keynes called “animal spirits,” regardless of the amount of money around.
Assume GDP is $20 trillion and maximum real growth is 3{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}. That means nominal GDP growth above $600 billion (3{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of $20 trillion) will be inflationary. Now consider two cases. In the first case, money supply is $300 billion and velocity is 2. In the second case, money supply is $250 billion and velocity is 3.
The first case yields $600 billion in nominal growth ($300 billion times 2), which is noninflationary because it matches potential growth. In the second case, nominal growth is $750 billion ($250 billion times 3), which is inflationary because it exceeds potential real growth.
In other words, the example with the larger money supply has lower inflation. Sorry, Janet.
In recent remarks, both at the FOMC press conference on Sept. 20 and a speech last Monday, Yellen left markets with the impression that the Fed would raise rates in December based on the arguments noted above (low unemployment and monetary policy acting with a lag).
At the same time, she noted that inflation has been going down sharply and that the Fed really doesn’t understand why (a refreshing note of humility).
Yellen dismisses the weak inflation data as “transitory” and clings to her forward-looking Phillips curve fears as a reason to raise rates in December. Markets seem to agree.
Yet as with all false belief systems, reality intrudes sooner or later. In this case, reality intruded at exactly 8:30 a.m. EDT last Friday, Sept. 29.
That was when the August core PCE year-over-year (YoY) inflation figure was released.
Core PCE YoY is the one inflation metric the Fed focuses on. The Fed’s target for that measure is 2{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}. Here are the data so far this year:
You get the picture.
The real data have moved in the opposite direction from the Fed’s 2{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} target by a full 0.5{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} in seven months. That’s a big move, and that’s a long period of time to cling to the “transitory” explanation.
I told Rickards’ Intelligence Triggers subscribers on Thursday that if core PCE came in at 1.4{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} or lower Friday morning, it would drive a stake into the heart of Wall Street research departments and kill any chance of a December rate hike.
If it was 1.5{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}, I said it wouldn’t move the needle much one way or the other. Yellen would take a “wait and see” approach. If it was 1.6{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} or higher, I said that would have increased the odds of a December rate hike and given encouragement to Yellen and her “transitory” theory.
So what did August core PCE come in at Friday?
Read More @ DailyReckoning.com
by Dave Kranzler, Investment Research Dynamics:
The Fed often treats financial markets as a beast to be tamed, a cub to be coddled, or a market to be manipulated. It appears in thrall to financial markets, and financial markets are in thrall to the Fed, but only one will get the last word. – Former FOMC member, Kevin Warsh – The Fed Needs New Thinking
Please note, a large portion of the source links, plus the idea for this commentary, were sourced from GATA’s latest dispatch regarding the possible appointment of Warsh as the next Fed Chairman.
The quote above is from former FOMC board member, Kevin Warsh, who appears to be Trump’s top candidate to assume the Fed’s mantle of manipulation from Janet Yellen. By way of relevant reference, Warsh happens to be the son-in-law of Ronald Lauder, who is a good friend of Trump’s. He is also a former Steering Committee member of the Bilderberg Group. GATA has published a summary reprise of direct evidence from previous written admissions by Warsh the the Fed actively manages financial asset prices, “including bolstering the share price of public companies” (from link above).
In addition to stocks, Warsh admitted in the same essay that, “The Fed seeks to fix interest rates and control foreign-exchange rates simultaneously” (same link above). This task is impossible without suppressing the price of gold, something which began in earnest in 1974 when, under the direction of then Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, paper gold futures contracts were introduced to the U.S. capital markets. This memo, written by the Deputy assistant Secretary of State for International Finance and Development, was sent to Kissinger and Paul Volcker in March 1974: Gold and the Monetary System: Potential U.S.-EC Conflict (note: the source-link is from GATA – it was discovered in the State Department archives by Goldmoney’s John Butler).
The nature of discussions after that memo, the minutes of which are now publicly available, center around the fact that several European Governments were interested in re-introducing gold into the global monetary system. This movement was in direct conflict with the interests of U.S. elitists and banking aristocrats, as U.S. had successfully established the petro-dollar as the reserve currency.
In 2009 GATA sent a Freedom Of Information Act request to the Fed in an attempt to get access to documents involving the Fed’s use of gold swaps (this letter written by Warsh confirms the existence of the use of gold swaps). Warsh, who was the FOMC’s “liaison” between the Fed and Wall Street, wrote a letter back to GATA denying the request.
The fact that Warsh has openly acknowledged that the Fed manipulates assets, including an implicit admission that the Fed seeks to suppress the price of gold, might give some in the gold community some hope that Warsh, if appointed to the Chair of the Fed, might reign in the Fed’s over interference in the financial markets.
On the contrary, I believe this makes him a bigger threat to democracy, capitalism and freedom than any of his recent predecessors. Warsh is better “pedigree’d” and politically connected than either Bernanke or Yellen. His high level involvement in the Bilderberg Group ties him directly to the individual aristocrats who are considered to be the most financially and politically powerful in the western world. Without a doubt he has far more profound understanding of the significance of gold as a monetary asset than any modern Federal Reserve FOMC member except, perhaps, Alan Greenspan.
The good news for the gold investing community is that it becomes increasingly evident that China, together with Russia and several other eastern bloc countries, is working to remove the dollar as the reserve currency and reintroduce gold into the global monetary system. A contact and subscriber to my Mining Stock Journal who happens to live and work in Shanghai has sent further evidence (and here) that China is working toward launching a gold-backed yuan oil futures contract.
Read More @ InvestmentResearchDynamics.com
by Stephen Lendman, StephenLendman:
On Monday, Catalan officials met in Barcelona. Referendum results showed 90{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of the autonomous region’s residents support independence from fascist Spain.
Catalan President Carles Puigdemont chaired a Monday cabinet meeting. He’s expected to ask regional parliamentarians to vote on an independence declaration within days, calling Sunday’s vote valid, binding, and had to be applied, adding:
“My government in the next few days will send the results of the vote to the Catalan parliament, where the sovereignty of our people lies, so that it can act in accordance with the law of the referendum.”
EU officials can no longer “continue to look the other way.” At the same time, Puigdemont called for international mediation to help resolve a standoff with Madrid, saying “(w)e don’t want a traumatic break…We want a new understanding with the Spanish state.”
Catalan trade unions and associations called a region-wide strike for Tuesday, protesting Madrid’s “grave violation of rights and freedoms.”
In Madrid, PM Mariano Roy is meeting with ruling People’s Party officials, discussing how to confront Catalonian independence if declared as expected.
Spain’s El Pais broadsheet blamed Catalan officials for Sunday’s “shameful” events, Madrid bears full responsibility for. It also blamed Rajoy’s regime for failing to prevent the independence referendum from taking place – calling Sunday “a defeat for our country.”
Read More @ StephenLendman.org
by Wolf Richter, Wolf Street:
Many people have seen this with their own eyes as it happened to others, or have experienced it themselves even as companies have vigorously denied it. So finally, here are some numbers that expose blatant age discrimination in the Tech industry, both in hiring and promotions, and it’s even worse than the age discrimination in Non-Tech industries.
The study boils down to this: if you’re a Baby Boomer, forget it. And if you’re Gen X, it’s tough.
These numbers are not based on VC-funded startups where the two founders may be 27 and 28 and the oldest people of the bunch. No one even bothers to mention age discrimination in these outfits. It’s just a fact of life. No, these numbers are based on an analysis of over 330,000 US-based employees – 63,000 in Tech and 267,000 in other industries – from 43 large companies. This is Corporate America.
Here is what the study by Visier, which provides workforce analytics for HR professionals, found: “Systemic ageism is occurring in Tech hiring practices.”
The study found that the older workers in Tech had more “Top Performer” ratings in their respective jobs. Some nuggets:
Despite the high performance of older workers in Tech, they’re being discriminated against via both, hiring practices and promotions:
This produces a “disconnect” for older workers between their rising performance and their declining promotions with age. In a sidebar, Visier’s report cited a study by researchers from the computer science department at North Carolina State University that found that programming knowledge actually improved with age:
Using Stack Overflow user data, they found a correlation between age and reputation. They found that: “…programmer reputation scores increase relative to age well into the 50s, that programmers in their 30s tend to focus on fewer areas relative to those younger or older in age, and that there is not a strong correlation between age scores in specific knowledge areas.”
Turns out, non-manager workers in Tech and Non-Tech experience similar salary trajectories: The median salary for workers in both sectors increases in the first phases of the career and peaks in their early 40s, at which point it “stabilizes” for both – that is, it begins to decline slightly for both.
However managers in Tech experience some salary increases as they age – if they remain employed in Tech, which, as the above numbers show, is very hard to do.
The study summarizes: “We found that hiring decisions in Tech do indeed favor younger candidates” compared to Non-Tech industries. Millennials are the big winners – at the expense of Gen X candidates and Baby Boomers.
Read More @ WolfStreet.com
by James Howard Kunstler, Kunstler:
Welcome to the witching month when America’s entropy-fueled death-wish expresses itself with as much Halloween jollity and merriment as the old Christmas spirit of yore. The outdoor displays alone approach a Babylonian scale, thanks to the plastics factories of China. I saw a half-life-size T-Rex skeleton for sale at a garden shop last week surrounded by an entire crew of moldering corpse Pirates of the Caribbean in full costume ho-ho-ho-ing among the jack-o-lanterns. What homeowner in this sore-beset floundering economy of three-job gig-workers can shell out four thousand bucks to decorate his lawn like the set of a zombie movie?
The overnight news sure took on that Halloween tang as the nation woke up to what is probably now confirmed to be a national record for a civilian mad-shooter incident. So far, fifty-eight dead and over 500 hundred injured in Las Vegas at the Route 91 Harvest Festival (Nine up in fatalities from last year’s Florida Pulse nightclub massacre, and way more injured this time).
The incident will live in infamy for maybe a day and a half in the US media. Stand by today as there will be calls far and wide, by persons masquerading as political leaders, for measures to make sure something like this never happens again. That’s rich, isn’t it? Meanwhile, the same six a.m. headlines declared that S &P futures were up in the overnight markets. Nothing can faze this mad bull, apparently. Except maybe the $90 trillion combined derivatives books of CitiBank, JP Morgan, and Goldman Sachs, who have gone back whole hog into manufacturing the same kind of hallucinatory collateralized debt obligations (giant sacks of non-performing loans) that gave Wall Street a heart attack in the fall of 2008.
Europe’s quaint doings must seem dull compared to the suicidal potlatch of life in the USA, but, believe me, it’s a big deal when the Spanish authorities start cracking the heads of Catalonian grandmothers for nothing more than casting a ballot. The video scenes of mayhem at the Barcelona polls looked like something out of the 1968 Prague uprising. And now that the Catalonia secession referendum passed with a 90 percent “yes” vote, it’s hard to imagine that a good deal more violent mischief will not follow. So far, the European Union stands dumbly on the sidelines. (For details, read the excellent Roel Ilargi Meijer column on today’s TheAutomaticEarth.)
Next in the cavalcade of October traumas: the USA versus the nuclear weapons ambitions of North Korea. This has been ramping up all year, of course, but it looks to be headed for a climax now that the Golden Golem of Greatness is at the helm. Truly astounding, though, is America’s new method for conducting the most sensitive matters of foreign policy. The day after Secretary of State Rex Tillerson declared that his office was in contact with North Korean officials, the Secretary’s boss, You-Know-Who, tweeted out: “I told Rex Tillerson, our wonderful Secretary of State, that he is wasting his time trying to negotiate with Little Rocket Man.”
Could this possibly be a cleverly orchestrated good cop / bad cop effort to bamboozle Kim Jung-un? Or is the US government just completely dysfunctional? Or maybe something else is afoot. Under normal circumstances, Mr. Tillerson would just resign after such a gross insult, but we must suppose that a patriotic sense of duty compels him to remain in office in case the need suddenly arises in this witching month to run over Mr. Trump with the 25th amendment — the clause in the constitution that allows a consensus of a pretty small number of national political leaders to toss out a sitting president on the grounds of derangement and incompetence. Stay tuned on that one.
Read More @ Kunstler.com
by Jeffrey Tucker, The Foundation for Economic Freedom:
In a remarkably frank talk at a Bank of England conference, the Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund has speculated that Bitcoin and cryptocurrency have as much of a future as the Internet itself. It could displace central banks, conventional banking, and challenge the monopoly of national monies.
Christine Lagarde–a Paris native who has held her position at the IMF since 2011–says the only substantial problems with existing cryptocurrency are fixable over time.
In the long run, the technology itself can replace national monies, conventional financial intermediation, and even “puts a question mark on the fractional banking model we know today.”
In a lecture that chastised her colleagues for failing to embrace the future, she warned that “Not so long ago, some experts argued that personal computers would never be adopted, and that tablets would only be used as expensive coffee trays. So I think it may not be wise to dismiss virtual currencies.”
Here are the relevant parts of her paper:
Let us start with virtual currencies. To be clear, this is not about digital payments in existing currencies—through Paypal and other “e-money” providers such as Alipay in China, or M-Pesa in Kenya.
Virtual currencies are in a different category, because they provide their own unit of account and payment systems. These systems allow for peer-to-peer transactions without central clearinghouses, without central banks.
For now, virtual currencies such as Bitcoin pose little or no challenge to the existing order of fiat currencies and central banks. Why? Because they are too volatile, too risky, too energy intensive, and because the underlying technologies are not yet scalable. Many are too opaque for regulators; and some have been hacked.
But many of these are technological challenges that could be addressed over time. Not so long ago, some experts argued that personal computers would never be adopted, and that tablets would only be used as expensive coffee trays. So I think it may not be wise to dismiss virtual currencies.
Better value for money?
For instance, think of countries with weak institutions and unstable national currencies. Instead of adopting the currency of another country—such as the U.S. dollar—some of these economies might see a growing use of virtual currencies. Call it dollarization 2.0.
IMF experience shows that there is a tipping point beyond which coordination around a new currency is exponential. In the Seychelles, for example, dollarization jumped from 20 percent in 2006 to 60 percent in 2008.
And yet, why might citizens hold virtual currencies rather than physical dollars, euros, or sterling? Because it may one day be easier and safer than obtaining paper bills, especially in remote regions. And because virtual currencies could actually become more stable.
For instance, they could be issued one-for-one for dollars, or a stable basket of currencies. Issuance could be fully transparent, governed by a credible, pre-defined rule, an algorithm that can be monitored…or even a “smart rule” that might reflect changing macroeconomic circumstances.
So in many ways, virtual currencies might just give existing currencies and monetary policy a run for their money. The best response by central bankers is to continue running effective monetary policy, while being open to fresh ideas and new demands, as economies evolve.
Better payment services?
For example, consider the growing demand for new payment services in countries where the shared, decentralized service economy is taking off.
This is an economy rooted in peer-to-peer transactions, in frequent, small-value payments, often across borders.
Four dollars for gardening tips from a lady in New Zealand, three euros for an expert translation of a Japanese poem, and 80 pence for a virtual rendering of historic Fleet Street: these payments can be made with credit cards and other forms of e-money. But the charges are relatively high for small-value transactions, especially across borders.
Instead, citizens may one day prefer virtual currencies, since they potentially offer the same cost and convenience as cash—no settlement risks, no clearing delays, no central registration, no intermediary to check accounts and identities. If privately issued virtual currencies remain risky and unstable, citizens may even call on central banks to provide digital forms of legal tender.
So, when the new service economy comes knocking on the Bank of England’s door, will you welcome it inside? Offer it tea—and financial liquidity?
New models of financial intermediation
This brings us to the second leg of our pod journey—new models of financial intermediation.
One possibility is the break-up, or unbundling, of banking services. In the future, we might keep minimal balances for payment services on electronic wallets.
The remaining balances may be kept in mutual funds, or invested in peer-to-peer lending platforms with an edge in big data and artificial intelligence for automatic credit scoring.
Read More @ Fee.org